Not sure where to put this, but I was looking at the footer of for instance StackOverflow. The bottom portion font is very hard to read, the colors should be looked at:

enter image description here


site design / logo © 2013 stack exchange inc; user contributions licensed under cc-wiki with attribution required

for simplicity should be white just like the links.

Also the footer is inconsistent, all other categories have one column except Technology it causes a gap between the various categories and just looks odd:

enter image description here

All categories should indicate a max # of sites ( say 5-7) and then include a link to more(n).

  • 8
    Because science and other do not span multiple columns. Did you read my post? – JonH May 14 '13 at 19:19
  • 9
    But there are more technology related sites that are high profile enough to warrant being in the footer. I wouldn't want to have to add several clicks just to satisfy your OCD of having one column per category. It looks just fine. – Servy May 14 '13 at 19:21
  • 3
    So, how would you show the 21 graduated technology sites, considering that next highest number of graduated sites in a category is 4 (science)? – Oded May 14 '13 at 19:26
  • 4
    @Oded what happens to your footer when you graduate 21 more technology sites? – JonH May 14 '13 at 19:27
  • 3
    That would totally break my workflow. I use the footer all the time to switch between my favorites. – Mat May 14 '13 at 19:27
  • 3
    Well thats because you're the Fresh Prince :). The colors of cc-wiki and attribution required is probably what is killing it, but I'd prefer it was #fff. – JonH May 14 '13 at 20:02
  • 5
    me-a user who has used the stack sites probably more than you - why do you think you have used the sites more than @Servy? And even if you did, why does that qualify you to have better judgment about how the footer should look / function? Why do you care more about how it looks than how it functions? If you used the footer and your favorite site was now an extra click away, is that "better"? Why should I be forced to use bookmarks instead? What if I already have plenty, or if I have 30 favorite stack sites that are currently all shown in the footer? It's just clutter elsewhere. – Aaron Bertrand May 14 '13 at 20:02
  • 3
    @AaronBertrand - NO specific reason my point being is I know the sites to navigate them. A new person to the site doesn't, that is all. Don't think I was looking for any entitlement so calm down buddy. As for bookmarks bar/favorite versus all the sites on the footer, that is your personal preference. From a UX point it isn't consistent. The folks coming on here trying to stir some sort of controversy please stop with the drama, discussion and change is good. It's what makes companies successful, that is why we have admins on the site. So please I am just looking for discussion. – JonH May 14 '13 at 20:04
  • 5
    Wow, you brought up that you used the sites more than @Servy. shrug – Aaron Bertrand May 14 '13 at 20:08
  • 3
    @AaronBertrand Oh no, I need to look at the SE footer; better take some Dramamine. – Servy May 14 '13 at 20:12
  • 4
    I've only ever looked at the footer because this meta question was posted. Before that, you couldn't have convinced me that it actually existed. – swasheck May 14 '13 at 20:16
  • 3
    @JonH the irony is that you seem to think you do – swasheck May 14 '13 at 20:22
  • 3
    @swasheck - Because I brought up a discussion? Boy what would we have done had meta never existed? – JonH May 14 '13 at 20:23
  • 3
    I'm still waiting on an answer to my previous comment. What problems are you asserting exist as a result of the way the site currently is. Keep in mind you're the one proposing a change; I'm not here to justify why the site is the way it is; the burden is on you to demonstrate that there is a problem if you would like it to be addressed. – Servy May 14 '13 at 20:26
  • 3
    @JonH usually for a "discussion" to gain traction on Meta it has to have some sort of clear benefit. I would say be looking at the overall reacion to this thread that it does not. – Zane May 14 '13 at 20:38

For me:

  • Yes, change the font color. It's kinda weird like this; nowhere else in the footer this color is used.

  • No, don't change the columns. There are more technology sites, so I guess there's more interest for technology. So it should get a larger place in the footer, nothing wrong with that. How else do you want to show 21 technology sites and 4 science sites? Hiding a lot good technology sites under a 'more' is not a good idea IMO.

    What would be a good idea though, in my opinion, is TronicZomB's idea of using vertical lines between the different columns:

    It is suggested here: SE Footer Changes/Update

  • For point 2 look at it just by reading up and down the columns - turn off your programmer mind for a minute. Look at it from a new person. The gap is odd. For additional sites what are the issues with using your bookmarks bar? If this was the case why didn't Jeff Atwood support both "Favorite" questions and "Watch" questions. His argument was there is a favorites / bookmarks bar to handle that. – JonH May 14 '13 at 19:45
  • @JonH I sincerely don't have a problem with the gap. Perhaps we could move technology to the left to make it look less odd to you, but I wouldn't like that: technology is the major part of the network, it shouldn't be listed last. – Keelan May 14 '13 at 19:47
  • 2
    Fair enough, this is personal preference. – JonH May 14 '13 at 19:48
  • 7
    @JonH You can create a userscript if it bothers you that much. – Servy May 14 '13 at 19:50
  • 1
    "Hiding a lot good technology sites under a 'more' is not a good idea IMO." there is more than one way of 'hiding' a link: putting a link in a list of 20 other links is an excellent way of hiding them all. I'd rather have 5 visible than none! – Jack Douglas May 15 '13 at 7:41
  • 2
    @JackDouglas I disagree. Of the sites you use a lot, you know where they are in the footer, so you don't have to search. – Keelan May 15 '13 at 8:02

Font color: YES!

Categories: I don't like the idea of making them all one column, but I can see where the confusion could possibly arise. What about a small dividing line of sorts between the last column of Technology, the only columns of Life/Arts, Cultrue/Recreation, Science, and Other (4 lines in total)? There is the division that JonH seems should be there as well as we keep all 21 Technology sites in the footer.

You must log in to answer this question.

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