Better, than the test site, blander than the past.

[conan_edw]

Is this still happening? The rectangular tag "Anime" should be aligned to the right as on the old 'dex. It could've been caused by intermittent .css syntax error.

It used to be like this:

Image 1

Now it's like this, I guess it's somewhat better:

Image 2

 

[Taluntain]

I'm trying to be fair in my criticism of @Taluntain here; he does a ton of work that does not get appreciated. If the font/zoom poll was unambiguously for increasing the size, I would suck it up and use an extension to change it to how I like it. But the fact that the majority wanted it unchanged and he insists on changing, which he has made clear is his personal preference, does not sit well with me - regardless of all the other good work he does for the site.

No, as I've explained several times before, this is not just my personal preference but good web design norm for 2022 and insisting on making the fonts smaller every year (which is what leaving them the same size for the last 20 years effectively means) would pretty much be the definition of some petty agenda that would be hard for anyone sensible to understand. So what you're trying to achieve is actually what you're accusing me of. Funny, that.

Also, as I pointed out previously, I'm pretty sure that the small font enthusiasts pulled out their every alt to pad their votes on that poll, so it's not really reliable in any way.

 

[Twiglard]

The spoiler element used to be able to be renamed by using

[spoiler="text"]

but that no longer appears to work quite right, as it says "Spoiler: text"

Is this a big deal? I'd rather keep the amount of edited templates to a minimum. Anyway, it's in bb_code_tag_spoiler.

It used to be like this:

Image 1

View attachment 25174

Now it's like this, I guess it's somewhat better:

Image 2

View attachment 25175

Done by shifting the avatar 6 pixels to the left. Won't the avatar overlap the left edge of the screen a bit too much though? Due to some CSS fuckery this is better than adding a right margin to the avatar.

 

[Tacgnol]

No, as I've explained several times before, this is not just my personal preference but good web design norm for 2022 and insisting on making the fonts smaller every year (which is what leaving them the same size for the last 20 years effectively means) would pretty much be the definition of some petty agenda that would be hard for anyone sensible to understand. So what you're trying to achieve is actually what you're accusing me of. Funny, that.

Also, as I pointed out previously, I'm pretty sure that the small font enthusiasts pulled out their every alt to pad their votes on that poll, so it's not really reliable in any way.

In all honesty, if anyone has a particular bugbear about font size, it's probably better for them to just edit it with a stylus script.

I think the default one we've got set right now is alright personally, but then I'm at 2560x1440 so I dunno whether that skews things.

 

[JarlFrank]

good web design norm for 2022

But modern web design sucks ass compared to the web design of ten years ago.

Everything modern sucks ass. That is one of the core tenets of the Codex.

 

[Taluntain]

Font size is not so much about design but usability, but this goes hand in hand. When a size is too small for a good portion of readers to read comfortably, it's bad usability. Nobody should need to increase the size of the regular font on any website to read it comfortably. It's certainly more acceptable for those who for some reason prefer to read smaller fonts to zoom out a notch than to require all those who can't use the site normally due to too small a font to make adjustments so that they can even use the website. Thank your lucky stars if your vision is so superb that it affords you to read increasingly smaller text every year at the same level of comfort. This is definitely not the norm in the human population anywhere, and I'm pretty sure that the Codex is not comprised entirely of eagle-eyed mutants.

 

[Narushima]

Also, change the "Brofist" text back to "Rate"?

Since we use that button to rate, then yes, it should be called "Rate". The brofist is just one of the ratings.

 

[Bester]

A year ago, I made a thread asking to make 16px font for articles on the main page (not the forum). Nobody came in to support.

Now the post font is larger and sensible people want it to be 13px like it used to be. Nobody's there to support them either.

I think this shows exactly the kind of crowd you've got on the dex. They just don't give a fuck about anything. That's why they played Pillars of Eternity in the first place, you can feed them any kind of shit and they'll gobble it up.

 

[thesecret1]

Also, as I pointed out previously, I'm pretty sure that the small font enthusiasts pulled out their every alt to pad their votes on that poll, so it's not really reliable in any way.

Of course, if the results agree with your opinion, then it's 100% legit. If they counter your opinion, it must be cheating...

 

[agris]

Font size is not so much about design but usability, but this goes hand in hand. When a size is too small for a good portion of readers to read comfortably, it's bad usability. Nobody should need to increase the size of the regular font on any website to read it comfortably. It's certainly more acceptable for those who for some reason prefer to read smaller fonts to zoom out a notch than to require all those who can't use the site normally due to too small a font to make adjustments so that they can even use the website. Thank your lucky stars if your vision is so superb that it affords you to read increasingly smaller text every year at the same level of comfort. This is definitely not the norm in the human population anywhere, and I'm pretty sure that the Codex is not comprised entirely of eagle-eyed mutants.

You have consistently failed to demonstrate that this is an issue. You seem to be conflating it being hard for *you* to read with it being generally bad and hard to read.

and insisting on making the fonts smaller every year (which is what leaving them the same size for the last 20 years effectively means) would pretty much be the definition of some petty agenda that would be hard for anyone sensible to understand.

Despite your best efforts, 1+1 ≠ 3. Keeping the font the same size does not effectively mean it is smaller, it means it's the same damn size.

You are clearly using a screen for which the forum default font was hard to read for you. That sucks, maybe you should use stylus or another extension to make it larger, or enable text-only zooming and zoom in, rather than forcing your change on everyone while relying on appeals to authority vis-a-viz "standard web design"

Do you ever read news.ycombinator.com? The font there is even smaller, it is a site run and used by software and web developer professionals, and it is well indexed in google. Your arguments are but a figleaf to cover up the fact that you want your personal preference enforced on everyone else. And you don't even even have popular opinion here to support you, you have nothing but your opinion and appeals to "good web design norm".

As others said, most websites suck ass these days. We don't want the norm. We want what works for the majority of us, what we had. Not "a good portion of readers", which with your axe-grinding-philosophy could be interpreted as an even smaller subset than 40% by the way. Funny that.

 

[Nevill]

Also, change the "Brofist" text back to "Rate"?

I support this.

Also, the Quote/Reply buttons are one with their respective symbols, yet

and Brofist (Rate) are different elements with the same function. They should either be merged into a single button, or have different... consequences.

I.e. the Brofist could be just that, a one-click brofist (to appease the old-school Codex crown who think that 640kB one rating should be enough for everyone), and the Rate button could lead to the buttons list.

Also, hovering over the

symbol makes it cover the "B" on the Brofist button next to it. It's no big deal, but it doesn't look good.

Edit: another minor thing -- Brofist/Rate button does not underscore the text when you hover over it. Quote/Reply buttons do.

 

[Taluntain]

Of course, if the results agree with your opinion, then it's 100% legit. If they counter your opinion, it must be cheating...

Not really, just when they go against common sense.

 

[Berekän]

Thanks for the hard work Twiglard, it's amazing how much improvement we've had in two days.

 

[Twiglard]

Not really, just when they go against common sense.

The XF2 default bottom-left action bar "Report" button is seriously distracting. I'd rather avoid having it on the bottom. It's now consistent with the share and bookmark icons that are by default present in their current iconic form.

 

[thesecret1]

Not really, just when they go against common sense.

Common sense would say to not fix what's not broken, yet here we are...

 

[Üstad]

Revert it back

 

[Taluntain]

You have consistently failed to demonstrate that this is an issue. You seem to be conflating it being hard for *you* to read with it being generally bad and hard to read.



Despite your best efforts, 1+1 ≠ 3. Keeping the font the same size does not effectively mean it is smaller, it means it's the same damn size.

You are clearly using a screen for which the forum default font was hard to read for you. That sucks, maybe you should use stylus or another extension to make it larger, or enable text-only zooming and zoom in, rather than forcing your change on everyone while relying on appeals to authority vis-a-viz "standard web design"

Do you ever read news.ycombinator.com? The font there is even smaller, it is a site run and used by software and web developer professionals, and it is well indexed in google. Your arguments are but a figleaf to cover up the fact that you want your personal preference enforced on everyone else. And you don't even even have popular opinion here to support you, you have nothing but your opinion and appeals to "good web design norm".

As others said, most websites suck ass these days. We don't want the norm. We want what works for the majority of us, what we had. Not "a good portion of readers", which with your axe-grinding-philosophy could be interpreted as an even smaller subset than 40% by the way. Funny that.

You don't seem to understand the basic concept of increase in resolutions and DPI from 800x600 to today's resolutions, which effectively mean that leaving the font size the same as it was 20 years ago results in a significantly smaller text on screen. That is why the text size everywhere has been adjusted, not because some hidden cabal decided that they want to force agris to view larger text. Basic usability.

You're arguing against the accepted convention and good usability with your own subjective preference and singular anecdotal examples, which is fine. That's enough to "win" a lot of forum arguments. But it's pretty silly to think that you're going to make anyone who can't read the Codex comfortably due to too small a font see it your way.

 

[agris]

Since we use that button to rate, then yes, it should be called "Rate". The brofist is just one of the ratings.

I like the call-back to Codex's history in keeping the button labeled as brofist. Rate is so dry and mechanical. If it confuses people, do we want those people here, pushing our buttons?

I say no.

 

[normie]

this is normal
this is not

 

[agris]

You don't seem to understand the basic concept of increase in resolutions and DPI from 800x600 to today's resolutions, which effectively mean that leaving the font size the same as it was 20 years ago results in a significantly smaller text on screen. That is why the text size everywhere has been adjusted, not because some hidden cabal decided that they want to force agris to view larger text. Basic usability.

You're arguing against the accepted convention and good usability with your own subjective preference and singular anecdotal examples, which is fine. That's enough to "win" a lot of forum arguments. But it's pretty silly to think that you're going to make anyone who can't read the Codex comfortably due to too small a font see it your way.

Oh I understand it, probably better than you do which is why the old font stayed readable for me. But I am not going to engage in a discussion on display technology and marketing, this is about the font and the general preference of the people who use this forum. They liked the old size more than increasing it, you have yet to provide any data indicating a majority of the users would prefer a larger size - because it doesn't exist.

 

[Bruma Hobo]

Bunch of crybabies, the site looks alright and I'm sure it will look great in a couple of weeks days, just give it some time.

 

[Taluntain]

Common sense would say to not fix what's not broken, yet here we are...

Only you don't really know what was broken, what was about to get broken, what didn't function properly, etc. Those of us working in the background, on the other hand, were acutely aware of it all for years. Making it all outwardly function as if it was all good is just a testament to the effort invested by the site staff in making it appear like that. Keep that in mind.

 

[Lady Error]

Nobody should need to increase the size of the regular font on any website to read it comfortably. It's certainly more acceptable for those who for some reason prefer to read smaller fonts to zoom out a notch

Except it is easy to zoom in while zoom out is not an integral feature in many browsers.

 

[Bester]

You don't seem to understand the basic concept of increase in resolutions and DPI from 800x600 to today's resolutions, which effectively mean that leaving the font size the same as it was 20 years ago

Don't twist the truth. The oldex design was in line with what was modern in 2006, when nobody had 800x600 monitors.

Everyone had 1280*1024 and it was 19 inch. Nowadays, I have 1920*1080, which is 27 inch. Which means almost the same DPI - 86 pixels per inch vs 81.

Somehow this DPI worked for people for 20 years, but now suddenly doesn't? Bullshit.

 

[agris]

don't do it Bester , it's a side argument that distracts from the point that he has no ground to stand on with the change. this line of discussion is intended to distract.