[theforum] w.e.o. updating/rethemeing

ekm at seastorm.com ekm at seastorm.com
Wed Oct 8 13:50:16 CDT 2008

yanno, there's a lot of subjectivity in how a site "looks."   "good" vs
"not good"  - what does that mean?

I hate "2.0 blue" as seen on default myspace and twitter pages... but i
can *live* with 2.0 blue.  As long as the site works.  ALA?  It works. 
And, IMO ALA is beautiful and professional. It's a magazine-site and it
does its job... (my main criticism of ALA is that some of the links aren't
totally obvious until you hover..).  I like Martin's classic blue links
and clean clarity.  I'd be fine w/ any site w/ clear links and
user-friendly navigation, even if it incorporates my not-favorite color
"2.0 blue" into the design (mind that color will date a site as fast as a
horizontal striped bg did in the early 2k days, or "bright on black" did
in the late 90s... ok I still like horizontal striping and bright on
black... but hate 2.0 blue... anyhoo it's a MINOR thing)

my POINT BEING: "looking good" is largely subjective stuff.

Can you navigate the site?  Does it work as advertised??? That's the meat
of it.

In the current design: not so much.  Submitting an article is not for the
faint-hearted.  Style-guide is out of date, site is fraught w/ dead links
and ominous error messages...  frustrating.

The awesome thing is, there ARE people here with time and energy to make
things happen.  I hope that we can find a way take this and run with it.


> 2008/10/8 Erika <ekm at seastorm.com>:
> I do like Martin's theme, and much more than our other options today.
> That said, if whatever we come up with doesn't look at least as good
> as ALA (and it's good, but not *that* good), I don't think it's going to
> do the trick we're hoping for.
> jh

More information about the theforum mailing list