>>Come on. This is no excuse for number and unit on separate lines. no breaking space?? Also it might be enough to have the time w/o ago. It could not be in the future.
>
>If the time representation goes on a dedicated line, believe me, you will not like this. It was tried before releasing prototype 1 and it creates much more empty space, which you do not like very much I believe.

well if I have
xyz abcd ghg 1
hour ago
vs
xyz abcd ghg
1 hour ago
this seems not much space wasted. I guess you will not go into hundreds with hours? General typographic rule is to keep number and unit on one line.

>
>>It's about that the whole rectangle should be clickable to go to the message. Not only the the tiny link, wrapped over two lines. The important to me is to reach the message quick, no exersise in mouse targeting.
>
>...and it is. Simply click anywhere on the area, and it will go in the message. A link has been added for visual representation as, at first, many may not know that everything is clickable.

Hm responsive design would be without the underline - but then I dislike responsive design. I'm to lazy to switch to new design right now - you change the mouse pointer there? I can't remember well enough.

>>I can live with it like it is. I understand the numerator gives me the there is new something information, the color is more or less extra. Possibly you invent a better name for it then red number, so there is no more hickup.
>
>I do not think you follow me on this one. If there is no color representation, it makes it very difficult to see something new just came in. You will have two numbers side by side and this wouldn't tell much.
>
>>The use of the numerator 4 on this is obvious. I would never had noticed (or needed) the color, it was only you mention it and I had a problem to figure out what you where talking about. To me the color is unimportant for the use of the site - only to communicate with you :)
>
>Well, it still needs to be obvious there is something new. Whenever it highlights, I know immediately I got something new. If everything is the same color, it is not really good.

This is because the color type ones focus on the color and the color blind ones focus on outlines and figures. I miss nothing. But possibly I'm more annoyed with your flickering advertisement for that.

>>What I have done is read your reply (it was the only new at this time), go to account, switched to new interface, hit enter on adress bar (or F5, I'm uncertain). After that I missed the reply lefthand, looked around and found the thing in top counter (1/8). Clicked there get the list select the top message (yours, the one allready seen) open the message. The counter switched to 8
>
>That would be the normal behavior.

But I had read all replies in that moment. But this is just for infomation, I will notify you if I see a problem.

>>3d is an insert. Just to save me the effort to create an extra picture. Nothing fancy, just MSPaint.
>
>Ok, but what it is that you believe is not good with that? There wasn't anything changed about that with the new interface. This has been as is for a very long time.

Because the sense of it is just like the top counter. Something to click. And the top counter comes without icons, no button design. Doubtless it's the old style. But you are doing a new one?

>>What do I care what is text and what is graphic? I just see the result. And this does not fit togheter. Again, this is a hint to you, just my impression. Bad on 3a is that I have to fiddle around with my mouse to figure aut what is clickable and what is not (For example my name looks the same as anything else, but is not clickable). 3b is the same approach, but differnet background, thats all I see.
>
>So, you would like to have the top menu items to be hyperlinks with underlines, is that correct?

Michel, it's not about what I like to have. For me the old design was pretty good. But this is not the point. I suggest that you should not mix up several styles like the ones I've pointed out.

>>I know what the pop up does. It's ok so far. But why is this the text Audio in the popup? It's not clickable, what the popup is about is in the textbox above visible anyway.
>
>Audio is clickable. That is a dropdown list item and it behaves as it should. I must miss something in what you are trying to explain.

OK, the hard way.
-I click Audio
-A popup appears
-This has items
+Audio,
+Descriptive
+Short
+Disabled

What is the item Audio on that popup good for?

>>Doubtless. No complains about this advertisement for non paying customers. I've told you my idea about contribution if I do not pay money and I believe in TANSTAAFL. The advertisement is related to the stuff we are doing, nothing strange. Just - flickering. Distracting. Since this seems to be a loop anyway, it would be enought to change it with refreshing the message area / tree area via messages button.
>>But if I pay the use directly I think I should not be bothered with advertisement. This would mean to pay twice.
>
>Many do not share that opinion. Many wants to be on the Internet for free and now believe only the companies should pay for it, which is the model used by pretty much all sites now. We'll put more time into that and we'll let you know if something is adjusted in regards to that.
>
>>So the question was: is this advertisement (for that the whole banner) there if I pay for a subscription?
>
>See above.

I like to pay for the service. Via advertisement is more expensive, finaly.

>>There are reasons we are still on this site. ;)
>
>Ok
>
>>Simply on messages refresh? You do not need the timer, nobody is distracted, and if there is no new message at all it is not worth to look anyway.
>
>There is no perfect solution. On long activity of no new message, it would mean a user, while remaining on the site would not see new banners. We had some of that before and a mix and match could do with upcoming updates.

I do not see banners ( any advertisement for that) at all. They are in general out of my focus. Just the same way I do not see infrared. Scotoma.
I do not click them. Advertisement means to me Do not buy this.
If they try to attract me by crying, flickering or the like I try to turn them off. This means addblocker, noscript and ghostery. Cookies per session.
If they resist and I have no choice I leave.
A choice would be to pay for the access.
Banner advertisement is to be avoided under all circumstances, It's one of the biggest security problems in the moment, tracking too. It's not your approach, but I do not waste time to distinguish. A Banner is a Banner. You would need to have traffic like in the early 2000 where there was several hundred messages the day bound to the topic to compensate. To answer some noob questions and to talk to Aunty Emma from time to time might not be worth it.

So let's stop the philosophical part. I name this as an opinion on your new layout for now. You know I prefer to pay you rather then to to crowd my screen with advertisements.

>>What the scrollbar is good for is not the point. The top end of it is, if I just look at it, within an area that is just of background color. No hint why the scrollbar ends just on his place. I know what area, I understand why but I don't see it. Just focus on the top of it on a wide enough screen, and you will have no idea for what reason it just ends there. This is because the background of the tree aread simply goes without any border to the background of the message area. The border is around my line 4b, but normaly not visible.
>
>I am having difficulties understanding this point. Do you basically want a divider between the top and the bottom?

I just point out that I was looking at this scrollbar and found it akward. On my day to day business I don't care. It's just about quirks in your layout.

If you realy like to change something there, then get rid of the double scrollbar on message edit. One never know where mouse wheel is working. That's a pain.