No object-level justification can address the (even) more important meta-level point, which is that they made changes to the visual appearance of LW without consulting the community first. This is a no-no!
(And I have no doubt that, were a proper Discussion post created announcing this idea, LW’s considerable programmer readership would have been able to come up with some solution that did not involve making such an ugly visual change.)
No object-level justification can address the (even) more important meta-level point, which is that they made changes to the visual appearance of LW without consulting the community first. This is a no-no!
Design by a committee composed of conflicting vocal minorities? No thanks.
EDIT: Note that I don’t disagree with you that this in particular was a bad design change. I disagree that consulting the community on every design change is a profitable policy.
Kludge indeed; and it is entirely unnecessary: Wei Dai’s script already makes it easy to search a user’s comment history.
I again urge those responsible to restore the prior appearance of the site (they can do what they want to the non-visible internals).
Wei Dai’s tools are poorly documented, may not exist in the near future, and are virtually unknown to non-users.
No object-level justification can address the (even) more important meta-level point, which is that they made changes to the visual appearance of LW without consulting the community first. This is a no-no!
(And I have no doubt that, were a proper Discussion post created announcing this idea, LW’s considerable programmer readership would have been able to come up with some solution that did not involve making such an ugly visual change.)
Design by a committee composed of conflicting vocal minorities? No thanks.
EDIT: Note that I don’t disagree with you that this in particular was a bad design change. I disagree that consulting the community on every design change is a profitable policy.