@kbuttfield @The_McJones @parisba Sudden urge to play… https://t.co/9uE4uTRSGM
@lol_russo Ah, yes, definitely. I’ve just never seen it mentioned for a site that is predominantly static and doesn’t use any parallax effects.
@onsman Thanks. A few folks have sent me related links, and that seems plausible. I just haven’t seen in relation to a site that is predominantly static with limited animation, no parallax scrolling, etc.
@LeenaVanD Well yes, but I live in Sydney. 😂
@lol_russo Yeah, I didn’t want to bias results by mentioning the specific site in question (nor draw the ire of those who think the new design is legit harmful). But it looks to me to be a bog standard responsive web design with minimal animation. I don’t get it.
@stringy Yep, that’s the one I’m thinking of. I saw it both before and after, and I don’t see much difference. People are still complaining. I… just don’t get it. Do you see any serious problems with it now?
Well, that is fascinating. https://t.co/INj7QmmaX2
@daveslutzkin @OphelieLechat This is the issue I was asking about/subtweeting yesterday. I’ve never seen the level of response to a website redesign before. I was a beta tester for it, and to me it looks like any other responsive web 2.0 site. 🤷♀️
@OphelieLechat @daveslutzkin I’m not sure how I got in the test group (maybe because I was an editor once) and I don’t visit much these days. I got a RavMail about it and clicked around to verify that all the functionality was still there, just reorganised with lots of whitespace. I shrugged and moved on.
RT @CloverMoore: As of today, the City of Sydney is powered by 100% renewable electricity. https://t.co/3qJaQduBac
