[jahsome]

Sorry to say I've never used snapchat, so I'm not able to understand your comparison.

Sure, I am perfectly capable of figuring out the site. But I won't trouble myself with it. My loss it seems!

And lastly, the person I was replying to claimed the design "fit the content so well" or something to that effect, which communicates a certain depth, contrary to your claim. I was genuinely trying to understand what I'm missing out on.

[apsurd]

Fair points. in rereading the comments, I think "fits the content so well is in relation to the comment that comment replied to: the content being quirky and comical. So the navigation being non-standard is on brand.

and this is different from your point which maybe is "how does this help me understand fonts better?" which is fair.

[jahsome]

Thanks for the added context. I obviously missed the nuance because I ragequit the page, so your perspective does help answer my question.

I can understand the perspective that something whimsical might appeal to a certain group and even enhance the experience; in fact I usually enjoy non-standard game designs, and in general I really appreciate subversion in most media I consume. I think however when it comes to educational or info-dense resources, I prefer the UX to be minimally distracting.