So I read most of the posts.
Some were good, but nothing earth-shattering. Affirmations of why I teach and why I do
FIRST.
This one bothered me:
http://www.firstinspires.org/communi...ing-vulnerable
"The new website was the first large, mission-critical, and complex project I had led since joining
FIRST 18 months ago. A large group of staff members had put many, many hours into building this new site, and now it was out there for public critique. I knew that many would love it … but, inevitably, some wouldn’t."
"mission-critical" I would like to hear what the mission was. My reason being is that, IMHO, for new visitors curious about FIRST, or veteran participants, the new website is a misstep.
"complex"? You had a reasonably easy to navigate website that you could have evolved, instead, you went for a wholesale change.
"many" would love it, but "some" wouldn't. This comment demeans those that may criticize the new design by placing them in the minority.
I would like to see some metrics about how long visitors stay on the website and how deeply they go.
Have the creators ever tried to find an event in their area, only to have their choices constantly reset? Forget trying to find a team, where they will be playing, their history, or what awards they have won. (I don't know what I would do without The Blue Alliance)
My impressions and opinions are dismissed with a quote by Teddy Roosevelt, including:
"The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood"
Those of us mentoring teams and volunteering at events?
I agree that this is a nice feature of the new website. I would like to hear how you feel about the rest of the website?