WGA site update?

[Team Black-Cat]

The spell-checker has been replaced. This one doesn’t rely on an outside website, so it should be more reliable.

[Timberline Echoes]

Wow everything looks delightful! Thanks for all the work being done, great job.
TE

[goirish75]

We really love it, very professional looking and easy to find what you’re looking for. Nice job.

[kc9gbo]

I’m finding the site is speedier on loading, that was something that I noticed the last couple months having to use a different computer that the site had developed a lag time but now with this great update it is a lot quicker. Great job on the site!!

[seldom|seen]

I don’t know what to say without mollifying my reputation as being full of myself and having something of an ego. I guess I just have to accept it.

First, my apologies to anyone whom I might offend, no doubt I will. All of us appriciate the efforts of any WGA volunteer and know how precious that time is. Consider it constructive criticism from a graphic and web designer whose been around the block a few times…

http://www.foxcitieseye.com/
http://www.peakperformancefoxvalley.com/

I find it amazing the glitz and glitter to dress a site up STILL solicits this much positive feedback from the community even as some complain of eye-strain. From the drab, poorly kerned and hard to differentiate title of the header to the distracting toss-away background and amateur-looking (sorry, it is) navigation bar, this site has not improved from my standpoint. It is harder to look at and if I wasn’t already familiar with the layout I would have a hard time moving from navigation anchors to sub-navigation options, knowing I was picking the right places to go.

On a positive note, I think the changes to the primary navigation help. But, I would vastly simplify the graphics and dial the whole thing back a bit from a contrast standpoint, taking my queues from GC.com whose site developers understand the importance of readability and quite (white) space.

But that’s me and I know I am a minority of one as I have voiced professional opinions on these topics before without being heard and expect the same here. It’s why I don’t get involved with anything design or graphics related anymore when it comes to the WGA.

Let the snipping begin…

[BigJim]

And it looks really bad on my phone

All opinions, comments, and useless drivel I post are mine alone and do not reflect the opinions of the WGA BOD.

[-cheeto-]

Here’s my opinion for what it’s worth.

The general public user that comes here for the first time see’s a much more pleasant front page than before with pictures and better news content. A huge improvement IMHO.

Personally, I’d rather see the WGA’s money go towards CITO’s and public education than paying a designer to overhaul the website. We have a wonderful volunteer webmaster who was willing to give sprucing up our current site a try (in his spare time for no pay). I think he accomplished that and is still working to make it better.

I’m not a designer. I’m not artistic. The site looks better to me.

Now back to earning a living…

[Team Black-Cat]

My apologies to your sense of aesthetics. Since you “don’t get involved with anything design or graphics related anymore when it comes to the WGA”, we mere amateurs had to go it alone.
Just curious… did we do ANYTHING right?

@seldom|seen wrote:

I don’t know what to say without mollifying my reputation as being full of myself and having something of an ego. I guess I just have to accept it.

First, my apologies to anyone whom I might offend, no doubt I will. All of us appriciate the efforts of any WGA volunteer and know how precious that time is. Consider it constructive criticism from a graphic and web designer whose been around the block a few times…

http://www.foxcitieseye.com/
http://www.peakperformancefoxvalley.com/

I find it amazing the glitz and glitter to dress a site up STILL solicits this much positive feedback from the community even as some complain of eye-strain. From the drab, poorly kerned and hard to differentiate title of the header to the distracting toss-away background and amateur-looking (sorry, it is) navigation bar, this site has not improved from my standpoint. It is harder to look at and if I wasn’t already familiar with the layout I would have a hard time moving from navigation anchors to sub-navigation options, knowing I was picking the right places to go.

On a positive note, I think the changes to the primary navigation help. But, I would vastly simplify the graphics and dial the whole thing back a bit from a contrast standpoint, taking my queues from GC.com whose site developers understand the importance of readability and quite (white) space.

But that’s me and I know I am a minority of one as I have voiced professional opinions on these topics before without being heard and expect the same here. It’s why I don’t get involved with anything design or graphics related anymore when it comes to the WGA.

Let the snipping begin…

[TheBalks]

I find the new color scheme extremely easy to read. I like the high contrast.

[BigJim]

I don’t have a problem with it on a computer screen, but something about it really bugged me the other day when I pulled it up on my phone.

All opinions, comments, and useless drivel I post are mine alone and do not reflect the opinions of the WGA BOD.

[CodeJunkie]

[-cheeto-]

@CodeJunkie wrote:

I do a lot of my reading on the WGA site in low light conditions and the white just plain sucks. The green main menu with black lettering is very hard to read in my opinion. White letters on the buttons on top are also very hard to read.

Thanks to you and Alex for giving your schooled, expert opinions and honest feedback of the new theme.

The white’s always been there.

[cheezehead]

Well, I have no issues with what Brain had done to the site. It’s a heck of a lot better than it was. Everyone should know by now, the WGA and the BOD can not please everyone. Someone is ALWAYS going to gave the opinion. It’s like Grama always said “If ya can’t say something nice, don’t say nothing at all.” And if it’s hard to see cuz you sitting in the dark, turn on a freaking LIGHT for Pete’s Sake.

[cheezehead]

@BigJim60 wrote:

I don’t have a problem with it on a computer screen, but something about it really bugged me the other day when I pulled it up on my phone.

Well, maybe it you phone? And since no one here is a Professional geocacher, that I know of, The “Amateur” look is just fine!

[CodeJunkie]

At the risk of getting myself banned I’ll refrain from further comments. Have a nice thread.

[Author]

Posts