No, that's not at all the same as what we had before. That's just the last 1000 posts I made.

If you can agree that my suggestion above is what you also need then hopefully that'll start the wheels rolling to get it restored.

Good God.

What a mess. This looks like 1996.

https://cimg9.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.fly...cf3636791e.png

1996 looked better than this.

I have to admit, this is about as ugly of a layout as it gets.

Yeah but do you want an American Express?

Incredibly, I am still not seeing any ads on any page despite all Ad and Script Blockers off. Rest assured though, if I was staring two banner ads in the face before even getting to a single word of content, I would be waging war with every Ad and Script blocker known to man.

The formatting issues in this single screenshot alone are hilarious. I said it a few pages back but this looks like those old free ProBoards anyone could make with just the most basic code. I mean in this one screen shot you have:

1) Ads taking up far more space than any actual content
2) The ad on the right is twice the width of the Control Panel
3) All the navigation images have non-transparent backgrounds that don't actually match their background
4) Whatever the hell is happening to the last post box for the Jet Blue forum
5) You're scrolled all the way up with no apparent zoom on and the first actual website content you see on the page is in the lower 1/4 of it, not even three full lines
6) Just the most embarrassing mid-late 90s looking UI and look

This is embarrassing. I'd say this is the type of web design you see from a high school freshman level computer/web design course, but that would be insulting to high school freshmen who would at least have the common sense to not make an entirely white website.

Constant lock ups due to script errors in IE11.
Sometimes every few seconds in this thread especially.

Works fine on my phone although the forum selection page looks like the desktop rather than the mobile version.

Can have the same advert stacked twice at the top of the screen and again at the bottom.

Generally prefer the old look. Too much like British Airways' lipstick on a pig upgrade recently.

Wow - so far 99% of the comments are negative. IB is basically saying tough, we'll fix bugs but the 1995 version we just provided to you/"enhanced" is what you're stuck w/ because the Overlords (IB's phrase) want the new version which supposedly works on IB's other sites - even though IB's other sites are nothing like FT. So keep on complaining because unless it's a bug, we're (IB) happy with our 1995 not tested version.

A version that has such universal dislike & also is encouraging FTers to either quit/lessen posting - or go to IB's competitors can not be the result that IB wanted, unless IB is counting on FT continuing to crop up in searches & think it will continue to do so moving forward so it doesn't care about long-time posters leaving. However, if people discover FT via search & then are turned off by the formatting/1995 layout they may decide to not stick around either, which again doesn't help IB.

I've been on FT for 15 years. Some of the changes that have been made are ok; some have been eh, really, why did you think this was a good idea. But THIS 'enhancement' may actually be the one that gets me posting less on FT & going to its competitors to post instead. As someone w/ 60,000+ posts & a 15 year history w/ FT, thanks IB - not.

On a dif note (and just addressing one of the issues people have problems w/). IB had a 'white space' issue w/ a prior 'enhancement' & they were able to get it fixed. I don't believe that they can't fix this one.

I find it extremely appropriate that the latest Flyer talk email is titled:

Brace Yourselves. Devaluation Is Coming.

Perfect timing. :)

Does anyone know of another forum somewhere else on the internet that is similar to FlyerTalk? This site just does not work at all and I can't see coming back here often.

I couldn't agree more.

One thing I can't help wondering: did IB bother talking to any actual FT users before developing/implementing this atrocity? I'm guessing not.

And to be clear, I'm not talking about asking users "do you like this update color or this one?" I'm referring to something far more fundamental: asking users how they use the site on a day-to-day basis. (In other words, UX.)

AFAIK, IB has never asked us this fundamental question, so I'm going to propose that we start telling them. This thread isn't the right place IMO, so I'm happy to hear suggestions on where such a thread might go. I imagine the comments would answer questions like these:

Apparently pushing more ads was the goal, not making the FT user friendly.

Text size (like here) is to small and with all the blue bars and stuff doesn't have enough contrast to stand out. Very hard to read.

Can't believe this mess was beta tested before being shoved down our throats. FAIL!

What browser are you using? And desktop or mobile? I was able to post a photo URL from wikipedia OK, but want to test more. Were you using Quick Reply or Advanced?

Post reply left justifies - deliberate or bug?

Font in reply box is stupid small - deliberate or bug?

If deliberate, why?

If bug, please fix.

The wiki formatting issue was reported yesterday