Page 1 of 1

slashdot redesign

Posted: Sat Apr 01, 2006 2:28 am
by JulesWinnfield
I think it's for the better :icon14:

http://slashdot.org/

Posted: Sat Apr 01, 2006 2:29 am
by andyman
pink

*moves on*

Posted: Sat Apr 01, 2006 2:30 am
by Scourge
Uglier than homemade soap.

Posted: Sat Apr 01, 2006 3:13 am
by mjrpes
iit'll do.

Posted: Sat Apr 01, 2006 3:16 am
by Scourge
mjrpes wrote:iit'll do.
No it won't. That'll make a train take a dirt road.

Posted: Sat Apr 01, 2006 3:19 am
by mjrpes
What's wrong with pink? I think it's an OK choice. It's all about broadening slashdot's audience anyway.

Posted: Sat Apr 01, 2006 4:07 am
by seremtan

Posted: Sat Apr 01, 2006 1:26 pm
by Grudge
Image

Posted: Sat Apr 01, 2006 5:36 pm
by andyman
omfg a picture is worth a thousand stereotypes

Posted: Sat Apr 01, 2006 6:07 pm
by Canis
OMG Ponies!!!! :olo:

Posted: Mon Apr 03, 2006 2:11 am
by glossy
... i don't see it.

april fools, much ?

Posted: Mon Apr 03, 2006 2:14 am
by Scourge
glossy wrote:... i don't see it.

april fools, much ?
You're a day late and a dollar short son.

Posted: Mon Apr 03, 2006 6:26 am
by Eraser
The day Slashdot gets a redesign is the day hell freezes over

Posted: Mon Apr 03, 2006 11:14 am
by mjrpes
Actually, slashdot did get a redesign, but you would have never seen it. They completely converted the site from old html to pure css. Look at the source code, not one table.

Posted: Mon Apr 03, 2006 11:16 am
by mjrpes
Speaking of site redesigns...

http://www.nytimes.com/

Ahhh!!

Posted: Mon Apr 03, 2006 11:38 am
by Underpants?
andyman wrote:omfg a picture is worth a thousand stereotypes
Funny. 'Cause it's true.

Posted: Mon Apr 03, 2006 11:58 am
by Eraser
mjrpes wrote:Actually, slashdot did get a redesign, but you would have never seen it. They completely converted the site from old html to pure css. Look at the source code, not one table.
When did they do this? I remember not too long ago another discussion about it came up again, and the slashdot head honcho's wouldn't give in.