Pony99CA wrote:True, but the banner graphics -- which are much bigger than your so-called "ginormous" images -- had the same issues.
The images were shrunk shortly after several of us commented on their enormous size, and they were much much larger than the banner graphics so I suspect you never saw what I was talking about.
Pony99CA wrote:However, the graphics do draw your eyes to them
Maybe they draw your
eyes but as I stated previously, this mishmash of images and wild assortment of colors is visually distracting and unappealing for (my eye) thus that page makes me look away. I believe another poster phrased it as "in your face" which also fits my reaction to it.
Pony99CA wrote:That's a very appropriate reference.
How so? It was a teasing rejoinder directed at Mr. Bond whose post sounded like an echo of my previous post in the topic, bringing up the same issues point by point. I thought it was funny and suspected he had not actually read through all the critical posts as he was echoing the same concerns.
Pony99CA wrote:Not everything on a site has to be functional.
Who said it did? I said you need to be ruthless
when deciding what gets included on any given page, no where did I mention functional. You can include "cool" and things you like so long as they are relevant. I'm sure plenty of people here like Vlad's illustrations but that is certainly no reason to plaster them all over the website when they have no relation to the content.
Pony99CA wrote:Google would also have to lose their Doodles in your "ruthless" world.
Hardly, Google uses their Doodles to represent holidays and special events as they occur throughout the year making them perfectly relevant during the timeframe they are displayed.
Phil wrote:The home page will be undergoing further changes in the coming weeks that will give more prominence to the demo.
Ever consider holding a design contest open to the community for your homepage makeover? Submissions could then be voted on by everybody, may the best (web) designer win.