Wow, that took longer than expected (though right around the 6-8 week mark), but we finally have a semi-working prototype of the new profile page.


There’s a longer explanation on part 1 but the gist of it is this: we’re splitting the profile into two pages:

  • An “About Me” page which is what other people see when they look at your profile. It highlights your best stuff in a way that lets users quickly get a sense of who you are and what your interests are. For any deeper dives, you can switch over to the “Dashboard” view which houses everything else.

  • A “Dashboard” page which is what you see when you go to your profile from the topbar. It highlights the stuff you need to get to fast, and hides the stuff you don’t care about (your “about me” section, your Twitter profile, etc.). For now, it is just the existing view but we’ll work on this part next.

This part is just focused on the new “About Me” page.

The New Stuff

The prototype is only working on Stack Overflow so far, but you can try just about any profile by going to https://stackoverflow.com/users/reloaded/{id} (note: SO-only for now, must be logged in). Here are some handy examples:

EDIT: The historical reloaded page is no longer visible, but it looked something like this:

enter image description here

We made lots of little changes based on your feedback, but the two biggest changes are the Tags and Badges sections.


The tags section now gives a very basic visualization of where a user does most of their posting. The section shows between 6 and 9 tags for each user, and the size is based on the percentage of posts a user has in that tag. It's easiest to just look at some examples here:

The exact rules for how the sizing is done are still in flux, so if you notice a profile that seems off, just let us know and we'll see if we can tweak the rules.


After the last proposal was met with at worst confusion and at best a lot of "meh", we went back to the drawing board on the badges section. We were deeply inspired by this image:


We decided we wanted to focus on two things:

  1. Your most impressive badges, so they don't get lost in a pile of more common badges. If you're one of ~500 users who has earned the Generalist badge on SO, you darn well deserve to show it off.

  2. A visual representation of just how many badges you've earned. At some point, 1500 bronze badges becomes just another number, and it's hard to wrap your head around the sheer quantity. So we wanted to show the number visually. For new users, we wanted to feel a sense of accomplishment every time a new one shows up, and for top users, we wanted to show just how ridiculously many badges they have.

So here's the result: - Gheorghe Bulicanu - a newish user - Nerdess - a 1k user - SLaks - a top user The "Notable" section at the top lists your rarest badges, based on the number awarded on that site. The "Totals" section visualizes how many you have, and scales with your badge count. It also shows gold, silver, and bronze as different sizes to emphasize those rarer badges.

Other changes

We've made lots of other changes, but just a few I'll call out:

  1. The "About Me" section is easier to read, fits more, and hides less.
  2. Tags and Badges now use standard site styles
  3. The "Top Posts" section allows you to sort by newest
  4. The "Top Posts" section no longer shows badges, since it was too confusing
  5. Meta activity has been added to the sidebar (it’s just a placeholder right now -- we know it doesn’t work!)

Other notes that were common questions / requests:

  1. The current job and link to Careers profile are hidden for now, since they'll be optional anyway. We'll bring them back in a future version.
  2. The "Apps and Projects" section will be available on all sites (probably just called "Projects"). And yes, we know this section is just an image right now -- we'll get around to implementing it soon.
  3. Nothing that appears only to you on your profile, or to a moderator is implemented yet. This is just the “viewing somebody else’s profile” view.


We know there are still bugs, so we’re looking more for big-picture feedback than minor bug reports. We’re still actively building the page, but wanted to get the early prototype out for feedback sooner rather than later. Let us know what you think!

  • 31
    This.is.sexy..! – brasofilo May 6 '14 at 17:28
  • 29
    Dang, that's a massive identicon. I finally feel the need to change my profile picture... – mhlester May 6 '14 at 17:32
  • 67
    "I don't understand this need to make everything 3x times bigger everywhere. Are people going blind?" – R. Martinho Fernandes May 6 '14 at 17:33
  • 21
    Nitpicking bastard here: Why not instead of "POSTS 102 % OF POSTS 33%" say "102 POSTS 33% OF POSTS"? – Bart May 6 '14 at 18:39
  • 20
    How are "impressive badges" chosen? I care more about my gold ObjC tag badge than the Marshal badge, and it's also a far rarer badge. – jscs May 6 '14 at 18:49
  • 22
    Any chance of letting us pick them, since the point is to show off? – jscs May 6 '14 at 18:51
  • 34
    Gravatars look absolutely horrible... well not horrible, but who needs a huge blob of random colors staring at you. Probably will inspire me to actually upload an image. But otherwise, looks pretty good. – psubsee2003 May 7 '14 at 9:50
  • 7
    I suggest changing "View all $N questions & answers »" to "View [all] [$N1 question[s]] [&] [$N2 answer[s]] »". Now you can click view questions/answers even if there are none. – zch May 8 '14 at 19:04
  • 6
    Agree on the gravatar size; most gravatars are optimized for the default 32x32 display and don't give you anything when you supersize them. – mmyers May 8 '14 at 22:22
  • 9
    So much wasted space... also the interface is way too minimalist for me, but I guess it is trendy to make UIs less efficient. – Franck Dernoncourt May 8 '14 at 22:47
  • 7
    Agree with @CodyGray the badge visualization seems pointless it's just a lot of dots taking up a lot of space. – Lankymart May 9 '14 at 14:48
  • 31
    Ugly. This is not FB or Twitter. – Mikael S. May 9 '14 at 15:12
  • 14
    I like the old UI better in most every way including the badges section. I'm sure I won't be the popular vote, but I think the old UI was "utilitarian" and the new one is "flashy" but less useful than the dashboard. I won't enjoy looking at the new one, and did enjoy looking at the old one when poking someone's username. – BenSwayne May 9 '14 at 23:07
  • 12
    Do whatever you guys want to do, just give us an option to revert to the older version. I don't like this thing as it stands for now... – user3459110 May 10 '14 at 16:59
  • 13
    Why put 1/2 the info in 2x the space? Also, being deeply inspired by the Korean People's Army is uninspiring, to say the least. – mcalex May 13 '14 at 7:43

38 Answers 38


BEWARE: too many changes to a good and well established interface usually lead to a WORSE interface!!! (see Micro...t's disasters, GMail changes or the recent Firefox 29 UI) !!!

The things I don't like:

  • the profile picture is too big: stackexchange is not FB or twitter
  • there is too much empty space
  • information boxes are not well organized and look messy
  • you need one more annoying click to go to the dashboard
  • the gray text is a little bit unreadable (why don't you use black for normal text???)

enter image description here

| improve this answer | |
  • 14
    Too many changes don't lead to a worse interface. They lead to an interface that is different enough to the previous one that a lot of people get very vocal and complain about it. (Unless they all happen to agree it's an awful lot better, which is entirely possible.) – doppelgreener May 12 '14 at 5:58
  • 2
    @JonathanHobbs That's possibly true. However, the concerns here are quite in place. Concerning Firefox, there's a lot of stuff I can't get used to, and I got my new Status4Evar of course. Considering SE top bar: the increased click distance of chat made me use Ctrl+T,41,Down,Enter to open my favourite chat room. And this new stuff will spread the important information into two pages and increase the click distance of a lot of stuff by one. And in this case my trick with remembering a piece of the address doesn't work, so I'll have to click "Dashboard" on the touchpad every time. – yo' May 12 '14 at 7:17
  • Well, quality of the new profiles aside, it's definitely true that quantity of changes does not correlate to quality of the end result. Lots of changes does not mean a bad result, nor does few changes mean a good one. They're totally separate. What you do get from any radical change, especially lots at once, is complaints, simply because people hate interface changes in general almost always. – doppelgreener May 12 '14 at 8:02
  • 1
    +1 After the Firefox Whatever-it-is-now update a few days ago, I nearly switched to Chrome. – michaelb958--GoFundMonica May 13 '14 at 2:50
  • The complaints in the image you've highlighted are primarily complaints about color choice and whitespace. This comes down to a personal preference. You don't like the less-dense, more understated design. I do. This sort of binary design preference doesn't seem like it can go in a productive direction. – Conspicuous Compiler May 13 '14 at 23:16
  • @ConspicuousCompiler Usability matters. It doesn't matter what you like, using grey on white is wrong. It doesn't matter what you like, there's an optimal amount whitespace. – bjb568 Jul 30 '14 at 16:29

I don't know if Microsoft have a got a patent on this, but couldn't you just use coloured bars for the tags? Far more compact, and legible. Currently, unless someone has one or two predominant tags, it's not even immediately obvious how/that/why the sizes are different.

enter image description here

Oh, and I second badp's request that careers not be auto-linked (I'm having serious second thoughts about the 'connectedness' of my 'online persona' right now...)

| improve this answer | |
  • From the question above: "The current job and link to Careers profile are hidden for now, since they'll be optional anyway. We'll bring them back in a future version." You might not have to worry about it being auto-linked, unless that concern is something like the link being opt-out rather than opt-in. – doppelgreener May 12 '14 at 5:56
  • 2
    @JonathanHobbs, I saw that but wasn't sure whether 'optional' just meant that not everyone has a Careers profile. – Benjol May 12 '14 at 5:57

For those who want to easily get to the new user page from an old one, use this userscript I made. It makes the user's avatar link to the new page.

enter image description here


// ==UserScript==
// @name         New User Page linkifier
// @namespace    http://stackexchange.com/users/*
// @version      1
// @description  Links to the new user page
// @match        http://stackoverflow.com/users/*
// @grant        none
// @copyright    2014+, The Guy with The Hat
// ==/UserScript==

$(".gravatar > a[href*='http://stackoverflow.com/users/']").attr('href', $(".gravatar > a[href*='http://stackoverflow.com/users/']").attr('href').replace(new RegExp(/http:\/\/stackoverflow.com\/users\/(\d+).*/),'http://stackoverflow.com/users/reloaded/$1'))
| improve this answer | |
  • 2
    Shouldn't you add // @grant none to run the script in the page without sandbox (in order to use the page's $)? – Rob W May 9 '14 at 10:49

While I appreciate the consistency in styling the tags as they are styled elsewhere on Stack Overflow, the styling does look somewhat out of place.

Current tag display

I'd suggest changing this to something more suitable for such a 'modern' profile page. Perhaps something as simple as this: (I removed the 'post-tag' class, added the 'tag-style-legend' class and increased the font-size to 1em.)

Proposed tag style

While this may break some consistency within a Stack Exchange site, I do feel it looks a lot better.

| improve this answer | |
  • 7
    This does look awesome, but I'm conflicted since the badge aesthetic is an important mental cue. – doppelgreener May 9 '14 at 5:16
  • 3
    No, this does not look awesome. Why should a clearly lowercase information be displayed uppercase? Just because a designer chose so? That doesn't sound like a reason for me. Oh wait it is a reason, but then the design is a goal rather than a tool. And if I remember correctly, the goal here is to spread knowledge. – yo' May 12 '14 at 7:12

The main thing I use the existing "dashboard" for is to check for recent activity on my posts. As such I would require an "Activity" ordering for the Posts table for it to be useful to me.

| improve this answer | |

Overall, great redesign.

The new Top Tags section however made me wince a bit. Maybe because the tags I have on my profile have short names, but there is just too much space and not enough connective tissue holding the pieces together. Maybe a stronger border, or a more prominent background color would help better tie the right margin info together with the tag itself?

| improve this answer | |

Here's my full review:


| improve this answer | |
  • Why are you "reviewing" other parts of the page that have nothing to do with the new about me page? Also, I'm confused what you mean by the "bg-color" label on the votes tab over there. Are you also complaining that's grey? – animuson Jun 1 '14 at 14:53
  • @animuson Why not? Yes. It having a background instead of a text color, hover color, or border looks strange. – bjb568 Jun 1 '14 at 17:32

I am not offending, I appreciate your work. Just remember one thing. When you successfully complete this and gift it to us, give us an option to revert to the old look. Scrrenshot


This option is for the viewer, not the owner... It is to comfort the user who is seeing the other user's profile. So, if I click on it, then then on, every profile I see on SO, including mine, will display that way. Any other user seeing my profile would still see it their way...


This can be maintained for a specific time period only. Say 6 months or so. Until then, the newer version can be put in beta...

| improve this answer | |
  • I think this might be great. One can choose which look they want to see, win-win for everyone. [I don't like the new design as well, though.] – Sawarnik May 11 '14 at 4:53
  • -1. It doesn't make sense. I want to access the user profiles to get some information. I might get used to seeing the information in another place, but I'll never get used to having to look at two different places depending on the person's preference. – yo' May 11 '14 at 19:42
  • @tohecz No, that option will set preference of the viewer, not the user... See ETA. – user3459110 May 12 '14 at 5:00
  • Why'd you title that 'ETA'? Is there a meaning for it other than estimated time of arrival I'm not aware of? – doppelgreener May 12 '14 at 5:27
  • @JonathanHobbs ETA = Edited to ADD – user3459110 May 12 '14 at 5:30
  • People are jealous of all your triforces – doppelgreener May 12 '14 at 11:09
  • @JonathanHobbs Whats triforces? – user3459110 May 12 '14 at 11:29
  • 8
    No, that would be pointless. Even gmail won't let us go back to the old look after a while. It will be waste of time to maintain the old design and keep fixing bugs related to it. Once a change is done, it's done and it's really not a big deal. – Shadow Wizard Wearing Mask May 12 '14 at 11:43
  • 1
    @AwalGarg This thing! From the Zelda games. – doppelgreener May 12 '14 at 11:44
  • As for +10/-2 (which is now +30/-10) it's due to upvotes vs. downvotes: people who agree vs. people who disagree. (currently 3 agree, 5 disagree) – Shadow Wizard Wearing Mask May 12 '14 at 11:45
  • 1
    @ShadowWizard I am on the fence about this for the reason you specified there. I am against it because the old version should go away in favour of not having to maintain two versions. I am for it, however, for exactly the reason Gmail does what it does: it lets people switch back and forth between new and old versions in order to help them get comfortable with the new feature before the old one goes away forever. This is up to how the SE team wants to handle the transition, though, and what they want to do to ease people into it. – doppelgreener May 12 '14 at 11:45
  • 1
    @JonathanHobbs so maybe limiting this to a time frame, which isn't suggested in the answer right now. Having this, I'll share your opinion and undo my downvote. – Shadow Wizard Wearing Mask May 12 '14 at 11:47
  • @ShadowWizard Well, GMail DOES allow us to switch to Basic HTML look and even make it permanent. In Fact, Google Support Forum still welcomes bugs and reports of Basic HTML Look, albeit there would be very less or no bugs left now. And yes, your time-frame idea was nice. So I added it. Always good to discuss and add to answers like this. Hail SE! – user3459110 May 12 '14 at 12:26
  • 2
    @AwalGarg That's different: basic HTML is a current feature for Gmail, not an old feature to be superseded. It exists because Google actively supports older or niche browsers which might not support the features the standard Gmail view uses. (Even the Google homepage is full of archaic HTML, like the font tag!) – doppelgreener May 12 '14 at 12:28
  • 1
    @AwalGarg gmail has hundreds, if not thousands, of programmers. Billions of dollars to spend. Stack Exchange got much less. I prefer they spend their funds on other things. – Shadow Wizard Wearing Mask May 12 '14 at 12:43

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