| 10:46 pm on May 26, 2010 (gmt 0)|
I agree, revamp the logo maybe some of the buttons but other than that keep it simple, streamline and content rich. No ads please - anyone who can't afford to pay the small subscription fee doesn't deserve to benefit from the site content.
If anything the stickymail, etc. could use a makeover but not the forums.
And please no member pictures, it's a big turn off (imho).
| 11:54 pm on May 26, 2010 (gmt 0)|
I prefer to keep it simple as well. Some forums nowadays are barely readable. A few, well-chosen ads would be fine with me, but not so many they flood the place.
The important part is the posts so focus should be on those and being able to easily find those. Speaking of which, perhaps the Search and stickymail could use some updating.
| 11:59 pm on May 26, 2010 (gmt 0)|
Someone needs to be keeping score here...
The votes for keeping it simple on one side.
The votes for pulling out all the bells and whistles on the other.
Mark me down on the simple side.
| 12:01 am on May 27, 2010 (gmt 0)|
What about the vote for updating it into this millenia but still keeping it simple? Why does it have to be one extreme or the other?
| 12:09 am on May 27, 2010 (gmt 0)|
Yes, if you can with BestBBS, you should start a poll and count votes on who wants the old or (potential) new layout.
Or, just give users the choice in the next version. Classic view or New view.
| 12:19 am on May 27, 2010 (gmt 0)|
>>give users the choice in the next version. Classic view or New view.
I did that after a major redesign of another forum. It really defused all of the "I HATE the new look and I'm NEVER coming back" sentiment. If it is technically feasible, I'd recommend doing exactly what you suggest if WebmasterWorld gets a major facelift.
| 4:05 am on May 27, 2010 (gmt 0)|
as much as I can appreciate "retro chic", I'm a sucker for bells and whistles.
| 4:34 am on May 27, 2010 (gmt 0)|
Mmm I just think it needs brighter colors, for the most part and an updated logo and a few other design changes. It is easy on the eyes now, but the design definitely doesn't help with the "trustworthy" feel when it comes to web discussions the site deserves (because frankly, this is THE site to go to).
It makes me wonder how many visitors over the past few years stopped by, saw the design, and left without obtaining the great knowledge that the community holds.
| 5:20 am on May 27, 2010 (gmt 0)|
My vote is for the simple design (preferably the current one, but if there is a new re-design which is also simple, I will take it). Don't follow other forum sites where I don't even know whether I am reading a post or an ad or something else.
Keep the colors dull. Let the information be the highlight of the forum. It has been like that and that is why it is very successful and keep it that way.
| 6:15 am on May 27, 2010 (gmt 0)|
I like the ease of use, but the design definitely needs a makeover!
| 6:23 am on May 27, 2010 (gmt 0)|
I am also a long time lurker and I think keeping it simple (stupid! :-P ) is the best way to go with colors that are not bright so that they do not drown out the content. There's no need to complicate things and SEO with a a revamp unless that revamp is simply to upgrade code to be more W3C compatible (it's time for XHTML Transitional, WebmasterWorld!) and optimized for mobile and other burgeoning environments.
| 7:42 am on May 27, 2010 (gmt 0)|
I am nostalgic. Small facelift won't hurt but navigation and overall look is very easy and simple... don't make too much mess...
| 7:58 am on May 27, 2010 (gmt 0)|
Whatever happens, if WW is getting close to providing a "nostalgic feel" it is dead. You see, every once in a while you see a 70s car, and you go like "uh- remember when we used to drive in that?" and everyone nods and suddenly laughs, agreeing on how uncomfortable and bad it was compared to "modern" cars. But everyone will have a positive "nostalgic feel" about having seen it. But drive it again? No thanks.
So this thread alone should raise serious concerns at WW. The least thing WW should become is a museum consisting just of archived threads.
I like the simplistic design for other reasons. It puts the focus on the content, and on the content alone. Which is good and useful and a clear differentiator. And it loads fast.
| 9:27 am on May 27, 2010 (gmt 0)|
I don't see the issue here.
There's more options than two extremes:
1. Keep website exactly the same
2. Make a crazy graphical website with bells and whistles
If there is a redesign I'd trust that it would fall well in the middle between these areas.
| 9:59 am on May 27, 2010 (gmt 0)|
| 10:22 am on May 27, 2010 (gmt 0)|
Agree that the correct approach is a middle ground, no harm in changing a few images and styles to make it more pleasing the eye, but don't break the way the UI functions as it works fine as it is.
| 12:14 pm on May 28, 2010 (gmt 0)|
Design should facilitate function, otherwise it’s art... how many of us are artists?
I think this is a ‘Does what it says on the tin.’ place.
Bit of ajax, refresh the current layout and add a couple of features. Like the old adage, ‘keep it simple stupid!’ - yes wickedskaman!
God, I’d love to get my hands on this sites design and development! ;-)
| 12:39 pm on May 28, 2010 (gmt 0)|