Design and brand of new site

[jordanful]

Sorry if this isn't the right place, but is there a discussion regarding the overall redesign of bitcoin.org? I've forked the repo and refreshed it myself, and have some big concerns with the latest redesign. I'd just like to be part of the discussion. Thanks.

[ghost1542]

jordanful : feel free to make improvements on your side and propose them as pull requests. Most recent discussions about the current design ended up overall satisfied. But there is always room for improvement and proposition. You can also ask for feedback from the community there : https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=148712.0 or create a new topic by your own.

[jordanful]

Thanks, I can't post on that forum, even though I'm logged in, because I guess I'm not 'of status?'

I'll put some quick thoughts here:

• This revamp doesn't do much to improve immediate understanding of Bitcoin (prevent bounces due to confusion and complex language choice)
• The new logo is bland and just doesn't fit that of a currency.
• What is an Enthusiast? Why is that different than Individual? 'Who identifies with that?
• Way too much copy everywhere. People don't read.
• I agree with one poster who said this should not be a directory of third party services. That only causes more confusion.
• The site isn't responsive and therefore looks really bad on mobile.
• Do we really expect users to memorize/wade-through a glossary of terms (Vocab section), or understand the diagram on the how it works page?

Overall, this is why open source design doesn't work. Bitcoin needs someone to step up and own it's brand, marketing and design. I've got a start on something, and hope to find more time so I can share it more broadly.

[gmaxwell]

Open source design? The current thing is saviann's work with just some minor tweaks (mostly stuff-removal) by the public. I'm sure somewhere there exist a spherical designer who can make the perfect site, but it seems that all the perfect designers don't have enough time. :P

"Real artists ship".

[jordanful]

It seems more design-by-committee to me, honestly. That thread is crazy! I
respect saviann's work, but my opinion is that it isn't a big improvement
nor what Bitcoin needs right now. I suspected most of that wasn't because
of saviann, but rather the result of having an entire community weigh-in on
this. But, perhaps getting content suggestions and feedback is useful.

I don't think "Real Artists Ship" is an absolute, by the way. It's very
easy to ship work that isn't great. I understand this is a starting point.
But we're far from there. I hope to help in the future.

I suggest we find a place to discuss and riff on designs away from the
huge, vocal community.

On Tue, Mar 26, 2013 at 4:03 PM, Gregory Maxwell
notifications@github.comwrote:

Open source design? The current thing is saviann's work with just some
minor tweaks (mostly stuff-removal) by the public. I'm sure somewhere there
exist a spherical designer who can make the perfect site, but it seems that
all the perfect designers don't have enough time. :P

"Real artists ship".

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com//issues/91#issuecomment-15488396
.

[gmaxwell]

You're missing my point: Shipping isn't sufficient, but its necessary. The beauty of your hypothetical design is irrelevant if the design remains hypothetical.

[ghost1542]

Understanding of Bitcoin : Still have more nice content then before, and I have no problem with further changes/improvements.

Enthusiast : Users are not necessary enthusiasts, and enthusiasts are not necessary users, it is the "ideological page". Or again "what Bitcoin is changing in this world as a ground-breaking technology".

Third party : Default Bitcoin-Qt is not suitable for normal users. And explaining each type of wallet is important, especially in regards to explain them the risks.

Mobile : I 100% agree with a future mobile optimized version.

Vocabulary : People don't memorize dictionnary either. It is all reference material. Vocabulary might very well get out of the menu in the future if we produce more interesting content, and be linked as a reference for technical words inside any pages that mention things like "mining".

As said earlier, patches welcome. And a discussion on a github issue is not likely to end up with something concrete with no pull request and no discussion with the community.

[jordanful]

That's fair. But I think you missed my point, though. Shipping something
that is not an improvement is hardly necessary. I realize that's
subjective, but wanted to voice my opinion somewhere.

On Tue, Mar 26, 2013 at 4:24 PM, Gregory Maxwell
notifications@github.comwrote:

You're missing my point: Shipping isn't sufficient, but its necessary. The
beauty of your hypothetical design is irrelevant if the design remains
hypothetical.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com//issues/91#issuecomment-15489497
.

[gmaxwell]

::nods:: Okay, a lot of people thought this change was a necessary improvement. Maybe I can't explain why they thought that, but they did. Hearing more opinions is helpful, but patches and alternative are even more helpful.