Something New and Something Blue?

With the New Year, we have been discussing various changes including the general appearance of the site. This is a leading contender but we are not opposed to sticking with our old appearance. (My eldest son Ben described our old site as hopelessly “70s” and, as someone who lived through the large plaids and big hair of that decade, it hit home).

Please let us know if this is an improvement in your view:

17 thoughts on “Something New and Something Blue?”

  1. For the record, I typically post as “anonymously posted” and the comment on January 6, 2014 at 9:06 a.m. is mine. The comment at 9:31 was posted by someone else. Not that it really matters. (:

  2. If you’re making changes, any chance you could make the site mobile friendly or even switch to a responsive layout?

  3. I’ve done layout on paper and appreciate the effort it takes to come up with a format that is readable and pleases most. You have my support and sympathy.

    I liked the old format, the 70’s was a good decade. Change is ok but it’s sometimes hard for me to catch up.

    I don’t care for the blue sides. The color is too strong and is a detraction. I don’t like having to scroll to the bottom to find latest posts, top posts, latest comments. Suggestion: get rid of the blue sides, put honorary stuff on one side which will allow the “latest” stuff to move up. I also liked the “previous”/”next” at the bottom as well as the top. Didn’t notice the green as green until I read the comments. Green works for me, but something else might, too. The banner is a bit strong but would seem to be toned down if the background color of the side bar were a tan rather than blue.

  4. Agree with lottakatz about the banner — “visually jarring” is a perfect description. Wish that I could offer an alternative.

  5. You need to change the headline font can keep it a darker color than green. As a general rule, it needs to stand out, not get lost. The kerning is now stretched, it’s too thin and the green is not standing out. This makes differentiating the articles harder for a copy heavy blog

  6. A guest on a evening talk show was asked what whoever took over from Johnny Carson (the name escapes me) should have done with the show (since it was extensively revamped and faltering in the ratings) and they said, ‘hire a band leader named ‘Doc’, a straight man named ‘Ed’ and keep all the old furniture. This because people come to the Tonight Show for familiarity and comfort – it’s like the comfort food of late night TV.’ Words close to that. From a marketing perspective (long time viewers, very familiar cast etc.) it was good advice.

    Everything with your new format is cool except that the banner illo (Sorry Darren) while appropriate is visually jarring. Too much color and a subject that is busy. Due to the fact that it is from a painting it lacks some clarity. You can’t put clarity in, it degrades with the various pixel settings on your viewers computers.

    I would go with something that was a line drawing or less colorful. The more professional the less colorful is not a bad maxim. I liked, for your blawg, your old header but it didn’t stick in one’s mind. It didn’t make a big splash.

    If you can’t have the new type and something similar to the old header then I’m torn; the new type is more crisp and the new spacing is nice in my opinion. Still, it’s a ‘hobby’, you could have a nice cartoon of a diver with a net or spear-gun chasing an octopus labeled NSA on it, that would kind of get your point about defending the First Amendment across 🙂

    As Prairie Rose said, lots of luck; a redesign is a serious and possibly maddening undertaking.

  7. Looks nice to me. I especially like the founding fathers image at the top. It is very appropriate and fitting.

  8. I’m a bit traditional, so I like the old style. Simplicity itself speaks. 🙂

    Having some blue fonts (the title and background) and some green fonts (post titles and names, etc) and black fonts doesn’t seem to ‘flow’ as well as the old style. Maybe it’s because to my eye the green doesn’t ‘go’ with the blue doesn’t ‘go’ with the picture…

    Also, having the title of the blog and any associated pictures above the links seems a more logical order than the other way around (e.g., title page, then table of contents).

    But, what does a quasi-Luddite who likes real books know about all this newfangled web design. 😉

    Good luck with the re-design!

  9. Agree with the crisper look…. I wish that at the bottom, you could still task to the next article rather than going back to the top……

  10. Better image, but the blue clashes with the image. How about a background that’s the same color as the rust in the drapes in the image?

  11. I’m fine with the change. And I must admit that the text has a crisper look.

  12. ‘Fraid this definitely does not look “crisper” on my system! Looks faded and blah. Yoicks! I tried to look at the old version for a more detailed comparison, and can’t find it, even the archives have gone all “Susie-Q-Blue”

    Nope, this is certainly different, but doesn’t feel modern to me, unless you spell it “moderne” and mean 50’s-retro??? Also the illustration feels overbearingly “Amurc’n”, which feels really unlike Prof. Turley.

  13. Marilou, You should be able to go to your tools and increase the type size. I’m in my 60’s and routinely use 125%. It will be 150% soon.

  14. I voted twice for this new and improved look. It’s the Chicago way. We’re dog sitting my son’s dog while he’s visiting family also. She also voted for the new one. She’s a border collie and smarter then me.

Comments are closed.