please empty your brain below
So...
You quite like the design.
They think it could be better.
You're both right.

diamond geezer | Homepage | 19.05.12 - 8:03 a.m. | #

The big problem with most web designers is that they design websites to show how clever they are, NOT so that the user can find any worthwhile information.

You only have to look at Google's recent redesigns to realise that they don't live in a world where people use the internet as a small part of their day, rather than a raison d'etre

Content over style? My preference every day

Simon | Homepage | 19.05.12 - 8:26 a.m. | #

p.s. Maybe they don't realise that 10's of people enjoy your blog every day.

A stat counter of some sort would amaze them - So many people read this blog, while so few read their beautiful, life affirming, soothe their damaged ego websites

Simon | Homepage | 19.05.12 - 8:30 a.m. | #

Hugely more people read the London Reddit page than read my blog. I had many more readers from there yesterday than from here.

diamond geezer | Homepage | 19.05.12 - 8:32 a.m. | #

i think your site is fine as it is. the 1990s were a much simpler time, and i would go back in an instant.

dave | 19.05.12 - 8:42 a.m. | #

If the kiddy with the stupid handle thinks that the line length is too long, there is a resizing thingy in the corner of the screen. Dragging it makes the lines shorter.

Max Roberts | Homepage | 19.05.12 - 8:51 a.m. | #

What is the perceived problem? Beauty or ugliness is very much in the eye of the beholder. Are you trying for a pretty blog, or a functional one? And how is this blog hard to read, exactly?

I recall that you get about half a million visitors a year - http://diamondgeezer.blogspot.co.uk/2011/12/two-and-half.html - but lots of people seem to read on RSS. I wonder how many "regulars" you really have.


Andrew | 19.05.12 - 8:52 a.m. | #

DG.
I've read your blog for years, initially on a desktop, and for the past two years, mainly on an HTC Desire.
The format (including the pop-up comment dialog) has never been an issue.
This is another vote for keeping the site the way it is.

What do your usage stats say about screen resolutions or user-agents?

TimW | 19.05.12 - 8:59 a.m. | #

I can read it perfectly well on both the computer and my phone, on the actual blog and the RSS feed. My only gripe is the infrequency of kittens. What there is, is fine.

Debster | Homepage | 19.05.12 - 9:05 a.m. | #

Why not just copy and past in the comments thread from a couple of days ago?

Don't feed the reddits.

Blue Witch | Homepage | 19.05.12 - 9:22 a.m. | #

Great typo BW.

'paste' not 'past'.

Blue Witch | Homepage | 19.05.12 - 9:23 a.m. | #

Ignore 'em all DG, if it's not broke why bother trying to fix it.

kevin hennessy | 19.05.12 - 9:40 a.m. | #

If I was a teen I'd say "Whatever':-)

We read your blog for the content, not the style.

Carry on regardless DG

Rob C | 19.05.12 - 9:43 a.m. | #

And how many of the reddit commenters have kept a regularly updated blog for nearly 10 years?

Talk is very cheap.

Sourav | 19.05.12 - 9:48 a.m. | #

Content first and foremost. You can put a ribbon on a pig but it will still be a pig.

Waterhouse | 19.05.12 - 9:49 a.m. | #

Websites are full of unnecessary clutter these days, I think one day people will realise this and want a return to a simpler lay-out.
If you do make changes then please don't be too radical.

Tetramesh | Homepage | 19.05.12 - 10:27 a.m. | #

I'd rather you focussed on content than presentation. The world is full of people offering advice that is easy for them to say and hard for you to do.

I read through Google Reader, and am working through past years in desktop/tablet Firefox, and both are fine for me.

John | 19.05.12 - 10:33 a.m. | #

There are many websites I read despite their design, because I like the content.

There are none I read because I like the design, despite the content.

Kirk | 19.05.12 - 10:37 a.m. | #

I still have no idea what Reddit is

Gareth Wyn | 19.05.12 - 10:48 a.m. | #

Surely, if the web was designed properly, content would be what you should produce (with appropriate tags). Presentation should be in the eye of the beholder and it should be up to them to choose the style they want to view it. A bit like choosing your font on Kindle only taking the idea further.

Any discussion on style is fatuous and missing the point. Do what you want DG and wait for the world to create a system where everyone will be happy. Well not happy exactly but if they don't like the style it should be down to them to change it rather than moan to the content provider.

Pedantic of Purley | 19.05.12 - 11:02 a.m. | #

Oh, good grief.

Out-nerded but never out-geeked.

Or is it the other way round?

Whatevs, anyway.

Phase 2 of the assault: a surfeit of unsolicited emails offering the free services of website designers, with conditions attached.

Dominic | 19.05.12 - 11:03 a.m. | #

Reddit may have sent loads your way DG, now you've sent one back. I'd never been there until just now. Not sure it's a service I'd use, unlike that provided by your good self. More power to your elbow.

THC | 19.05.12 - 11:06 a.m. | #

I went to the library and borrowed some books today. They have black lettering, some serif, some sans serif, on white to cream pages. Occasionally there are pictures, but not very many. There are a few more graphs and figures than there are pictures. But mainly there are words. The books have around 200 pages each. Any more, and publishers get tetchy these days, or so I am told. They also have contents pages and indexes and proper referencing. I am going to read them, some in more depth than others. Then I will diligently make photocopies of the best and most relevant chapters and create a course reader for my students. I have to do this, because it is too 'hard' for students these days to find sources in the library themselves. With respect to many sources I could use e-books, but they probably won't find those either. So, I will do all the hard work, produce a cheap course reader and wait for all the excuses as to why it isn't read and students have nothing to say in class. I'll also note that while I am giving lectures they will all have their phones, tablets and laptops out, although oddly the mouse pads and screen-scrollers seem to get more exercise than the keypads. I'll mark batches of papers, most of which will use on-line sources from pretty websites that have very few letters on them, no matter whether the background is a pleasant grey, or white, or pale blue or any other colour. The websites are bound to be accessible by hand-held devices, however, because generally they are form over content, easily read, and don't require a lot of thought to understand, mostly because they are lacking in substance. But they would probably cream the jeans of the reddit brigade. There is a point here and I will leave it to anyone who has bothered to read this far to find.

Antipodean | 19.05.12 - 11:07 a.m. | #

I read on a HTC desire HD. After facebook, you are the first site I visit everyday. Sometimes the comments pop up throws its toys out of the pram, but mostly its ok. I read for your content, and am glad that you haven't cluttered the design with unnecessary gubbins, as it means it uploads/renders easily. When I zoom in the text of the entry autoformats itself to the width of my screen. I can scroll if I want to view side bar stuff.

Oh, and I live in north west England.

anne | 19.05.12 - 11:08 a.m. | #

Like Gareth Wyn I have no idea what Reddit is, so I've just had a look at its home page. It was cluttered and unappealing, and I didn't linger.

Great Aunt Annie | 19.05.12 - 11:25 a.m. | #

I too want to support your decision to focus on content over form.

I mostly read on my laptop, but sometimes I do read on my phone, which is the same one I've been using since April 2006 (and the HTC Wizard wasn't a new design then) - it all just works. Reddit doesn't.

Facebook though flat out refuses to let me even try, telling me that I need to spend money on something shinier if I want to be allowed onto their site.

Chris M | 19.05.12 - 11:34 a.m. | #

Well, being 'of a certain age' I haven't really got a clue what any of this is about.
But I've learned one thing, and it's made me feel a whole lot better about visiting this site.
I always used to think the background was just plain old grey, but never really minded. Finding out that it's actually silver, I've been seeing the site in a whole new light!
I wouldn't say it wants anything more than an occasional polish :)

RogerW | 19.05.12 - 11:45 a.m. | #

I want to read the words, not look at the layout. Your audience is readers, not geeks.

Sarah | Homepage | 19.05.12 - 11:48 a.m. | #

Another supporter for keeping things the way they are.
And a supporter for your interesting content since I discovered the site over a year ago.

Freddie | 19.05.12 - 11:58 a.m. | #

I find it vastly amusing that the Reddit page that you linked to ('Thanks') looked much more of a mess than you blog.

Your blog which primarily I read on my lapto and looks like, sometimes read on my iPad and looks great, and occasionally read on my iPhone for which i turn it sideways, and it's just fine - thanks.

Nothing to see here, droids, etc...

Geofftech | Homepage | 19.05.12 - 12:09 p.m. | #

I want to kill all these people! Keep it the way you want it, and to hell with their insults.

SGK 374V | 19.05.12 - 12:17 p.m. | #

+1 to all the comments. I read mostly via RSS; a couple of times a week via iPhone or MacBook. All work fine and very easy to read. The End.

Carlbob | Homepage | 19.05.12 - 12:34 p.m. | #

Let me add my own farthing's worth here.

Some people making comments say that they value DG for the content but not the style.

I would say that "style" doesn't just mean that which has been "stylized". There is such a thing as writing style; every great writer has a style of their own. DG's style is informative and funny. I love it; it is one of the few websites I look at every day.

Also, he makes life easier for me by not having things moving or flashing.

Peter Cameron | Homepage | 19.05.12 - 12:39 p.m. | #

Of course everyone is right here: the content, not appearance, is why we read DG; and the appearance isn't the latest and greatest.
But I don't care. I actually really like the richness of the site - I love the fact that it's full of links to other sites and to photos; and that they're not obvious but need hunting for. This is what hypertext, in Berners-Lee's vision, is all about - that's how we find out loads more than the text itself can convey. DG is a great entry into a whole world of stuff about London and much besides. It's always for me the starting-point of far too much surfing out of interest- something we don't do enough of these days.

Pete Johnson | 19.05.12 - 2:28 p.m. | #

The day I want sexist 'banter' rather than insightful information and opinion, I shall turn to Reddit rather than DG.

Karen | 19.05.12 - 2:55 p.m. | #

Thought I'd better check out the site in question in the interest of balance and found a shambles. Leave it at this DG and don't waste anymore space on them.

kevin hennessy | 19.05.12 - 3:14 p.m. | #

Style comes and goes. Quality content is timeless. DG is fine (and perfectly legible) exactly the way it is.

Steve | Homepage | 19.05.12 - 3:52 p.m. | #

Well, it looks nice on my little screen, good on my big one, and is quite all right on my laptop.

Web designers often are of the "must change things to show how clever we are" breed, but as for actual content, oh dear. Years ago, I spent about 20 hours correcting a so called professional's errors. Sure it looked nice, but was riddled with spelling errors, typos and unchecked broken external links.

No complaints about this site here!

Martyn | 19.05.12 - 4:27 p.m. | #

As a graphic designer and partial web developer myself, I find some of those comments hilarious.

It's absolutely true that web designers are so stuck up about their profession that they often put fancy design over pure legibility and simplicity. Most of them barely have useful design skills or training anyway. Knowing how to code a website = does not equal having the correct opinion to everything that concerns design, even if it is on the web!

As a newly found Londoner myself, I read this site nearly every day and have no trouble with it. Visually, it's quite refreshing to read and a nice break from the trend of OTT layout and design that floods the web these days, in fact.

It's a blog only concerned with it's content at the end of the day and you do a bloody good job!

Matt | 19.05.12 - 4:48 p.m. | #

— just spotted a few errors in that comment, like the random equals symbol. It's been a busy day.

Matt | 19.05.12 - 4:49 p.m. | #

"If he's only doing the site for his own benefit, why bother publishing it online at all."

Right now, lookatmeme is honestly wondering why nobody has ever bothered to read his own blog.

I've learned quite a lot about web designers over the last few months, not all of it from these posts, and I must say that I hope I never, ever have to hire one. All they, as a profession, seem to care about is the latest technological fad (drop-down menus are very fashionable at the moment), regardless of how it would (or, more often, wouldn't) improve the content and navigation of a site.

And don't get me started on the "surveys" large sites often do immediately before or after a major redesign, on the pretence of soliciting opinions from those who actually have to use their sites. They're a sham, and nobody's ever paid attention to their results.

Ideally, every site would look like DG's - simple yet functional, without making anything more complicated than it needs to be. But that would, of course, make the profession of "web designer" largely redundant, so you won't ever hear any of them arguing in favour of it...

(I think you should quote some of these comments in your next post. Rest assured, nobody who matters wants you to change - by which I mean those who read your site, as opposed to those who looked at it for fifteen seconds before going back to bitch in an endless feedback loop over on r/online_experience_providers.)

swirlythingy | Homepage | 19.05.12 - 6:15 p.m. | #

I am an occasional Redittor myself. However, I have to disagree with the people who are saying that this is a terrible-looking site. Granted, the design may be thought of as slightly old-fashioned now, but I'm not bothered about the look of your site as long as it gets the message across (which it does very well, thanks to the lack of distracting ads or YouTube videos).

In addition, I often look at your site through iOS devices, and while I may have to zoom in to read the text, this isn't a problem. The only problem I have is that the site may take a while to download through 3G (however, this can easily be resolved by using apps such as Flipboard).

Andrewh | Homepage | 19.05.12 - 6:18 p.m. | #

I looked at Reddit because I had no idea what it was either.

I don't understand what the point of it is.

Amused | 19.05.12 - 7:05 p.m. | #

I am surprised nobody has suggested using Comic Sans. Or installing a like or irony button.

Debster | Homepage | 19.05.12 - 7:38 p.m. | #

yawn...oh dear...yawn...

B | 19.05.12 - 7:49 p.m. | #

I read your site at work, at home and on my fruit phone. Your site works fine on all three using three different web browsers and operating systems. The content is cracking and always insightful. In fact, I've just had another great day out following a recent post of yours.

Don't change. Other websites have and I've stopped reading cause they don't work on works out dated system or fit my phone. Yours does. Simple works. Easy to read on any screen. And the content is cracking!

Tim | 19.05.12 - 10:14 p.m. | #

One thing I would suggest they are right about if I may...

The number of posts about the emails you receive that basically say 'please blog about this and we'll give you stuff' seem to have increased in frequency...

If I'm honest, this is the only bit of your site that annoys me. I realise that the constant emails you receive probably annoy you as well, but is there really any need to keep ranting about it?

dg writes: There have been two such posts so far this year. Sorry if two is too many.

A.N.Other | 19.05.12 - 11:33 p.m. | #

The words/Story is the most important bit, sprinkled with the appropriate amount of pictures, tables, Graphs and suitable sarcasm, not every story is to my taste, but I know round the next corner, as regular as the Clapham Omnibus will be one that will interest me such is the wide variety of subjects covered, Keep a steady hand on the DG tiller.

Peter Taylor | 19.05.12 - 11:48 p.m. | #

In order to calm down I suggest you visit the exhibition on invisible art.

Barry | 20.05.12 - 12:38 a.m. | #

If I'd been asked a quiz question "How many of DG's posts this year have been about those annoying unsolicited emails?" I'd have guessed about four or five. I wonder why they have such an impact.

Great Aunt Annie | 20.05.12 - 1:36 a.m. | #

I don't particularly give a rat's behind what your blog looks like. I enjoy the content and the colour scheme does make reading it easy on the eyes.

Jackal | 20.05.12 - 1:49 a.m. | #

If only I had a reddit account. I'd go on there and say...

"It's Diamond Geezer's site and he can do whatever he wants. It's his site. You don't need to read it."

Andrew Bowden | Homepage | 20.05.12 - 10:36 a.m. | #

Barry - he probably did but was invisible.

Debster | Homepage | 20.05.12 - 12:46 p.m. | #

Hello, reddit commenter here (I'm "guitarromantic" quoted at the start of this article).

Some fairly deliberate (I presume) ignorance happening here in this comment thread. A lot of people seem to think that people on reddit are advocating "style over content". This is missing the point of those comments. I'm not saying this site should be all flashy and whizzy and full of garish detail. I'm saying that for a site that is predominantly text-based, there's much that could be done to make it more readable. Readability (particularly via typography) is a really complex art and when it's done well, you don't notice it.

I'm half tempted to throw together a mockup of how this page could look with a bit of basic styling added (so it'd look half-decent on mobile too). Far from not reading this blog I follow it via Google Reader and know how popular it is. That doesn't mean it's beyond criticism and if you re-read my comments on reddit, I'm suggesting that it deserves a bit of design love because it clearly has so much *content* love. Balance things out.

The people who are saying that reddit looks ugly are perhaps missing the point too: reddit is all about links to external content. It's good enough to read content and discuss things with, but it's all about sharing stuff that's good to read.

Again, my two cents...

Matt Andrews | Homepage | 20.05.12 - 1:09 p.m. | #

What I honestly don't get is what makes this site any less readable than a book? I can read it just fine. I can read books just fine. And newspapers. Why the hell do I need more?

Antipodean | 20.05.12 - 4:12 p.m. | #

Yesterday I was sat behind a young woman who had the following quote tattoed on the nape of her neck in a rather fetching cursive script: "All the worlds [sic] a stage". Talk about style over content!

I know that DG will provide carefully crafted content pretty much every day, as he has done for nearly a decade and crucially, the website's look won't get in the way of that. As long as the design doesn't hinder reading, you do what you want DG, it's your party.

s | 20.05.12 - 4:17 p.m. | #

Go ahead, guitarromantic/Matt - I'd be very interested to see what a bit of "design love" and "typography" might look like in this context.

Andrew | 20.05.12 - 8:21 p.m. | #

If it's only two, then please accept my apologies.

I will admit, I probably should have checked beforehand... time is flying by obviously that it seems more often!

Had a quick count of 2011 - you did 6 and a half posts in the year, so about one every 2 months, which, ironically, was the frequency I was going to suggest.

I feel somewhat of a lemon right about now.

So please accept a hearty apologetic handshake, and the promise of a pint of beer of your choice should we ever cross paths.

dg writes: No problem. 2011's total may well have been excessive, so I'm trying to keep it down.

A.N.Other | 20.05.12 - 10:31 p.m. | #

At least I know what reddit is now.

Amused | 20.05.12 - 10:34 p.m. | #

.. sorry I should have clarified. I do need more kittens. There can never be too many kittens in one's life.

Antipodean | 21.05.12 - 1:29 p.m. | #

It is ironic that quite number of the 'reddit' comments suggesting that your site needed revamping, had more than their fair share of grammatical mistakes, particularly missing words.

Though I have quite a few years behind me, I do frequently question whether I am resistant to change since on many things eg. the latest app, the must-have notepad, the wesbite to end all websites, I don't want to know. So much of this to me is just another tentacle of consumerism.

Perhaps there is a disease out there, that makes people's heads hurt when they have to read informative and wide-ranging articles of more than a few sentences or paragraphs (perhaps this sounds smug). There is little or nothing that needs to be done to your website; the content is consistently readable, accessible, and enjoyable.

andygryce | 21.05.12 - 4:46 p.m. | #

DG reads very well on an iPad. On an iPhone, I double-tap on the left hand column and view it in landscape. Once that's done, it's very clear and easy to read.

mike | Homepage | 23.05.12 - 4:25 p.m. | #

DG reads very well.
Nuff said.

Jakartass | Homepage | 23.05.12 - 5:09 p.m. | #

I like your layout, DG.

Beth | Homepage | 23.05.12 - 5:20 p.m. | #

The internet is full of fads- I'm sure heritage HTML will be all the rage again one day, when they'll be back for some free advice from DG :)

jtonline | Homepage | 03.06.12 - 11:14 a.m. | #











TridentScan v2.10.0 | Privacy Policy