61 Comments on “Blog Changes Update Update”

1. Better!

2. I like this one so much better! The previous one I had to wear my glasses to read on my desktop. (The phone was fine though– I guess that says something about how close I keep my phone screen to my face.)

3. For the record, I like this one better . . . but I’m a more text-oriented person in general, so I think I like seeing the text spread more fully across the page.

4. I think both themes worked well on mobile devices, but I like this one better on the computer.

5. Much cleaner!

6. Better. Not as much whitespace, and the font colors are much better (some things still use a lighter gray color, but it’s not as light as in the previous theme). I don’t mind having the sidebar there at all times, but others may not like it. On the whole, though, I prefer this one.

7. Layout good but that header font is kinda blech.

8. The other one was visually more interesting, but probably not as practical for your audience.

9. Much better, thank you.

10. New font is horrible, IMHO, please can we have something easier to read like Charlie Stross’s blog? (or indeed the font this comment appears in as I type?

11. Nope. I like the font.

12. Laptop/JAWS user here,

    This is much better, thanks. 😊

13. This one is a better widescreen/desktop experience for me!

14. Much better for me (Safari, macOS primarily).

15. Much better for me!

16. I guess I’m contrarian. I liked the other better. But usability trumps beauty.

17. I mean, I liked the other one better, too. But, yeah.

18. As I recall, Charlie Stross has said he needs to rework his blog sometime Real Soon Now.

19. Also, I don’t know how many of you noticed, but I updated the photo that floats behind my comments for the first time in more than a decade.

20. I noticed the updated photo. I’ve always thought that was a nice touch in the comment threads.

    And I love the update. Including the font.

21. This one is definitely better, because it’s not a thin column of text with a massive image.

    I like the font, it looks pretty, but you might want to run it by some accessibility checks. Serif fonts can be hell for people with reading disabilities.

22. I’m sorry you like the font, because for people like me, astigmatism plus baby cataracts, it’s all a blur. Also, as a long-time adult literacy tutor, I have to add my two cents about serif fonts being very difficult for those with reading/visual disorders.

23. Looks awesome here.

24. You say you liked the last one better, but I suspect (without evidence) it was just so this change would seem like an improvement (rather than a change from what folks were used to).

25. John, do whatever (pun intended) you like. It’s been fun watching you cycle through options! And not like you needed my permission in the least.

26. This works fine on my tablet. Have to weigh in against the font, though. Maybe I can make it more readable by enlarging my screen. It’s not a great reading experience, sorry!

27. Dude, it’s your blog, it should reflect what you like and want people to see.

    That said, I do find this version a bit more readable and navigable than the previous theme, but honestly, I’ll keep reading and try and get used to whatever floats yer boat.

    I’m just glad you’re still doing an actual blog!

28. I prefer this design. Have not checked on the mobile devices but hey I’m a luddite …

29. I noticed the image but mainly as it reminded me of the wicked screen burn-in from Google maps on my OLED based phone which for a horrible second I thought had gotten much worse…

    But enough about me. Site looks nice, still a fair amount of white space if I go silly on my 21:9 monitor but that’s more my issue. Seems reasonably information dense, thank you!, unlike some other websites I frequent and looks spiffy on my desktop and my phone.

30. Like some other people, I’m having a hard time reading the title font. The serifs and strokes to the upper right are too thin. (The left part of the capital “A” is hard to see.)

31. Much better layout than the previous one; the columns were too narrow & there was too much white space.

32. Ah! Nice! I like the retro font. I missed the earlier version because of school, but this seems to work. Also, thank you for the mashup. I had not heard it before.

33. Yay.

    (But still on my laptop and staying there, not seeing a font issue in that context.)

34. Did you change your site design? I didn’t even notice. That’s probably a good sign.

    P.S. I like the way you use CSS as a verb. It’s very Buckminster Fuller.

35. I definitely prefer this one; it’s the old layout but with some more modern design aesthetics, so still the same functionality but looks like it was created recently.

36. Your blog, your call. For this older, frequent reader, the use of Abril Fatface” causes me to have to stop and squint, which makes me sad. When skimming, it’s too much of a fuzzy blob. “Libre Baskerville” as body type is fine. Rock on with that.

37. Looks good on a tablet! Less of a revolution than the previous trial, but I guess it is the price for all of us to find our personal favorite functionality 😉

38. I like it, including the font! Didn’t get to see the one you used yesterday though

39. Pretty plain, but clear. Say, why don’t you activate the “like” button on your blog?

40. Significantly more readable for me, thanks!

41. This theme is fine. Similar to the original, much better than yesterday’s experiment

42. Much better for me as well.

43. Yay! The number of comments button back!

    Like the font. I much prefer serif fonts. Easier to keep my eyes on the line of text.

44. It took longer to load, but that may not be your issue.

45. Better. Definitely better. On behalf of my eyes, thanks muchly.

46. I like this version. I understand where the readability/font people are coming from, but it’s not a problem for me. BTW, at least on my display the Scalzi-behind-the-Scalzi-comments photo is a lot more well-defined and noticeable than the previous one. Whether that’s a bug or feature is your call.

47. While it is a minor thing, I wish that the comments could be numbered to make it easier to bypass the ones you have already read when you return to a long comment thread after time has passed.

48. Quite a bit more practical, if a little less visually striking than the previous version. I’ll take it!

    I hadn’t ever noticed a floating image behind the host’s comments until this morning when I checked what the new site looked like on on my phone. Made me laugh aloud. Fantastic.

49. Much better, on a macOS laptop running Firefox. The post and comments area is sufficiently wide again (though I wouldn’t mind the option to narrow or close the Whatever right sidebar as it wastes space after the content runs out). Font seems fine to me.

    Oh yeah, love the blog and the books!

50. Very nice indeed! Hope you go with this variation! No problem with serif typefaces here; I cut my teeth on Caledonia and Century Schoolbook.

    Interesting thing on initial page loading. The “Whatever” at the top appears in some-or-other script typeface, all sweet curves, then it changes to Abril Fatface.

51. I’m with the other people who find this version better! (Laptop user.)

    I check the blog for comments as much as content (all carefully moderated by the Mallet.)

    Anyway, it looks like some commentator’s names are bolded, while others are not. I would prefer a more emphatically bolded commenter name all round.

    Also, the commenter name seems to have about equal whitespace before and after it. I think it would be more intuitive to remove some of the whitespace after, to more directly associate the commenter with the comment.

    However, those are only tweaks. I’m fine with it as it is. (But I spent way too much time at work, years ago, setting up style templates in structured FrameMaker.)

52. No twitter link? I found it handy.

53. SO. MUCH. BETTER!

54. Pacifica! *That’s* what that scripty-looking font is called. FWIW. :D

55. Oh good, the heavy black bar at the top is gone. THANK YOU. Big relief. Also generally: I like this theme!

56. Side note: as currently configured, it’s not obvious that links are links, fwiw. Looking at yesterday’s “Five Things,” I mostly sussed them from context.

57. MUCH better. The previous one was “I’m reading this in NetNewWire forever.”

58. Oh, neat. Just noticed the calendar in the sidebar. Speaking as someone who’s finding orientation in our current time/space continuum a little bit of a challenge these days, I appreciate all the help I can get.

59. Yeah, much better; easy to get to Comments link. Yeah! I like this one.

60. John,

    I thought you might want to know that the “Gabby Giffords Shooting Followup” post is inaccessible.

    I get the following when I go to the page:

    “Info icon
    We were unable to return you to scalzi.com.

    Internet Explorer has stopped trying to restore this website. It appears that the website continues to have a problem.

    What you can do:

    Go to your home page

    Try to return to scalzi.com

    More information”

    I tried to access the post through Chrome and get something similar. I’m using a Windows 10 laptop. Does this make a difference?

61. I like the new format. I’m more text-y so this definitely works for me, although adjusting the font size up by a point or so wouldn’t hurt my middle aged eyes any. I did notice that you’d updated the photos – I hope you kept the one of Daisy upside down and smiling in the rotation. I know it’s old, that’s about as great of a memorial for her as I can think of.