Return to Answer

One gets a feeling what we have here is... a complete failure to communicate. One even feels a little like this is even hostile to the rest of the network.

I've been an active user of the network for 15 years. I moderate one tech and one non-tech website. I've never been a Stack Overflow user. Least for me, its very clear that my feedback was read, then completely ignored. A significant amount of the feedback given does seem to want to maintain the Stack Exchange branding for smaller sites too.

Is the intention here to alienate the rest of the network, with their own distinct identities and get them to go away? Cause this very much feels like a potential end result. I'd expected better but its pretty clear that marketing's dug in on the Stack Overflow branding despite smaller sites preferring the Stack Exchange branding.

And right now - does Stack Overflow Inc. really feel a redesign that alienates a significant part of small site user-bases is the best option?

This is digging into and reinforcing the feeling that our opinions don't really matter. The smaller sites are unimportant enough that we need to be assimilated into the Stack Overflow "Borg collective" despite - well, it being not what we want.

I guess this isn't new but it feels like another example where the company pays lip service to community feedback, minimises it, and does as they like.

As for the options given - I voted for neither. We have BRIGHT COLOURS and LOUD IMAGERY. It's... terrible. The colours are loud and discordant and obviously designed by people who don't deal with a large amount of text.

What's twoface {''} even mean? Why all the clashing colours? Do the people who design these things spend any amount of time using Stack Exchange and other social software? It's the visual equivalent of a noise marine concert.

Brands tell a story. At least with Stack Exchange and its community, the somewhat quiet, orderly brand image is soothing. I'm not quite sure what the story here is.

One gets a feeling what we have here is... a complete failure to communicate. One even feels a little like this is even hostile to the rest of the network.

I've been an active user of the network for 15 years. I moderate one tech and one non-tech website. I've never been a Stack Overflow user. Least for me, it's very clear that my feedback was read, then completely ignored. A significant amount of the feedback given does seem to want to maintain the Stack Exchange branding for smaller sites too.

Is the intention here to alienate the rest of the network, with their own distinct identities, and get them to go away? Cause this very much feels like a potential end result. I'd expected better but it's pretty clear that marketing's dug in on the Stack Overflow branding despite smaller sites preferring the Stack Exchange branding.

And right now - does Stack Overflow Inc. really feel a redesign that alienates a significant part of small site user-bases is the best option?

This is digging into and reinforcing the feeling that our opinions don't really matter. The smaller sites are unimportant enough that we need to be assimilated into the Stack Overflow "Borg collective" despite - well, it being not what we want.

I guess this isn't new but it feels like another example where the company pays lip service to community feedback, minimises it, and does as they like.

As for the options given - I voted for neither. We have BRIGHT COLOURS and LOUD IMAGERY. It's... terrible. The colours are loud and discordant and obviously designed by people who don't deal with a large amount of text.

What's twoface {''} even mean? Why all the clashing colours? Do the people who design these things spend any amount of time using Stack Exchange and other social software? It's the visual equivalent of a noise marine concert.

Brands tell a story. At least with Stack Exchange and its community, the somewhat quiet, orderly brand image is soothing. I'm not quite sure what the story here is.

One gets a feeling what we have here is... a complete failure to communicate. One even feels a little like this is even hostile to the rest of the network.

I've been an active user of the network for 15 years. I moderate one tech and one non-tech website. I've never been a Stack Overflow user. Least for me, its very clear that my feedback was read, then completely ignored. A significant amount of the feedback given does seem to want to maintain the Stack Exchange branding for smaller sites too.

Is the intention here to alienate the rest of the network, with their own distinct identities and get them to go away? Cause this very much feels like a potential end result. I'd expected better but its pretty clear that marketing's dug in on the Stack Overflow branding despite smaller sites preferring the Stack Exchange branding.

And right now - does Stack Overflow Inc. really feel a redesign that alienates a significant part of small site user-bases is the best option?

This is digging into and reinforcing the feeling that our opinions don't really matter. The smaller sites are unimportant enough that we need to be assimilated into the Stack Overflow "Borg collective" despite - well, it being not what we want.

I guess this isn't new but it feels like another example where the company pays lip service to community feedback, minimises it, and does as they like.

As for the options given - I voted for neither. We have BRIGHT COLOURS and LOUD IMAGERY. It's... terrible. The colours are loud and discordant and obviously designed by people who don't deal with a large amount of text.

What's twoface {'} even mean? Why all the clashing colours? Do the people who design these things spend any amount of time using Stack Exchange and other social software? It's the visual equivalent of a noise marine concert.

Brands tell a story. At least with Stack Exchange and its community, the somewhat quiet, orderly brand image is soothing. I'm not quite sure what the story here is.

One gets a feeling what we have here is... a complete failure to communicate. One even feels a little like this is even hostile to the rest of the network.

I've been an active user of the network for 15 years. I moderate one tech and one non-tech website. I've never been a Stack Overflow user. Least for me, its very clear that my feedback was read, then completely ignored. A significant amount of the feedback given does seem to want to maintain the Stack Exchange branding for smaller sites too.

Is the intention here to alienate the rest of the network, with their own distinct identities and get them to go away? Cause this very much feels like a potential end result. I'd expected better but its pretty clear that marketing's dug in on the Stack Overflow branding despite smaller sites preferring the Stack Exchange branding.

And right now - does Stack Overflow Inc. really feel a redesign that alienates a significant part of small site user-bases is the best option?

This is digging into and reinforcing the feeling that our opinions don't really matter. The smaller sites are unimportant enough that we need to be assimilated into the Stack Overflow "Borg collective" despite - well, it being not what we want.

I guess this isn't new but it feels like another example where the company pays lip service to community feedback, minimises it, and does as they like.

As for the options given - I voted for neither. We have BRIGHT COLOURS and LOUD IMAGERY. It's... terrible. The colours are loud and discordant and obviously designed by people who don't deal with a large amount of text.

What's twoface {''} even mean? Why all the clashing colours? Do the people who design these things spend any amount of time using Stack Exchange and other social software? It's the visual equivalent of a noise marine concert.

Brands tell a story. At least with Stack Exchange and its community, the somewhat quiet, orderly brand image is soothing. I'm not quite sure what the story here is.

One gets a feeling what we have here is... a complete failure to communicate. One even feels a little like this is even hostile to the rest of the network.

I've been an active user of the network for 15 years. I moderate one tech and one non-tech website. I've never been a Stack Overflow user. Least for me, its very clear that my feedback was read then completely ignored. A significant amount of the feedback given does seem to want to maintain the stack exchange branding for smaller sites too.

Is the intention here to alienate the rest of the network, with their own distinct identities and get them to go away? Cause this very much feels like a potential end result. I'd expected better but its pretty clear that marketing's dug in on the Stack Overflow branding despite smaller sites preferring the Stack Exchange branding.

And right now - does SO Inc. really feel a redesign that alienates a significant part of small site userbases is the best option?

This is digging into and reinforcing the feeling that our opinions don't really matter. The smaller sites are unimportant enough that we need to be assimilated into the Stack Overflow "Borg collective" despite - well, it being not what we want.

I guess this isn't new but it feels like another example where the company pays lip service to community feedback, minimises it, and does as they like.

As for the options given - I voted for neither. We have BRIGHT COLOURS and LOUD IMAGERY. It's... terrible. The colours are loud and discordant and obviously designed by people who don't deal with a large amount of text.

What's twoface {''} even mean? Why all the clashing colours? Do the people who design these things spend any amount of time using SE and other social software? It's the visual equivalent of a noise marine concert.

Brands tell a story. At least with SE and its community, the somewhat quiet, orderly brand image is soothing. I'm not quite sure what the story here is.

One gets a feeling what we have here is... a complete failure to communicate. One even feels a little like this is even hostile to the rest of the network.

I've been an active user of the network for 15 years. I moderate one tech and one non-tech website. I've never been a Stack Overflow user. Least for me, its very clear that my feedback was read, then completely ignored. A significant amount of the feedback given does seem to want to maintain the Stack Exchange branding for smaller sites too.

Is the intention here to alienate the rest of the network, with their own distinct identities and get them to go away? Cause this very much feels like a potential end result. I'd expected better but its pretty clear that marketing's dug in on the Stack Overflow branding despite smaller sites preferring the Stack Exchange branding.

And right now - does Stack Overflow Inc. really feel a redesign that alienates a significant part of small site user-bases is the best option?

This is digging into and reinforcing the feeling that our opinions don't really matter. The smaller sites are unimportant enough that we need to be assimilated into the Stack Overflow "Borg collective" despite - well, it being not what we want.

I guess this isn't new but it feels like another example where the company pays lip service to community feedback, minimises it, and does as they like.

As for the options given - I voted for neither. We have BRIGHT COLOURS and LOUD IMAGERY. It's... terrible. The colours are loud and discordant and obviously designed by people who don't deal with a large amount of text.

What's twoface {'} even mean? Why all the clashing colours? Do the people who design these things spend any amount of time using Stack Exchange and other social software? It's the visual equivalent of a noise marine concert.

Brands tell a story. At least with Stack Exchange and its community, the somewhat quiet, orderly brand image is soothing. I'm not quite sure what the story here is.