Communities

Writing
Writing
Codidact Meta
Codidact Meta
The Great Outdoors
The Great Outdoors
Photography & Video
Photography & Video
Scientific Speculation
Scientific Speculation
Cooking
Cooking
Electrical Engineering
Electrical Engineering
Judaism
Judaism
Languages & Linguistics
Languages & Linguistics
Software Development
Software Development
Mathematics
Mathematics
Christianity
Christianity
Code Golf
Code Golf
Music
Music
Physics
Physics
Linux Systems
Linux Systems
Power Users
Power Users
Tabletop RPGs
Tabletop RPGs
Notifications
Mark all as read
Q&A

Welcome to Codidact Meta!

Codidact Meta is the meta-discussion site for the Codidact community network and the Codidact software. Whether you have bug reports or feature requests, support questions or rule discussions that touch the whole network – this is the site for you.

Post History

63%
+5 −2
#1: Initial revision by user avatar celtschk‭ · 2021-06-09T07:44:25Z (over 1 year ago)
I definitely do *not* appreciate the bigger fonts. This makes much less content displayed at the same time, which is bad especially on  overview pages. At the current design, two-line titles are the exception. At the new design, they are more like the norm.

Also, I don't like the titles to be in bold font on the overview page. In my opinion, bold should *always* be used sparingly. Titles in the actual text are sparse, therefore it makes sense to make them bold. Titles on the overview page are the main content, therefore making them bold is IMHO wrong.

Also the fact that the scoring takes much more space isn't to my liking (especially since most of it is whitespace to accommodate the overly long picture bar). And I would prefer to keep it on the left, as that way I do not have to move my eyes across the page to get to it.

Also, I *much* prefer the current “red to the left, green to the right” bars to the new ones. For one, the current bars get more red the more negative the posting is, while the new bars get more red the *less* negative the post is (where “negative” means relative to the neutral 0.5 score). Indeed, the most red you get if you are almost neutral. That subconsciously gives the message that the worse posts are *less* bad (because there's less of the “bad colour”).

Also, the header in the new design is basically empty space (indeed, ironically, for my page width — which is actually less than the screen width — it *only* has content where the content has whitespace (on the left and right), see image:

![Screenshot of new design header and page start](https://meta.codidact.com/uploads/okX9mBkXZnojPEfaVUs9m7Pd)

I'm also missing the Featured/Hot Posts box. And the page somehow aprubtly ends, as opposed to the footer information in the current design (and I cannot find the essential information contained there anywhere in the new design, in particular the terms of service, about us and contact links).

What I do like, however, is the new functionality. I appreciate that instead of the unspecific “last activity” the type of activity is given (new comment, new answer, …). The “expand” button is also nice (though I think it shouldn't move when turning into “close”). And of course the filters are a great addition, although the filter criteria need some work (e.g. instead of excluding questions with downvotes, it would make more sense to exclude questions with more downvotes than upvotes, that is, with “negative” score).

BTW, unrelated to the redesign I'm now wondering if instead of using the Wilson score directly, it would make sense to use (2*Wilson score − 1) as public score. The ordering would be the same (that is, the actual score handing would not need to change, only the presentation to the user), but posts with more downvotes than upvotes would actually get negative score (the score interval would be −1 to 1 instead of 0 to 1).