[HN Gopher] My website is ugly because I made it
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       My website is ugly because I made it
        
       Author : surprisetalk
       Score  : 401 points
       Date   : 2025-05-28 11:53 UTC (1 days ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (goodinternetmagazine.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (goodinternetmagazine.com)
        
       | donatj wrote:
       | Hah, yes! Whereas most of my developer friends have long ago
       | moved to off-the-shelf Hugo or Jekyll templates for their
       | personal sites, I stubbornly maintain my blog with entirely
       | bespoke css and a backend only a parent could love.
       | 
       | For me, the joy is not in _having_ a website, the joy is in
       | building the website. Why would I want to hand off the _joyful_
       | part?
       | 
       | It's like maintaining a classic car. You can buy a reliable
       | decent looking car, but that's not fun. If your goal is just to
       | get somewhere, sure, but my goal is to have fun.
       | 
       | I work on websites all day where I get less and less say in the
       | design and functionality. Why would I not want total control over
       | my own?
        
         | yoz-y wrote:
         | My argument to moving to a SSR is that I just spent all the
         | time tweaking the backend. Now I can spend more time writing
         | and tweaking just the theme.
        
           | donatj wrote:
           | But did you enjoy tweaking the backend?
        
             | yoz-y wrote:
             | I did yes. But I realized also that I could enjoy tinkering
             | with something more generally useful and permanent instead.
        
         | ebiester wrote:
         | I think the difference is that I spent so much time tweaking
         | the website that I wasn't writing. Moving back to Jekyll was
         | entirely a move because I wanted to spend more of that time
         | writing.
         | 
         | At the same time, I know that it limits me in other ways (for
         | example, I'd love to have a way to post to my blog in one
         | section and federate to bluesky and mastodon, and I know it's
         | possible, but I would have to build it. So I'll eventually move
         | from Jekyll.)
        
           | parpfish wrote:
           | An actual LLM use case!
           | 
           | A model that generates AI slop blog posts so you don't need
           | to write content and can just focus on the fun parts of
           | making the website
        
             | indigodaddy wrote:
             | I'd imagine almost any old model could do this?
        
             | delfinom wrote:
             | Why even waste money on an LLM. Just lorum ipsum the
             | content since nobody is going to read it anyway
        
               | parpfish wrote:
               | but a model could write blog posts that describe changes
               | to the website as a blog-style changelog (e.g., 'today i
               | spent an hour playing with CSS to change padding' or 'i
               | refactored the backend to do more async calls')
               | 
               | a self-documenting blog about the blog.
        
             | topaz0 wrote:
             | \lipsum has been perfectly good at that for decades
        
         | oxalorg wrote:
         | Exactly this. My entire website is handcrafted, and not once
         | but over the last decade almost ~10 times.
         | 
         | It's fun and I almost end up revamping something every year.
         | 
         | Everything handcrafted:
         | 
         | - the matrix js code on home page. https://oxal.org click on
         | the matrix for a surprise!
         | 
         | - it's built using my own Static Site Generator:
         | https://github.com/oxalorg/genox
         | 
         | - my website uses a css theme, again handcrafted:
         | https://github.com/oxalorg/sakura/
         | 
         | - if you go to https://oxal.org/blog/ you will see a small
         | cyborg following you (started with a base image generated by
         | chatgpt and then edited and added animations manually in Piskel
         | sprite editor)
         | 
         | - it's deployed on a VPS manually, just run `make` (I've
         | experimented with serving it via a handwritten C http server,
         | but I haven't finished this toy project yet)
         | 
         | - i have several shell scripts which uploads things to my
         | websites in private locations (think gists, quick share videos,
         | screenshots etc.).
         | 
         | - the favicon is also pixel art, made when I was still in
         | college! https://oxal.org/favicon-32x32.png
         | 
         | - I even tried designing my own funky font but gave up and used
         | a Naruto inspired font
         | 
         | - and as a bonus, try to `view-page-source` on the home page
         | 
         | I see my website and feel extremely proud of my journey as a
         | software engineer, and I cherish this simple thing oh so
         | dearly!
        
           | miloignis wrote:
           | I quite like the matrix w/ the surprise!
        
           | runamuck wrote:
           | The floating robot makes me smile. Reminds me of 90s
           | silliness. I love it!
        
           | navanchauhan wrote:
           | It's good to see you here! For a long time I was just using
           | your project Sakura CSS file to mane everything look pretty.
           | 
           | Even though I have moved on to using a mix of LaTeX.css and a
           | two column theme, I still love using Sakura whenever I'm
           | crafting a hand rolled HTML page for something.
        
           | chrisldgk wrote:
           | That's hilarious, I was just using Sakura not long ago for a
           | small mvp I made where I couldn't be arsed to write any css
           | myself. Good stuff
        
         | 90s_dev wrote:
         | > For me, the joy is not in having a website, the joy is in
         | building the website.
         | 
         | Sure, that's a fine purpose.
         | 
         | But some websites just want to get a specific job done and be
         | done with it.
         | 
         | Like https://tellconanobrienyourfavoritepizzatoppings.com/
        
         | natnatenathan wrote:
         | I feel this exactly. However, I find more fun to create and
         | modify the site vs actually writing articles, so my deployments
         | are probably 5x my actual blog posts. I got into computers
         | because I love to code. I will still be here, writing dumb
         | things for my own fun long after AI is the primary creator of
         | professional coders.
        
         | sli wrote:
         | I spent _far_ more time writing my own generator with Babashka
         | than I have putting actual content on the site. I was almost
         | disappointed when I finished it. It doesn 't support compiling
         | stuff like TS or Elm, but the only JS on my site is a
         | console.log that says there's no other JS on the entire site.
        
           | 01HNNWZ0MV43FF wrote:
           | Years ago I had a JS banner nagging readers to disable JS
        
         | henrebotha wrote:
         | I'm spending more time than I'd like to admit thinking about
         | how to achieve various ends using AsciiDoc(tor). I could just
         | carry on with Jekyll, but why?
        
         | AndrewStephens wrote:
         | > For me, the joy is not in having a website, the joy is in
         | building the website. Why would I want to hand off the joyful
         | part?
         | 
         | I have a server to serve my website and a website to have
         | something for my server to do.
        
         | donatj wrote:
         | Hah, this comment took off!
         | 
         | My colophon if anyone is interested
         | 
         | https://donatstudios.com/colophon
        
         | indigodaddy wrote:
         | I like your website a lot! Curious as to the stack, and/or do
         | you have a blog post about the setup?
        
         | justusthane wrote:
         | Here's mine: https://www.justus.ws/
         | 
         | It's built with the excellent Eleventy SSG, but all HTML and
         | CSS is done by hand (as you can probably tell :)
        
         | reaperducer wrote:
         | _For me, the joy is not in having a website, the joy is in
         | building the website. Why would I want to hand off the joyful
         | part?_
         | 
         | Part of the joy for my personal web sites is building in the
         | Easter eggs.
         | 
         | Connect via Lynx, and it's a different experience.
         | 
         | Hover over something at a certain time of day, and something
         | happens.
        
         | bradly wrote:
         | > For me, the joy is not in having a website, the joy is in
         | building the website. Why would I want to hand off the joyful
         | part?
         | 
         | This is Journey Before Destination, the first ideal spoken by
         | the Knights Radiant and a common trope across mythologies as
         | seen with Job's suffering and Hercules' 12 steps to recovery.
         | 
         | Turns out they turned Hercules into a god to stop all the cool
         | stuff he doing as a human :/ Don't let them take away your
         | pain, don't let them take away your humanness. And if they do,
         | just listen to some bird music instead.
         | 
         | https://birdymusic.com Either the best looking or worst looking
         | site you'll see today.
        
         | unsungNovelty wrote:
         | > For me, the joy is not in having a website, the joy is in
         | building the website. Why would I want to hand off the joyful
         | part?
         | 
         | To each their own. I wanted something functional. A stable
         | platform which is organised. I also wanted to write more. Which
         | I still haven't gotten to do. It's more of a functional project
         | than an art project.
         | 
         | That doesn't mean the OP's website is bad. But that is not why
         | I created my website. But I have thought about Writing HTML in
         | HTML after being inspired from Writing HTML in HTML by John
         | Ankarstrom [1]. But it will be a forever art project and not my
         | real estate on the internet. It's OK to want different things
         | from the indieweb. That's what makes it diverse.
         | 
         | 1- http://john.ankarstrom.se/html/
        
         | p4bl0 wrote:
         | > For me, the joy is not in having a website, the joy is in
         | building the website. Why would I want to hand off the _joyful_
         | part?
         | 
         | This is exactly it!
         | 
         | My personal website https://pablo.rauzy.name/ is also entirely
         | handcrafted, I use a few custom Bash scripts and a Makefile to
         | build it (it is entirely static, no server side rendering, and
         | not a single line of JS), and I have a lot of fun playing with
         | CSS for example to make it responsive, have a mobile menu, etc.
         | I probably (re)invented a few techniques in doing so but that's
         | what's fun!
        
           | WhyIsItAlwaysHN wrote:
           | I love the idea of the colored links for navigation in your
           | summary. Thanks for the inspiration!
        
           | izietto wrote:
           | Thing is, it looks better than many corporate websites out
           | there. Kudos
        
           | p4bl0 wrote:
           | I'll add one thing: since April 2009 my website files are
           | tracked using Git, which means I can go back to what it
           | looked like at any point in time whenever I want (`git rev-
           | list --count HEAD` gives me 2184 commits). It's been fun to
           | show my students what my own website looked like when I was
           | their age!
        
         | bitwize wrote:
         | I used to maintain a web site with a cobbled together script
         | written in Guile. I still totally would do the same today.
         | 
         | > For me, the joy is not in having a website, the joy is in
         | building the website. Why would I want to hand off the joyful
         | part?
         | 
         | Indeed. One of these days my company is going to pull my Claude
         | usage logs and mark me down in my performance review for not
         | using AI enough. But until that time comes I'm writing every
         | line of code myself.
        
         | oooyay wrote:
         | Most of the tech blogs I run across are static sites. I
         | understand the choice; to prioritize writing reads as pragmatic
         | and I did that for a long time. At some point I got intrigued
         | by being able to tailor my own editing experience and built my
         | blog. It took months but now I use MarkdownIt and custom
         | components in Vue to render the markdown in my posts. I built a
         | commenting and moderation system.
         | 
         | I started all of this before LLMs but once I started using them
         | it sped up my delivery substantially, especially with agents.
         | It also informed how I use coding agents at work, which I think
         | I've been able to adopt with relative ease and a higher success
         | rate than most.
         | 
         | https://ooo-yay.com/blog if you're curious.
        
       | kapitanjakc wrote:
       | I don't have a personal site yet. But when I do, I plan to make
       | it with HTML+CSS+JS/JQ only
       | 
       | Maybe apache or nginx as webservers
       | 
       | host it on shared stuff or AWS free tier
       | 
       | I just need to figure out how to center a div, and then I'll be
       | in the business.
        
         | qznc wrote:
         | Within minutes you could start at https://neocities.org/
        
         | donatj wrote:
         | I've never understood the whole centering a div meme.
         | width: 60%; // define your width as desired          margin: 0
         | auto;
         | 
         | Now go start your blog!
        
           | cuu508 wrote:
           | Now center div with unknown height vertically :-)
           | 
           | And no cheating by using flexbox!
        
             | arp242 wrote:
             | ^ Comment flagged for sadomasochism.
        
             | skydhash wrote:
             | how do you center something on an axis with no limits
             | placed to form a segments. That's mathematically impossible
             | unless you placed the limits first.
        
               | whatnow37373 wrote:
               | Powerful the Force is, young Padawan, as is the strength
               | of your doubts. Release them you must.
        
           | o_m wrote:
           | That's the old hacky way of doing it. place-content makes it
           | even easier.
        
           | reconnecting wrote:
           | <center> </center>
           | 
           | It's been working for the second century.
        
             | alabastervlog wrote:
             | I'll still bust this out if it's some quick page that's not
             | going to last long (like some kind of "service down for
             | maintenance" page that's only going to be visible for a few
             | minutes, or something)
             | 
             | It's "bad" but you know what? It fucking works, it's
             | concise, and I can remember it no matter how long I go
             | between writing HTML/CSS.
             | 
             | Hell I wouldn't be surprised if the paths it takes through
             | a typical browser engine also makes it burn 5% or fewer as
             | many cycles as CSS centering methods.
        
           | nocman wrote:
           | I'm not sure if you are being serious about not understanding
           | "the whole centering a div meme". Your example handles a
           | trivial case, but does not address the whole of the problem.
           | 
           | As others have pointed out, vertical centering is often the
           | problem being discussed (although difficulties with
           | horizontal centering do happen). Anyone I know that has
           | written any non-trivial web application has run into the
           | situation where they spent _way_ more time than they thought
           | they should have to getting some element in a web application
           | centered on the page the way they wanted it to be.
           | 
           | This article is a good example of the complexity, I think:
           | 
           | https://css-tricks.com/centering-css-complete-guide/
           | 
           | The author makes a decision tree, which illustrates the
           | complexity fairly well, and then there's a conversation in
           | the comments between the author and a reader about whether
           | parts of the decision tree are correct.
           | 
           | CSS is extremely complicated. It's easy to get lost in the
           | complexity, and it can be very frustrating when you know how
           | you want something to look, but can't quite figure out how to
           | get it to happen.
           | 
           | That's why the meme is so popular. _LOTS_ of people who deal
           | with CSS can relate.
        
         | neepi wrote:
         | AWS free tier. S3+cloudfront has cost me $0.00 for the last
         | year. This is incidentally the best price.
         | 
         | My (single page) personal site is HTML+CSS (no JS) based on a
         | template generated by ChatGPT because I don't give a crap.
         | Trying to make something that works on a mobile device and
         | desktop is beyond my meagre skills. This worked fine.
        
           | bradly wrote:
           | >AWS free tier. S3+cloudfront has cost me $0.00 for the last
           | year. This is incidentally the best price.
           | 
           | I haven't tried this setup, but I'm using Cloudflare to serve
           | my static sites for $0.00 as well. My mini rails apps I've
           | down to $6/month VPS that I'm happy enough with as well for
           | anything a bit spicy.
        
             | neepi wrote:
             | I would do that but I dislike Cloudflare because they
             | wanted by DNS as well. I keep my DNS / CDN separate. Too
             | many eggs in one basket otherwise.
        
         | lo_zamoyski wrote:
         | GitHub has free hosting.
        
           | reconnecting wrote:
           | GitHub has poor browsers backward compatibility. Considering
           | it's owned by Microsoft, we should probably start counting
           | the days until it ends up behind a login wall like LinkedIn.
        
         | dominiwe wrote:
         | I did the same: https://domi.work/
         | 
         | And it's also ugly :)
        
           | dguest wrote:
           | I love this:
           | 
           | - Most of it is CSS, which when removed still produces a
           | pretty functional website.
           | 
           | - Most of the CSS is just one (commented out) background
           | image
           | 
           | - There are about 5 lines of java script, which seem to just
           | exist to obfuscate your email.
        
             | dominiwe wrote:
             | Wow, I completely forgot about that image! Thank you for
             | reminding me (it is now gone).
             | 
             | It was an experiment a while back and it was inline in
             | order to keep it all in one file. Actually that made me
             | realize, my site is dynamic: Because I edit this one html
             | file live on the server to make changes, whoever loads my
             | website repeatedly while I'm doing that is going to see
             | changes live.
        
         | edu wrote:
         | What I'm doing for my site is similar, I just sprinkle 11ty on
         | top for the static generation, and then publish on netlify
         | pages.
        
         | immibis wrote:
         | If your budget isn't literally zero, avoid AWS and get a cheap
         | VPS from Digital Ocean, Linode, Vultr, OVH, or Hetzner Cloud,
         | IMO.
         | 
         | The problem with AWS is their extortionate egress fees which
         | are about 50-100 times the market price.
        
       | smetj wrote:
       | Static generation. Tables. End of story.
        
         | reconnecting wrote:
         | We made a static, table-based, zero-CSS website [1] for open-
         | source security platform, and the other day there were
         | complaints on hn that it's broken on mobiles. So be careful.
         | 
         | [1] https://www.tirreno.com/
        
       | inatreecrown2 wrote:
       | Inspiring for me to see this, I have yet to make my own website.
        
       | luckyandroid wrote:
       | Even with frameworks, I don't see any joy in making something
       | that just looks and feels the same as any other site. I
       | understand it from a business point of view, but if you're trying
       | to just showcase yourself or your work having flavor makes more
       | sense even if it's not the most optimal thing for SEO or
       | retention.
       | 
       | Really hate how modern website building sites moved towards
       | structured, samey sites. I miss the days of Geocities and
       | Freewebs, the unreadable text against cluttered background
       | images, the auto playing music, the trailing cursors, the
       | spinning skeletons in front of crappy looking flames.
        
       | jasir wrote:
       | The current one looks quite nice to me, of course that's
       | subjective :D The lighter lines on the home page are a bit harder
       | to read, but if you consider it as a canvas to explore (i.e.
       | click on random things) instead of an toc/index to find a
       | specific page from, it's fun and serves the purpose.
       | 
       | I liked the heading fonts on the pages, "Austin News" according
       | to Firefox. But then I looked it up for future use but it starts
       | at 350$, so a bit steep for me :D
       | 
       | I used to have https://zaeem.dev/eye/ as my homepage for years,
       | no text at all. Until I remade the site this year.
        
       | Arisaka1 wrote:
       | This article reminded of the days when building anything wasn't
       | driven by neither the fear of being judged or the need to impress
       | a future employer, but because I just felt like it.
       | 
       | I think there's a lack of kind of approach in general. There's a
       | time and place when you build because the end goal is your client
       | or boss, but it's ultimately the inner itch of experimentation
       | that shapes your skillset and taste.
        
         | susam wrote:
         | > This article reminded of the days when building anything
         | wasn't driven by neither the fear of being judged or the need
         | to impress a future employer, but because I just felt like it.
         | 
         | Those days are now! There are still plenty of us who create
         | websites and small projects purely for the fun of it. I still
         | maintain a personal wesite that began as a university dorm room
         | intranet portal, and I do it for myself. I have a blog with a
         | small audience, but I also have quirky, obscure pages that
         | exist purely for my own amusement. If someone else happens to
         | stumble upon them and enjoy them, that's just a bonus!
         | 
         | I know there are plenty of others who do the same. I often come
         | across such websites and projects right here on this forum!
         | 
         | The mainstream web these days is full of walled gardens and
         | loud and chaotic social media platforms, so this kind of
         | quirky, creative web might seem like a small fraction by
         | comparison. But it's still out there, and it's very much alive.
        
       | mcdonje wrote:
       | The pic of the ugly site looks like it's full of blog posts, but
       | this post is on a different site for some reason.
       | 
       | I would've rather been sent to the ugly site if it doesn't have
       | marketing cookies and a membership popup.
        
         | BlackLotus89 wrote:
         | If you look at the screencap you see a mail to
         | hello@taylor.town.
         | 
         | My first instinct was the same as yours so hf visiting
         | https://taylor.town/
         | 
         | Edit: after posting this the taylor.town site became much
         | slower - so maybe that's the hn hug of death gripping again
        
           | neogodless wrote:
           | And the original linked article actually links at the bottom
           | 
           | > Taylor Troesh is mayor of taylor.town, author of
           | scrapscript, and connoisseur of crap.
           | 
           | And on taylor.town is a link to the magazine article which
           | they contributed.
           | 
           | Each of the blog screenshots has a caption like this:
           | 
           | > taylor.town in 202x
        
           | ffsm8 wrote:
           | Clicking on the article on that site gets me back to the HN
           | link.
           | 
           | I guess that's just a landing page with links to articles he
           | wrote, but doesn't host himself? Strange.
           | 
           | And it really is ugly _right now_ with the spotted background
           | and slightly rotated links.
           | 
           | Is he aiming for the "I just discovered a new feature and so
           | need to use it" vibe? Like when someone makes a PowerPoint
           | presentation and now uses the completely over the top
           | transitions across slides?
           | 
           | But design is subjective, and if you're doing something in
           | your free time, you better enjoy it! So if he has fun making
           | that ugly thing, great ( * _ * )
        
             | nemomarx wrote:
             | the background looks a lot like an old geocities page to me
             | so I have to assume it's a fashion choice
        
           | handsclean wrote:
           | The fact that people can't see beauty in a thing like this
           | feels to me like people looking at a field of flowers and
           | calling it ugly for all the ways it doesn't look like Disney
           | Land.
        
         | IshKebab wrote:
         | Yeah presumably because the ugly site has an awful background
         | and poor font/colour choices that make it kind of hard to read.
         | E.g.
         | 
         | https://taylor.town/wealth-000
         | 
         | I made my website myself too and it isn't ugly. This guy's
         | website is ugly because he decided to make it ugly out of some
         | misguided sense of self-importance.
        
           | GingerMidas wrote:
           | Self-important - sure, the author says as much themselves.
           | 
           | But how is it misguided? OP is having fun on their personal
           | site. Where would you _guide_ them instead?
        
         | lynndotpy wrote:
         | Yeah, I thought this was one of those critiques of the
         | enshittified web.
         | 
         | I think this website is bad, but I also think it is very funny
         | to have:
         | 
         | (1) a banner about print editions (2) a cookie consent u (3) a
         | header 'Good Internet' peeking through the now-familiar modern
         | hallmarks of the bad internet, and (4) the first four words of
         | the headline, which is being eclipsed by the cookie popup (5)
         | Once you remove the cookie banner, there is now also a
         | persistent cookie settings button, and a persistent "+ Become a
         | Member" button.
         | 
         | taylor.town is a very good internet website by comparison
        
       | AndrewStephens wrote:
       | I am so into this philosophy. My web site is an expression of me
       | and no-one else. If someone tells me it looks ugly or non-
       | professional (I have heard both, although my site is not so weird
       | as this one) I can tell them that I like it that way.
       | 
       | We need more of this kind of non-conformity on the web - and in
       | general.
        
       | badgersnake wrote:
       | I have a personal site with a bootstrap and ScalaJS-react
       | frontend and I regret it massively. 'Old fashioned' server side
       | templating (e.g. JSP) would have been a way better choice.
        
         | esafak wrote:
         | How so, less work?
        
       | severusdd wrote:
       | Every polished template looks the same, but each handrolled site
       | is weird in its own way. I'll happily take wabi-sabi HTML for
       | personal projects over yet another Tailwind landing page!
        
       | xyst wrote:
       | Reminds me of a home I was interested in buying. Shades of grey,
       | everywhere. White marble counter tops, of course. Very sterile.
       | 
       | Nothing wrong with it. It's a choice. But does scream "millennial
       | aesthetic". Maybe that's what caused the vitriol that spurred
       | this blog post
        
       | nonethewiser wrote:
       | His website circa 2023 was not ugly. It was minamalist.
       | 
       | NOW its ugly.
       | 
       | Its funny because I initially agreed with him when I thought his
       | website was the same as the 2023 version. Which I didnt find
       | ugly. But now that I see it really is ugly I find myself with a
       | more negative disposition towards his message.
        
         | inanutshellus wrote:
         | His original design was clean, minimalist and... unremarkable.
         | 
         | Now it's an intentionally-jumbled chaos. Ugly or not, it's
         | remarkable. After all... we are busy remarking on it.
         | 
         | The new design has impracticalities / downsides, specifically
         | it's hard to visually locate a specific link if you leave and
         | came back, but... that's not something that matters to him.
         | 
         | He wants /unsettling/, /dischordant/, /interesting/, and more
         | importantly _/ MINE/_.
        
         | jjulius wrote:
         | >But now that I see it really is ugly I find myself with a more
         | negative disposition towards his message.
         | 
         | Why? The whole message is about finding joy in creating
         | whatever you want, something that is ostensibly _you_ , in a
         | way in which you find joy in creating it, regardless of what
         | other people think of the final product.
         | 
         | The fact that many people here find it ugly and off-putting
         | only makes the site, and the message in this piece, _more_
         | endearing to me. If you 're griping about the appearance, or
         | think that the message is lost because of the ugliness, you've
         | missed the point.
        
       | ChrisMarshallNY wrote:
       | I just use WordPress, with slightly-modified themes. I make sure
       | they load quickly, and work on phones.
       | 
       | Web sites aren't my specialty, or my goals. I just want somewhere
       | to post my ramblings.
        
       | jbd0 wrote:
       | It's ugly because an "accept cookies" pop-up obscures half of the
       | page.
        
         | nemomarx wrote:
         | that's on the blogging site - the actual Taylor.town doesn't
         | have that.
         | 
         | I'm not sure why the author hosts their blog posts on this
         | platform and not their own website though
        
           | bru wrote:
           | Just this one article, as part of the magazine. Most are
           | directly on his website.
        
         | coldpie wrote:
         | Open up your uBlock Origin settings and enable the Cookie
         | Notices list. If you're forced to use a shit-tier phone web
         | browser like Chrome or Safari, you can also use the Kill Sticky
         | bookmarklet to clean up most of this crap[1].
         | 
         | If you are a web dev reading this and you've implemented a
         | cookie popup on a website, please do the world a favor and find
         | a different industry to work in.
         | 
         | [1] https://www.smokingonabike.com/2024/01/20/take-back-your-
         | web...
        
         | whatnow37373 wrote:
         | At this point I will intentionally include a cookie banner even
         | if my sites doesn't need it. It exudes this ... je ne sais
         | quoi.
        
         | aendruk wrote:
         | Yeah literally two thirds of this is adversarial.
         | https://0x0.st/83AB.png I reflexively noped out.
        
       | smjburton wrote:
       | Great article OP. This is exactly what made the "old web" so
       | great: there were no defined standards so people were compelled
       | to experiment. It was a little more chaotic, but it felt more
       | rewarding when you came across a cool website with a unique
       | design. The modern web on the other hand is very structured and
       | formulaic, served mostly through the same templates and
       | frameworks. Instead of being a place to explore, it's largely
       | become a place to consume content in a predictable fashion.
        
       | yeeyang wrote:
       | lol,yes
        
       | sph wrote:
       | It was good and minimal before, now it's all form and no function
       | (no dates, no ordering of posts).
       | 
       | Honestly, unremarkable post for an unremarkable idea. Smells like
       | a PR push to publicize the author's website more than anything.
       | Sure it's your website, you can do anything you want, but that is
       | hardly a ground-breaking concept, is it?
       | 
       | (The posted website has been created 2 days ago, and already has
       | 5 posts created all on the same day, asking for paid membership,
       | hoping to trend on HN. s/good/dead/internetmagazine.com)
        
       | Eleuthero wrote:
       | Aesthetic and trends are part of it, I think it looks purely
        
       | mehdix wrote:
       | > It's an itch - a feeling that something is really important,
       | and you need to do something about it, and nobody else can
       | possibly do it except you.
       | 
       | Might be difficult to believe, but I strongly believe there are
       | things that no one else on this planet would do except one of us.
        
       | guywithahat wrote:
       | It is a bit of a shame he's changed the website in-between
       | getting the email and this being posted on HN, I would have liked
       | to see the original CSS rotate and non-JS scrolljacking website.
        
         | justusthane wrote:
         | It hasn't changed. The linked page is an article _about_ his
         | website posted on a different site. Here is the site he 's
         | talking about: https://taylor.town/
        
       | ayaros wrote:
       | Hey, my site is handcrafted too. But ugly? Speak for yourselves,
       | but I've tried to make mine beautiful. Handcrafted doesn't _have_
       | to mean ugly...
       | 
       | But of course, it's at the point where it's grown into something
       | unwieldy. I feel like it's overdue for a redesign/rewrite. Just
       | gotta figure out a clever UI design that works on desktop _and_
       | mobile. Not only that, but it also needs to work without any JS,
       | because I don 't want my site to be nonfunctional without JS...
        
       | rchaud wrote:
       | There's 'ugly yet interesting' and then there's 'ugly and
       | boring'. This is the latter I'm afraid.
       | 
       | At its core, the homepage is still showing the output of a CMS
       | looping through a folder of markdown files (probably) and
       | displaying the title wrapped in a hyperlink. There appears to be
       | zero information architecture - no visually distinct categories,
       | no icons, images or dates, so everything is equally weighted,
       | just in a slightly "wacky" format.
       | 
       | Most dev blogs get their traffic from something showing up on
       | organic search, so the site homepage doesn't really matter,
       | unless the dev actively wants to make it interesting, and
       | encourage exploration. Despite the attempt at breaking that mold,
       | this website feels much the same as those ones using a boring
       | default Ghost template.
        
         | jjulius wrote:
         | I feel like you've missed the point of the author's piece.
        
           | rchaud wrote:
           | I don't think I did. The homepage is the only thing that's
           | unique about the design. Had you arrived on any page besides
           | that, you would think this is a bog-standard developer's
           | blogsite, one skinny column amid a sea of white space.
           | 
           | It's possible to have an ugly site that's still easily
           | navigable and visually interesting, even if the author is the
           | only user.
        
             | jjulius wrote:
             | Respectfully, to the author's point, none of that matters
             | and neither does anything in your previous post. The author
             | likes it, and has fun creating it and enjoys molding and
             | re-shaping it to their own changing desires over the years.
             | That's what they find important to them, not anything that
             | you've mentioned. As the author writes...
             | 
             | >Somebody with good taste could've made my website, but
             | then it wouldn't be mine.
             | 
             | >To bake bread, many feel compelled to grow wheat, mine
             | salt, culture yeast, etc. Not me. My puerile palate yearns
             | for buckets of Olive Garden breadsticks.
             | 
             | >That's okay. Your "mine" is not my "mine."
             | 
             | ... and...
             | 
             | >Soon it will become something else entirely. Because it's
             | my website and I'm perpetually becoming somebody else.
             | 
             | >You'll change too. Your passions and values will
             | pollinate; your ugly thing - whatever it is - will come
             | alive again and again.
             | 
             | They've created something that is authentically "them", in
             | a way that is authentically "them". And they love that. Not
             | having images, or icons, or categories, or being easily
             | navigable, or having a blog post section that looks "bog-
             | standard" to you or anybody else are all completely
             | irrelevant.
             | 
             | Hell yes, more power to them, I say.
        
         | ninininino wrote:
         | No need to be afraid, the point is the author isn't creating it
         | to please an audience. They are creating it to please themself.
         | So your opinion isn't relevant to the author or this linked
         | written piece.
        
       | nooooooooo_ wrote:
       | Honestly, I don't really understand the reasoning here. While the
       | author's website doesn't look bad to me, creating and maintaining
       | your own site doesn't mean it cannot also look "good". Sure,
       | "good taste" is subjective, but most of us probably use the
       | internet daily and are exposed to countless designs, and
       | eventually develop at least a general sense of what constitutes
       | good UI/UX and what doesn't. CSS can be awfully unintuitive, but
       | if you're capable of building and styling a website, you're
       | certainly capable of making it look nice. Saying "it looks bad to
       | others because I made it myself" sounds like some kind of self-
       | flagellation.
        
       | susam wrote:
       | I made my website [1] totally from scratch too! Using 100%
       | handcrafted HTML and CSS and a little bit of Common Lisp.
       | Hopefully it is not too ugly!
       | 
       | Like some of the other comments here, I don't use Hugo, Jekyll,
       | Pelican, etc. either! I know they are solid tools and they serve
       | many people well. But I haven't found them useful for my own
       | needs. I prefer not to subject my website to the constraints of a
       | large and complex framework when I can write my own that is
       | smaller, simpler, and fully under my control.
       | 
       | I have a small Common Lisp (CL) program to automate a few things
       | like applying consistent layout to all pages, generating RSS
       | feeds, creating tag list pages, etc. But otherwise, all content
       | on my site, including all of the HTML and CSS, is 100%
       | handcrafted. Perhaps the only exception is KaTeX, because
       | handcrafting a parser and renderer for a subset of LaTeX is not a
       | problem I want to take on in order to maintain my website.
       | 
       | I've put together a little colophon page [2] in case anyone wants
       | to read more about it.
       | 
       | Some people rightfully worry that maintaining your own program
       | like this might become a major burden, potentially taking more
       | time than actually publishing articles on your website. At least
       | for me, that hasn't been the case. The CL program has become
       | quite stable. Its commit history [1] shows that I don't tinker
       | with it too often these days. I certainly have more lines of
       | published content than I do code in the program. The CL program
       | is about 1000 lines long but I have about 55000 lines of content.
       | 
       | [1] https://susam.net/
       | 
       | [2] https://susam.net/colophon.html
       | 
       | [3] https://github.com/susam/susam.net/commits/main/site.lisp
        
       | hackerbeat wrote:
       | New website gives me headaches. The one before was much better.
        
         | hackerbeat wrote:
         | PS: Just use Bear Blog everyone.
        
       | einpoklum wrote:
       | Well, if your website content is not very static, your website
       | will almost without fail not be "made by you", but made by some
       | kind of site generator. And while _that_ could be made by you
       | (which seems to be the case for Taylor Town), I would suspect
       | that, these days, it's possible to factor out enough "made by me"
       | aspects of a site, and use a generic/non-bespoke static site
       | generation mechanism.
       | 
       | Anyway, some people write their own HTML+CSS, some people build
       | their own table, other people build their own car. I usually
       | can't decide which kind of DIY I like best :-\
        
       | indigodaddy wrote:
       | Barry Kauler's website uses a CMS that's a static generator using
       | SeaMonkey as the wysiwyg component:
       | 
       | https://bkhome.org/shellcms/
        
       | hinkley wrote:
       | I lived in a garden neighborhood for a time. I did a lot of work
       | on our place and my partner and friends would praise me but all I
       | could see was the weeds or the poor pruning job done by the
       | previous owners.
       | 
       | There was a retired lady three blocks away who had by far the
       | best garden in a half mile radius. It was amazing.
       | 
       | I lived there almost four years before I started noticing her
       | weeds, her mistakes.
       | 
       | In a lot of things we can see other people's flaws but miss our
       | own. But when we make something, that situation seems to be
       | reversed. What we make isn't that special, and everyone else's
       | creations are so much better.
        
       | KronisLV wrote:
       | Doesn't seem like the thing with the best usability for me (how
       | my eyes scan information, in that regard the old site would be
       | better), but it does seem aesthetically different and kinda cool.
       | Plus, good job on not putting a whole bunch of JS into the site
       | and letting it actually _perform_ well without making my CPU sad.
       | 
       | That said, https://taylor.town/android-chrome-512x512.png is
       | about 225 KB and probably doesn't need to be quite that big. The
       | first optimizer I found online turned it into a 55 KB image.
       | There, this time I'm the nitpicky nerd, bwah.
       | 
       | Not to miss the point though: it's cool that people are making
       | things that are different!
        
       | naet wrote:
       | My website is pretty because I made it. Or at least it is to my
       | tastes, I'm sure someone else would tell me otherwise.
       | 
       | The author of this article's site is taylor.town, not the site
       | the article was posted on. For what it's worth taylor town looks
       | nice enough to me. Actually a lot nicer than the
       | goodinternetmagazine site hosting this article...
        
       | doubleorseven wrote:
       | I remember when 'Mr. Morale & the Big Steppers' by Kendrik Lamar
       | was out on 05/22 and I was thinking to my self, OMG it's only May
       | and the best album of the year is out.
       | 
       | The words I just read takes me back to that same feeling. Thank
       | you for that.
        
       | nluken wrote:
       | Might go against the grain here but I actually quite like the
       | website, as minimal as the new one is. I don't want to oversell
       | it, since it's not really super "out there", but the author put
       | some nice humanist touches there like the hand drawn mouse that
       | lights up when you hover over a link.
       | 
       | Could use some color, but it serves its purpose and I don't find
       | it sacrifices readability as much as some others in this thread
       | are claiming.
        
       | jurgenaut23 wrote:
       | That's also the very reason why it is an absolute madness to give
       | up programming because AI is (supposedly) capable of doing it on
       | your behalf.
       | 
       | We invented the car, the motorbike and the jetpack, yet people
       | still hike and ride bikes. It would be dumb to stop doing things
       | that you like just because one can do it better with a machine.
        
       | wpollock wrote:
       | You don't know ugly. Your site is fine!
       | 
       | I wrote my website by hand in Notepad (and vi) in the 1990s. In
       | the late 1990s, I rewrote it to use CSS. I tried to use a dark
       | background (research suggested that was easier on the eyes, and
       | it saved power), I tried to pick properly contrasting colors.
       | This was the result: <https://wpollock.com/>.
       | 
       | I used this site for 30 years, and never once received a
       | compliment on its design. Some of us have no artistic sense, I
       | guess.
        
         | dgellow wrote:
         | For what it's worth, I find it instantly familiar and
         | comforting! Here is your first compliment :)
        
       | dgellow wrote:
       | I genuinely find it beautiful
        
       | mrinterweb wrote:
       | The spirit of this reminds me back to earlier days of the
       | internet. I know a lot of people bemoaned Flash sites for weird
       | navigation, and other issues. Not saying the Flash criticism
       | wasn't warranted, but I did appreciate the creativity some people
       | put into making their site unique. Too much of the internet feel
       | homogeneous now, and with AI generated content, that is only
       | going to get worse. I appreciate the portions of the internet
       | that don't want to conform.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2025-05-29 23:00 UTC)