/94/ - site meta discussion

>>330 (OP) 
what's an example of a "modern ui", even?

>>331
as far as imageboards go, I think its ours tbh.
 
4chan has always been pissy poop colored, 7chan looks like dogshit after using jschan, even if kusabaX is technically more fully featured. 

The only options that aren't custom software are either ancient, ugly, or unsupported, and they'll just make you look like every other imageboard if you don't take the time to tweak shit.

you.jpg
[Hide] (133.7KB, 794x807)

"Web 3.0" is shit.

And OP is a dumb nigger for thinking otherwise.

On most of the "Dark Web", both Tor and I2P, we're still "Web 1.0" masterrace.

>>330 (OP) 
I just wanted to say that while a chan might do alright with modern UI, it might also not do well. It'd depend on the functionality of the software behind that UI and the overall user experience, but that can also be influenced by whatever culture your site attracts. Modern UI isn't good necessarily because it's modern. Trends in UI design can proliferate based on profit and said profit can largely be based on what's easiest on the eyes.

The reason why minimalism, rounded corners along with muted colours or smooth animations have defined web design over the past decade is because they're seen as "safe" for corporations who want to maximise engagement - profit - and minimise potential aversion - losses.

Fuck that philosophy. It's not "good", it's just safe. That's all it is. The only reason it's caught on is because the majority of products in design are made and sold to consumers rather than given out or shared, and profit from those sales is really what the creators/distributors of said product are after. 

So it becomes the norm and retards think normation is a prescriptive force rather than a descriptive one, so they emulate it in mimicry like a child. Don't be like them >>330 (OP) .

>>341
BASED.

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1t10VI-sccy1CfAeMZHwmCS_7agIHFo_B5ipMjzsMtTg/edit

>>331
Reddit, perhaps?

disgust.jpg
[Hide] (8.2KB, 200x267)

>>353