Slashdot Mirror


Designer on Slashdot Overhaul Plans

EdwardianDandy writes "Web designer Khoi Vinh, whose firm Behavior is responsible for the redesign of the Onion, argues on publish.com that an upcoming contest to overhaul Slashdot's look will yield interesting results, but the outcome will suffer because the underlying architecture is off limits." Normally I don't post stuff "About" Slashdot here since I find meta naval gazing very boring, but this article has many good points about architecture and design, even if his whole premise is based on a contest that we haven't spent more than about 5 minutes thinking about, and is mostly just meant to be a fun way for users to contribute themes to Slashdot. If Khoi wants to enter the contest, we'll consider his designs along with everyone else's. (I'm sure we can't afford him tho). And if he (or anyone) wants to make changes more substantial than cosmetic CSS, I'd consider them too. The upcoming Slashdot Redesign contest is intended to be more about design than architecture, but good ideas are good ideas.

35 of 469 comments (clear)

  1. Slash Light by (1+-sqrt(5))*(2**-1) · · Score: 5, Insightful

    A small request: whatever we finally decide to do, let's keep Slash Light.

    1. Re:Slash Light by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      One major thing that brings me back to slashdot, is how easy it is on the eyes. You aren't assaulted with multiple columns of content or gaudy, interleaved ads. It's right to the point, top to bottom. The front page of the onion looks like a bomb went off in the middle of some content. You have stories all over the place. Slashdot also isn't like other tech news sites where you have 20% story, %80 related links or other fluff. It's story, user reaction. Given that most of the site's content, and the whole idea of the site is based on community, anything other than a chronological top down design would ruin what slashdot is.

      If it's not broke, don't fix it.

    2. Re:Slash Light by koekepeer · · Score: 5, Insightful

      i think this argument is posed a little bit too black and white.

      aren't we the ones who always speak of freedom of choice being such a wonderful thing? ideally, a good default look and a large degree of customisation in the preferences section would make slashdot something that can be pleasing to *every* eye. already now you can switch off just about anything except for the ads.

    3. Re:Slash Light by Blakey+Rat · · Score: 5, Funny

      One major thing that brings me back to slashdot, is how easy it is on the eyes.

      Only if you're colorblind. If you think that purple color in the Games section is easy on the eyes, I'm sorry, but I think you need to see an optometrist immediately.

  2. Her own? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    "it's now possible for any enterprising designer to develop a new, production-ready (or nearly ready) 'skin' for the site completely on her own."

    I told you guys! Once we shaped up and went CSS the females would be all over us! I'm talking SKIN!

  3. The onion redesign isn't very good by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I find the new Onion design too busy and hard to navigate. The old design was simple, clean and the Infographcs and American Voices were easier to read. Maybe that's just my opinion...

    1. Re:The onion redesign isn't very good by froboy · · Score: 5, Insightful

      "isn't very good" is a kind, kind way of putting it. It went from a simple and easy to navigate site to an overgrown mess in the course of a couple months. One of the greatest tragedies of moden web design is the endless need to make sites more complicated and seemingly "busier." A vast majority of what I see on webpages could be just as effective with simple HTML rather than the mess of flash/java/shockwave, etc... that is needlessly being thrown around these days. I agree that it is time to shake things up a bit here at slashdot, I only hope that the powers that be opt to stick with a relatively simple design so that content does not get mired down in window dressing.

    2. Re:The onion redesign isn't very good by Dr.+Digg · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The Onion's previous format really fit; now - well, yuck.

      It's another case of a self-proclaimed expert forcing their own perceived expertise on the end-user without bothering to take the end-user into account. I've run into a couple of these. While the good ones can be good, the bad ones lack insight and just move on making the same mistake. Unfortunately, they also have a tendency to move up the corporate ladder.

    3. Re:The onion redesign isn't very good by eln · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I blame cable news.

      A few years ago, some cable news channel (probably CNNfn) decided to put a little stock ticker at the bottom of the screen all the time. A little distracting, but easy to ignore. Then, news channels decided to put a news ticker there. More distracting, and difficult to pay attention to the anchor while reading the ticker.

      Then, some genius decided to put TWO tickers, and some other crap on the side of the screen. Headline News is the worst at this that I've seen. Now, every time you turn on Headline News, it's like a bomb went off on your screen. It's completely impossible to absorb all of the information they're trying to throw at you all at once.

      This trend toward excessive busy-ness has migrated to the web. On news channels, it's primarily a way to cram in more useless information. On the web, it's primarily a way to cram in more useless advertisements. All of it sacrifices usability.

    4. Re:The onion redesign isn't very good by bonehead · · Score: 4, Funny

      I agree. I stopped reading the Onion quite some time ago when the content started sucking, so I wasn't aware that they had redesigned the site.

      When I pulled it up to check out the new design, my first thought was "Huh? The guy who designed this piece of shit is being quoted as an authority on web design?"

    5. Re:The onion redesign isn't very good by starm_ · · Score: 5, Funny

      The Onion -*AD*-
      \!!/
      -AD-cntnt
      /||\cntnt
      cntnt \!!/
      cntnt -AD-
      cntnt /||\
      \!!/ cntnt
      -AD- cntnt
      /||\
      What? Who doesn't appreciate the artfull design and delicate balance of subtle content decorted with blindingly colorful and flashy ads?

  4. hands off! by DustyCase · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I hope this guy keeps his hands off of /. because the new Onion design gives me a headache. Swapping a clean, streamlined design for a USA-Today ripoff isn't my idea of progress.

  5. Aha! by Zaffo · · Score: 5, Insightful

    So he's the one responsible for befouling my precious Onion.

    I realize the debate over homogeneity and efficiency of content/ad presentation is one that will never die, but there's something to be said about the sentimentality attached to site layouts. It's like that old pub you love going to getting remodeled with gear from Ikea or something. There's nothing inherently wrong with it, but it also doesn't feel right, either. :(

    1. Re:Aha! by Nqdiddles · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Just doesn't feel right at all anymore.
      The first time I saw the redesigned site I was really confused. Trying to sort the ads from the stories in a page that looks like it's in the middle of rush hour!
      Please slashdot! Don't let that guy anywhere near your site!

      --
      And that kids is how I met your mother.
  6. Navel-gazing by Speare · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Normally I don't post stuff "About" Slashdot here since I find meta naval gazing very boring,

    This brings many things into sharp focus. Lack of ethical caching of small sites. Lack of basic story duplication review. Lack of basic grammar review. Lack of basic journalistic fact-checking. Troubling comments that charge karma backlash to those who defy the editors. Lack of awareness that Slashdot is expected by its subscribers and would-be subscribers to behave like the professional corporate concern which it is, and not an unpaid hobby blog which it may have been in the distant past.

    Come on, Taco. Some regular "navel gazing" is how things improve over time. Is Slashdot worth so little to you?

    --
    [ .sig file not found ]
    1. Re:Navel-gazing by RobotRunAmok · · Score: 5, Funny

      D00D, leave my boy Taco alone!! He said "naval gazing." He was talking about taking the afternoon off and watching the Coast Guard maneuvers off the shore of Lake Michigan.

      Guy works hard, wants to slip out early, watch some cool ships sail around, what's the problem?

      Huh?

    2. Re:Navel-gazing by Short+Circuit · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Lack of ethical caching of small sites.

      They give a valid reason for not caching all the links. Your UID is low enough that I expect you know about the FAQ. Did you know that they address this?

      Lack of basic story duplication review.

      There's an open invitation to solutions. As it is, though, a lot of "dupes" are really followups, or revists to old subjects from years past.

      Lack of basic grammar review.

      They have a copy editor. At the very least, that's "basic."

      Lack of basic journalistic fact-checking.

      Slashdot is a meta-news site; They don't originate much content. However, they do (usually?) follow links before posting a story, weighing it against what they know. At the very least, that's "basic."

      Besides, I've seen worse out of "respectable" news media.

      Troubling comments that charge karma backlash to those who defy the editors.

      Obviously you don't really care, or you wouldn't have posted.

      Lack of awareness that Slashdot is expected by its subscribers and would-be subscribers to behave like the professional corporate concern which it is, and not an unpaid hobby blog which it may have been in the distant past.

      You're right, it's no longer an unpaid hobby blog. It's now a paid hobby blog. Slashdot was most likely bought to provide additional customers for commercial services.

      Personally, I think you're taking it too seriously. Slashdot was bought because of what it was: A popular tech community with a huge potential audience for tech ads. Changing the community risks alienating the audience, regardless of whether you think the changes are for good or ill.

  7. Re:Question for oldies. by bram · · Score: 4, Informative

    more or less.

    The menus and blocks around the content were added later.
    Also, now with the css and stuff there are gradients where there weren't.

    Overall it still looks the same as in the beginning. Although a bit heavier. :)

    --
    People using html in email should be shot.
  8. No Changes! by Evil+W1zard · · Score: 4, Interesting

    One of the things I like about this website is the simplicity in viewing it and I really wouldn't want to see much changed. The only thing I would say to change is to kill some of the white space between posted articles and user comments, but that is really a minute nitpick... Slashdot has enough of a following that changing the site won't hurt numbers of visitors IMO but hopefully if they decide to go with a new spread it won't wind up being visually unappealing...

    --
    News Reporters Make Tasty Polar Bear Treats!
  9. Slashdot's design is scandalously bad. by windowpain · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Here I am posting a comment and I can't view the story I'm commenting on. That's ridiculous. And it takes too long to learn how to use Slashdot because the most important information is buried among a lot of trivia in the FAQs.

    If Slashdot were a person it would wear taped together glasses, a pocket protector and floods.

    News for nerds indeed.

    --
    Insert witty sig here.
  10. Slashdot software broken, bans entire subnets by SumDog · · Score: 5, Informative

    So yesterday I was at home trying to post a comment and I got the following:

    Due to excessive bad posting from this IP or Subnet, comment posting has
    temporarily been disabled. If it's you, consider this a chance to sit in the
    timeout corner . If it's someone else, this is a chance to hunt them down.
    If you think this is unfair, please email moderation@slashdot.org with your
    MD5'd IPID and SubnetID, which are "fbc83eaaddf909965a32494c3cf14021" and "
    0681b6883c7b099b59889c08cb34313a" and (optionally, but preferably) your IP
    number "68.xxx.xxx.xxx http://68.xxx.xxx.xxx/>" and your username "SumDog".

    So I emailed them telling them the problem. I was a subscriber, with decent Karma and I don't troll (although I bet this will be modded as a troll sadly). The response I got was:

    > On 10/17/05, Robert Rozeboom wrote:
    >>
    >> It looks like you share this subnet with a troll, sorry.

    The next day, I am still unable to post from home. I have to ssh into work and use lynx to post a comment. I e-mailed him again and got this response:

    I;m sorry but I can't unblock your subnet.

    Again from Robert Rozeboom. I actually support slashdot, bought a subscription (yea I know it's only $10) and I can't post from home because someone who uses a Comcast cable modem is a troll?! What the fuck?!

    They don't bother to check the individual user, but instead ban an entire sub net. There were several comments I wanted to post yesterday but couldn't, because I didn't want to sit with a damn ssh terminal in lynx retyping my user name and password for each comment (I had cookies turned on in Lynx, but it didn't remember my authentication).

    If I had done something wrong, I could understand. If there was some way I could fix the problem I would. But even if I unplug my cable modem and get a new IP, it will still likely be on the same subnet. I can't change providers, I don't have DSL or any other broadband in my area (not to mention the reconnection and setup fees are insane unless they're running a special offer)

    Before slashdot worries about polishing up the look and feel of their site, they should go back and fix underlying problems with the code, maybe even add spell-check and require users to type in words from images (a.k.a reverse turing test) to prevent abuse from bots.

    1. Re:Slashdot software broken, bans entire subnets by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The subnet banning isn't new, the editors know what they're doing and they aren't changing it.

      It's just typical hypocrisy from the editors when they bitch and scream how DRM technologies annoy and frustrate legitimate fair users, while the piracy will still go on. It's exactly what slashcode is doing now. Their filters, timers, bans, blacklists have been expanding all the time, and entrapping more legit users every day. Meanwhile, trolling, and crapflooding still exists.

      Subnet bans are ridiculously amateurish with all the different proxies real trolls can use. And don't get me started with their idiotic comment filters. Talk about kiddy stuff.

    2. Re:Slashdot software broken, bans entire subnets by brianvan · · Score: 4, Insightful

      This is a terrible customer service experience you're detailing, and it's the exact type of customer experience that is frequently mocked here on Slashdot when the (other) big corps engage in it.

      You subscribed to a paid service but you can't get the free part of it. How lame. I'm sorry, but they don't deserve to have your money anymore. You should ask for a refund.

      I'm not trying to pick on Slashdot here. I'm being fair. Even if there is a technical problem, you owe it to your customers to be direct and accommodating about it. I know this is an isolated incident, but this is no way to run a business. It's completely unacceptable and unprofessional.

    3. Re:Slashdot software broken, bans entire subnets by kasparov · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Odd, it seems the best thing to do would be
      1. Disable Anonymous posting from the subnet
      2. Disable posting for the specific user if they were logged in
      3. Disable user registration from the subnet so the troll can't just get new usernames
      It still might be a little heavy handed (other users from the subnet wouldn't be able to register--but the only real reason to register is to post which they wouldn't be able to do anyway as it currently is), but it would be better and (I think) still solve the problem.
      --
      There's no place I can be, since I found Serenity.
    4. Re:Slashdot software broken, bans entire subnets by RingDev · · Score: 5, Insightful

      "The "you share a subnet with a troll" was pretty direct. As for accomodating, you have to consider the big picture. What's better, to lose half the users due to crapflooding, or lose a handful as collateral damage while blocking bad apples?"

      Why not allow registered user accounts to post regardless of IP/Subnet bans? And if the User Account is used to spam/flood/troll ban the account. That way, the IP/Subnet ban will block AC's from posting crap, the user account bans will block spam accounts, and valid users will still have full access. It doesn't seem like rocket surgery to me.

      -Rick

      --
      "Most people in the U.S. wouldn't know they live in a tyrannical state if it walked up and grabbed their junk." - MyFirs
  11. Re:Why Have A Contest At All??!! by going_the_2Rpi_way · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Notice all the "we"'s in the replys. People feel like they own or are a part of Slashdot. You can't buy that kind of loyalty and letting stakeholders play a role (or think they're playing a role at least) in determining the direction of the site is a small price to pay.

    It may be a business, but they're the keepers of this community. If they lose their way and get all evil and shit, Google will start their version and all us fan boys will run over there instead to bad mouth MS and warn everybody about the latest Firefox hole.

  12. Ugh, microfonts by Bogtha · · Score: 4, Insightful

    They call themselves "the definitive authority on web publishing and print", and yet their own site uses teeny tiny 10px fonts? Free clue: design is about balancing form and function. When you use tiny fonts, you sacrifice function. If you forget the balance, it's not design, just art wanking. A 10px font size for the main body of text is not acceptable for something to qualify as well designed.

    --
    Bogtha Bogtha Bogtha
  13. Meta navel gazing is exactly what's required by $RANDOMLUSER · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Why aren't the simplest things to improve the site even considered?
    The ASCII-goatse guys need to be IP-banned for life. The GNAA guys need to get a life. The "overrated/underrated" metamod loophole needs to be closed. Storys need to be checked for duplicates, at least a week back. Summaries should summarize. Third grade rules of grammar and spelling should be observed in summaries. Storys should be assigned to the category they belong to. Corel cache links should be supplied for sites that obviously can't take the strain - particularly if they have shown that they can't in the past. Roland Pipaquele (sp) and the Amazon recommendation link trolls should be executed. Storys should be accepted/rejected in a timely manner, and we shouldn't be seeing people posting "I submitted this 20 hours ago, and was rejected".

    I could go on, but I'm sure I've said enough already to be scored a troll-for-life, so I'll quit now.

    --
    No folly is more costly than the folly of intolerant idealism. - Winston Churchill
  14. The Onion is dead. Long live The Onion! by Marx_Mrvelous · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Agreed, I used to read The Onion religiously, but now I don't bother anymore. The new site is a disaster, and it's all about generating revenue through obtrusive ads. The "new" Onion is a corporate shill. I'd be ashamed to be associated with that site, let alone advertise that I created that trainwreck of a perfectly good (great!) site.

    --

    Moderation: Put your hand inside the puppet head!
  15. Good work Khoi by rho · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Your Onion re-design makes me have to scroll horizontally in Safari now! Not much, but my browser's about 1024x768. I'm not sure we should be listening to shit-all this guy has to say. Multi-column layouts just OWN for online newspapers. No, really, it works SO WELL to toss out 15 years of Web development and say, "You know, NEWSPAPERS ARE THE NEW BLACK!"

    Anyway, regarding TFA, that was the biggest load of "Web Designer" horse crap ever shoveled into HTML. Slashdot has been ASS UGLY since 1997. Yet, it's been hugely successful. Why is this? Gosh, it COULDN'T be because of the CONTENT--could it? Not only has Slashdot continued to provide what it's here to provide, it's remained remarkably stable, UI-wise.

    "Rethinking" the architecture is daft. Slashdot has a codebase built to encourage good comments and hide bad ones, but to accept everything that's not scripted spam. That's the architecture. "Rethinking" that is like "rethinking" the design of the nuclear reactor in a submarine while crusing at 20 knots 800 feet down.

    Please keep your Web Designer hands off Slashdot, thanks.

    --
    Potato chips are a by-yourself food.
  16. Ignore him! by zenmojodaddy · · Score: 4, Funny

    The Onion makes my eyes water.

    *bdumTSH*

  17. Re:Horrible changes so far: by Bogtha · · Score: 4, Insightful

    What the fuck is up with people who make the underlines of hyperlinks DISAPPEAR when you rollover them?

    Rollover effects aid usability by giving instant visual feedback the moment the user can activate the link. It has the greatest effect on people who aren't that comfortable using the mouse (newbies, people with arthritis, etc), but it affects everyone to some small degree.

    It's one of the stupidest things you can do, design-wise, with a web site.

    Not true. I can spend all day listing stupider things that people do.

    Just change the colour of the text if you must, but don't go changing the friggin' underline for no reason.

    Why the special attention to the underline? The user already knows it's a link, they've already navigated to it with the mouse and are geetting ready to click it. It's not the same as removing the underlines when you aren't hovering over the link.

    --
    Bogtha Bogtha Bogtha
  18. Navel gazing bad - but self-examination good by wowbagger · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Rob - you are right that "navel gazing" is bad. But looking down and saying "Dayum - I need to lay off the beer and do some sit-ups" is not.

    Being so focused upon your navel that you DO NOTHING about it is bad. But stepping back once in a while and saying "now, how can I make things better - anybody have any good advice", then implementing that advice is the only way to improve.

    For example - what if you added extra CSS classes to comments, reflecting the moderation adjectives applied and the moderation level - such as

    <li class="comment, level_5, karma_bonus, insightful, interesting, overrated">

    Then, without a server fetch, I could change my displayed comment threshold just by changing my CSS. Think about how much savings the /. servers could see from that.

    You could even add the zoo modifiers, then I could have my friends posts highlighted by changing the background, again, without a server fetch.

    In short, Rob - if you put more of the information the back-end has into the generated HTML, then that would increase the amount of cool stuff WE can do at the browser end.

    1. Re:Navel gazing bad - but self-examination good by Hulfs · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Then, without a server fetch, I could change my displayed comment threshold just by changing my CSS. Think about how much savings the /. servers could see from that.

      I certainly like your suggestions, but I'm not sure how this would cut down on bandwidth. I read at a comment threshold of 3, which seems to drop 4/5 of the comments/trolls. If slashdot implemented this moderation level css classes AND sent every single comment per article, letting the user's CSS sort out the viewing threshold, I think this would actually result in a much higher bandwidth usage.

      I still think the class idea is great though. You could pretty easily construct visual cues about the funniness of a post or the moderation level by using your own stylesheet. I'd probably use something like a color shade that gets progressively more saturated as the moderation level got higher, or I'd set up a sheet that just showed me +5 funny posts.

  19. I wish the ads were only obtrusive... by SethJohnson · · Score: 5, Funny



    The new site is a disaster, and it's all about generating revenue through obtrusive ads.

    So a couple years ago I was working in London and I was given a laptop to use by my employer. I decided to download the onion to read offline while riding the train home from work one day. Turns out the page wouldn't render because of a reference to a 3rd-party adserver graphic I hadn't downloaded. To fix it, I opened up my editor and was removing these ad tags from the code. Next thing I know, a man grabbed my laptop off my lab and bolted out of the train.

    Apparently, the Onion REALLY wants you to see those ads and has implemented some pretty excessive means of enforcement.

    Seth