[danso]

This is an attractive design and it's always good to have another place to discuss things.

My biggest problem, on first impressions, is that the design gives the most emphasis to the least important part: the submitter. What I love about HN and Reddit is that I can get through someone's 600-word comment and be thoroughly enlightened or angered and not care or even notice that it was authored by tptacek or some long-time lurker with just 50 karma. It's only because I've read HN frequently that I quickly associate tptacek's handle (if I stop to look at the handle) with having karma...otherwise, he's just some other commenter with something very insightful or aggravating to read...HN's design rightfully de-eephasizes the authority given by identity to a comment and submission, letting the content stand for itself. This is the exact opposite the USQ forum's current design, with Twitter handles overpowering everything else, even the already too-large and boldened headlines.

Edit: I don't mind the use of Twitter handles. I think the avatars should be axed, though, and perhaps the handles should be moved to the far right so that the user has to read the headline before being able to notice the submitter name. Yes, I realize this would make it very close to a "HN ripoff" but big deal...copy the best parts of HN.

[lnanek2]

There have been studies showing pictures with articles increase interest. Even GMail and Google search have been moving that direction. GMail on Android now has pictures next to the emails. Google search now checks the site author information and shows pictures. So USV is inline with modern best practices, HN isn't on this. You have good ideals wanting no pictures and to decide everything on text, but if your ideals make the site only good for techies, it isn't a good change for getting users and interest and contributors in general.