4 ms·

If you think time has no bearing on aesthetic then you don't know much about design. You might not care but engaging people and increasing views are important

by Zimahl 13y ago

If you think time has no bearing on aesthetic then you don't know much about design. You might not care but engaging people and increasing views are important to a new aggregator.

chris_wot 13y ago
The question is: what are the problems with slashdot's design? "Time" is not an answer.
Gormo 13y ago
> If you think time has no bearing on aesthetic then you don't know much about design. "Design" is not synonymous with "ephemeral fashion"; good design principles appeal to human perception and cognition irrespective of what was popular yesterday or which page of the calendar is facing up today. You've still yet to articulate any substantive criticism of Slashdot's design.
- Zimahl 13y ago
  I guess I should've differentiated between visual design and functional design. I would think I made it clear enough that I was talking about the visual design. That said, the functional design of the site is fine. Outside of the moderation system, which I think isn't thought out right, and the discussion threads, which seem to push out newer comments, there's not a lot to change. As for the visual design, not much has changed since early Slashdot. As just a few examples: the rounded corners are dated, the colors are out of style (I'm not sure they were ever 'in'), the left-side menu is wasted space. There is some weird selection of a story that highlights it, which is meaningless in function. Everything about the site is 'busy'. There's too much going on and I would guess that very little of the excess is used (I would love to see the stats on some features). The threading of discussions could use a ton of work. Overall, I bet a developer had a lot of input into the design and not designer. It looks like something a capable programmer would create but they have just enough aesthetic ability to cause trouble. Visual design is very intertwined with 'trend'. Slashdot is way 'off-trend'.
  - Gormo 13y ago
    You're still not sufficiently differentiating between "visual design" and "ephemeral fashion". Visual design is itself a subset of functional design. Its function is to convey ideas - whether logos, ethos, or pathos - in a way that's accessible to human perception. Perhaps the reason why Slashdot hasn't changed its visual design significantly is because the current design is sufficiently successful at fulfilling this purpose. If we regard reference to trend and fashion as a subset of visual design, the function of which is to convey ideas, then it becomes clear that one of the ideas being conveyed is "we follow trends", from which we can reasonably extrapolate "we follow the lead of others" or "we care more about novelty than effectiveness in design". Perhaps the people who run Slashdot don't want to say these things? The only actual substantive criticism you've offered is that you think that Slashdot's design is "busy" (calling things "dated" or "out of style" is unsubstantive). The one thing I'll agree with you on is that the left sidebar might be better implemented as a tag cloud, and included in the right column, or incorporated into a topic index accessible from the main navigation bar. But this is a relatively trivial complaint, and overall, I much prefer the structured layout of Slashdot to current design trends which arrange content inconsistently in haphazard grids, and separate distinct elements not with clear visual cues, but with vague whitespace.
    - Zimahl 13y ago
      You're still not sufficiently differentiating between "visual design" and "ephemeral fashion". I don't need to, these things go together. Visual design is entwined with aesthetics that include trends. Here's a fun fact: everyone talks about Slashdot in the past tense, specifically how it's become irrelevant. Malda even talks about how it's been replaced by other sites, but it didn't have to be. Want to be perceived as an old site? Look the same as you did a decade ago. Name a successful interface that is practically unchanged for a decade that is not in decline. I've seen database management programs that have made bigger changes than Slashdot. Perhaps the reason why Slashdot hasn't changed its visual design significantly is because the current design is sufficiently successful at fulfilling this purpose. It's in steady decline. It's not fulfilling it's purpose. If we regard reference to trend and fashion as a subset of visual design, the function of which is to convey ideas, then it becomes clear that one of the ideas being conveyed is "we follow trends", from which we can reasonably extrapolate "we follow the lead of others" or "we care more about novelty than effectiveness in design". Perhaps the people who run Slashdot don't want to say these things? Complete conjecture. Things become trends for a reason.
wbl 13y ago
Ever hear of a Regency chair, Tiffany glass, Fallingwater, Lever House, Buckingham Palace, the Sistine Chapel, a Ford Thunderbird, Porsche 911? Artistic merit outlasts fashion, and if anyone makes a website as good as one of the above, it will be an accomplishment no matter how dated the design is.
- Zimahl 13y ago
  You can pick and choose a lot of items that we think of as having artistic merit but there are countless thousands of others that were artistic failures that you can't name. There's no argument that artistic merit endures, however, Slashdot has none and never has. I'm not sure what you're even arguing because my comment wasn't against the design of all websites, just Slashdot.

by Zimahl 13y ago

If you think time has no bearing on aesthetic then you don't know much about design. You might not care but engaging people and increasing views are important to a new aggregator.

chris_wot 13y ago

The question is: what are the problems with slashdot's design? "Time" is not an answer.

Gormo 13y ago

> If you think time has no bearing on aesthetic then you don't know much about design. "Design" is not synonymous with "ephemeral fashion"; good design principles appeal to human perception and cognition irrespective of what was popular yesterday or which page of the calendar is facing up today. You've still yet to articulate any substantive criticism of Slashdot's design.

Zimahl 13y ago
I guess I should've differentiated between visual design and functional design. I would think I made it clear enough that I was talking about the visual design. That said, the functional design of the site is fine. Outside of the moderation system, which I think isn't thought out right, and the discussion threads, which seem to push out newer comments, there's not a lot to change. As for the visual design, not much has changed since early Slashdot. As just a few examples: the rounded corners are dated, the colors are out of style (I'm not sure they were ever 'in'), the left-side menu is wasted space. There is some weird selection of a story that highlights it, which is meaningless in function. Everything about the site is 'busy'. There's too much going on and I would guess that very little of the excess is used (I would love to see the stats on some features). The threading of discussions could use a ton of work. Overall, I bet a developer had a lot of input into the design and not designer. It looks like something a capable programmer would create but they have just enough aesthetic ability to cause trouble. Visual design is very intertwined with 'trend'. Slashdot is way 'off-trend'.
- Gormo 13y ago
  You're still not sufficiently differentiating between "visual design" and "ephemeral fashion". Visual design is itself a subset of functional design. Its function is to convey ideas - whether logos, ethos, or pathos - in a way that's accessible to human perception. Perhaps the reason why Slashdot hasn't changed its visual design significantly is because the current design is sufficiently successful at fulfilling this purpose. If we regard reference to trend and fashion as a subset of visual design, the function of which is to convey ideas, then it becomes clear that one of the ideas being conveyed is "we follow trends", from which we can reasonably extrapolate "we follow the lead of others" or "we care more about novelty than effectiveness in design". Perhaps the people who run Slashdot don't want to say these things? The only actual substantive criticism you've offered is that you think that Slashdot's design is "busy" (calling things "dated" or "out of style" is unsubstantive). The one thing I'll agree with you on is that the left sidebar might be better implemented as a tag cloud, and included in the right column, or incorporated into a topic index accessible from the main navigation bar. But this is a relatively trivial complaint, and overall, I much prefer the structured layout of Slashdot to current design trends which arrange content inconsistently in haphazard grids, and separate distinct elements not with clear visual cues, but with vague whitespace.
  - Zimahl 13y ago
    You're still not sufficiently differentiating between "visual design" and "ephemeral fashion". I don't need to, these things go together. Visual design is entwined with aesthetics that include trends. Here's a fun fact: everyone talks about Slashdot in the past tense, specifically how it's become irrelevant. Malda even talks about how it's been replaced by other sites, but it didn't have to be. Want to be perceived as an old site? Look the same as you did a decade ago. Name a successful interface that is practically unchanged for a decade that is not in decline. I've seen database management programs that have made bigger changes than Slashdot. Perhaps the reason why Slashdot hasn't changed its visual design significantly is because the current design is sufficiently successful at fulfilling this purpose. It's in steady decline. It's not fulfilling it's purpose. If we regard reference to trend and fashion as a subset of visual design, the function of which is to convey ideas, then it becomes clear that one of the ideas being conveyed is "we follow trends", from which we can reasonably extrapolate "we follow the lead of others" or "we care more about novelty than effectiveness in design". Perhaps the people who run Slashdot don't want to say these things? Complete conjecture. Things become trends for a reason.

wbl 13y ago

Ever hear of a Regency chair, Tiffany glass, Fallingwater, Lever House, Buckingham Palace, the Sistine Chapel, a Ford Thunderbird, Porsche 911? Artistic merit outlasts fashion, and if anyone makes a website as good as one of the above, it will be an accomplishment no matter how dated the design is.

Zimahl 13y ago
You can pick and choose a lot of items that we think of as having artistic merit but there are countless thousands of others that were artistic failures that you can't name. There's no argument that artistic merit endures, however, Slashdot has none and never has. I'm not sure what you're even arguing because my comment wasn't against the design of all websites, just Slashdot.