[taeric]

Seeing one of the opening paragraphs say "The right font choice along with the absence of sidebars and popups makes everything feel easier and better to read" while being distracted by the bloody sidebar and ad on this site is rather interesting.

[arrrg]

It appears that this website bought the rights to publish this article from the author.

The original article appears to have been posted on the author’s blog quite some time ago: https://ooomf.com/blog/the-science-behind-fonts-and-how-they...

As such criticising contradictions between website design and what the article advocates makes even less sense than it usually does.

[taeric]

Well, in that case it makes it even more amusing. They are paying to get the ability to post a story, but aren't even following it. It would be one thing if they posted some sort of rebuttal, but posting a "best practice" style thing in obvious violation of it is rather amusing. (Granted, it is not a criticism of the article.)

I do think there is still more handwaving in the article than I'd care for. In very few cases was it a small change in font that made a difference. And, even then, it is still artistic in nature. Pretty things make people more trusting and happy. Some fonts are prettier than others.

[toggle]

To be fair, the three sites the author holds up as good examples (Medium, 37signals' blog, and Zen Habits) are not being run for a profit. Having to monetize a site does make it much harder to keep the layout clean -- ads are supposed to catch your eye, after all.

[mcherm]

Oh my... the presentation on the original blog is SO much better!

[aaronem]

I had the same thought. It's not that they don't have a point, but one might reasonably wonder why they have a hard time taking their own advice.