[weinzierl]

You exaggerate the issue. Proportional fonts were a necessity when lead, ink and paper were expensive. In lead typesetting they are easy to do. This caused the success of newspaper fonts like Times New Roman.

Contemporary fonts have much less variance in the width of characters, except for a couple of outliers like the i. From there to a completely monospaced font is not as big a leap as you make it seem. For me, I'm fine with monospaced fonts for prose.

[TylerE]

Disagree. Reading monospaced prose sucks big time. For those of us with a little bit of vision deficiency the vary character widths are helpful.

Also, the reduced character width (as a monospaced font inevitable has to be spaced at what the widest chatacters, such as w, require, means that you have to use a smaller font size to get the same amount of info per scroll/line/page whatever, again compromising readability.

Here's a comparison between the posted site, and the same site with the font size bumped up 4px, proportional (just browser default, I didn't cherry pick) and the ridiculously wide line spacing reduced.

Even with all that, the easier to read version is quite a bit more compact. Could likely bump the font size 2 more px and still be smaller.

https://i.imgur.com/DBFI2RU.png