How about we are able to get a list of who voted and what their vote was? Then you can find out who did it, spam their mailbox, find out where they live, burn down their parent's house, kidnap their cat, feed chicken bones to their dog, throw them in a deep pit, have them rub lotion on their skin until they are all prunish, then make them confess as to why they voted your article poorly.
Not really. The background colour is terribly white and not much
difference between visited/non-visited links. Frankly I liked
the old softer colour better. How about setting this in
Just my 0.02 €.
"If you feel paranoid it doesn't mean they're not after you!" -- Woody Allen
I liked the old format better, at least the colorization. IIRC there has been an option to toggle between two display modes, hasn't there?
Disclaimer: Because of heavy processing requirements, we are currently using some of your unused brain capacity for backup processing. Please ignore any hallucinations, voices or unusual dreams you may experience. Please avoid concentration-intensive tasks until further notice. Thank you.
The only thing I would change would be to add a heavy orange <hr> between each day's articles. That would help me be able to glance over each day's entries.
Maybe a smaller line between each section within a day as well, to make it easier to tell which article is in which section (this would be especially helpful when there are several groups in a row, each with one article)
The layout, icons, scores are all fine. I don't mind the lack of colors, however in the old layout the different colors did provide the visual separators that I now miss.
I don't particulary care for the stark white background, especially since all of the other pages have nicer colors. The article scores don't really help me, because if I am interested in a certain topic, I'll read the article anyway. Afterwards, I may agree that it should have the low or high score it got. But, since the score won't affect my decision to read or not read an article, it is superfluous.
The new/update/moved indicators are alright, but since the page is titled "What's New," I would expect everything I see there to be "new" in some way. If an article has a name that I remember seeing earlier, then I can assume it is an update. It's not new because I remembered seeing it before, and it wouldn't be on the "What's New" page if something hadn't happened to it. Therefore, those indicators are superfluous too.
I do like the categories, though, as that helps me ignore things that are of little interest or to focus on areas that are of more interest.
"You can say that again." -- Dept. of Redundancy Dept.
It's easier to follow yes, though it would be very very nice to add something like an article id to all articles for referencing. It's easier to tell other people about problems they have. "Look at article CP-12312131 .. " know what I mean?
_______________________________________________ Peter Schneider, MCT - MCSD.NET - MCAD.NET - MCDBA "If a problem cannot be solved, enlarge it!"
I have been afraid always. When you see something insurmountable ahead of you, say to yourself: "All right! I am afraid. Now that I've been properly afraid, let's go forward." That is the whole secret. - Jeanne d'Arc