Meta Stack Exchange is where users like you discuss bugs, features, and support issues that affect the software powering all 158 Stack Exchange communities.

What is meta?
Here's how it works:
  1. Any Stack Exchange user can ask a question
  2. The community provides support, votes on ideas, and reports bugs
  3. Your voice helps shape the way Stack Exchange operates

I noticed this today about the logos between the 4 sites. They all vary in size. Server Fault's logo is 250x48, Super User's logo is 250x60, and the logos for Stack Overflow and Meta are 250x61. I understand attempting to maximize efficiency, and the sheer number of times you serve the logo is pretty huge, but if the dimensions of the CSS are the same between the sites, why not try to make the logos the same dimensions as well?

All that really needs to be done is pad Server Fault's logo 13 pixels at the top, and 1 pixel at the top of Super User's logo. I suspect that the size difference would be almost unnoticeable increasing Super User's logo size, and only somewhat noticeable by increasing Server Fault's.

So, my question is this: Is there any real reason not to make the logos between the sites all a uniform size?

share|improve this question
Does this actually cause any problems? – Macha Aug 4 '09 at 13:37
I want to unread this. Give me my time back. – Jeff Yates Aug 4 '09 at 14:05
TRQ: Who cares? – GEOCHET Aug 4 '09 at 14:06
This is stupid, and approaching google-level style restrictions. "I think a 2px border would be nicer than a 3px one", "Really? Can I see a 10 page usage report to back up your recommendation?" – Ian Elliott Aug 4 '09 at 14:09
Why not also ask Google why they've gone an added padding around search results? Looks like 10px more on either side now. – random Aug 4 '09 at 15:11
Back before some of you were born, I used to get requests like "Shift these print fields by a character", and they really annoyed me, particularly when using the main part of COBOL and not the Report Writer. If Jeff wants to ignore this, he has my sympathy. – David Thornley Aug 4 '09 at 21:26
Weird, I thought this kind of small niceties would be the main point of distinguishing between real successful websites and clones thereof. :) – badp Apr 10 '10 at 12:41


  • serverfault (1.84 kB, was 1.69 kB)
  • superuser (3.13 kB, was 3.00 kB)
  • stackoverflow (unchanged, for reference)
  • meta (unchanged, for reference)

Yes, but what have I accomplished? Pretty much nothing.

  • OMG! Differently sized text!
  • WTF! The "p" in "superuser" screws up the baseline between the logos!
  • BBQ! Needs more ligature! m&a stackoverflow!
  • LOL! Needs more unicorns! cowbell!

The reality here is that there is a real tradeoff between these "niceties" and time spent implementing them and additional cost in terms of bandwidth and loading time. A hundred bytes on sites like superuser or serverfault add up faster than you would expect.

share|improve this answer
Yes, & is a ligature for 'et'.… – badp Apr 10 '10 at 13:16

I think the bigger question is: Is there any real reason TO make the logos a uniform size? Are there instances where the logos are messing up the layout of the site?

If not, I do not see an issue here.

share|improve this answer
Other than colors, the logos are the only design aspect that have a visible difference between the four sites. If everything else in the template is exactly the same, then why not make the logos the same dimensions? I realize that this is an extremely minor thing, but it's something I noticed today and wanted to gather some opinions on. – phuzion Aug 4 '09 at 19:42

They are all different sites. I say let Jeff do what he wants.

share|improve this answer
I'm not telling Jeff to do anything. Obviously he is free to do whatever the hell he likes, and whatever he thinks is best for the sites. However, outside perspectives are useful as an outsider can sometimes see something that an insider wouldn't notice. And I'm just offering an outside opinion. Isn't this what this site is for, making suggestions for the sites? – phuzion Aug 4 '09 at 19:44
True, at best though, I think this would be low on the priority list. – Troggy Aug 4 '09 at 20:35

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .