# Website overhaul \[should drop outdated look\] **URL:** \ **Category:** Feature Proposal\ **Tags:** documentation, art, user-interface\ **Created:** [May 5, 2026, 10:52am UTC](https://forum.delta.chat/t/website-overhaul-should-drop-outdated-look/5174 "2026-05-05T10:52:52Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 16\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![mray](https://forum.delta.chat/user_avatar/forum.delta.chat/mray/32/10_2.png) [@mray](https://forum.delta.chat/u/mray)\ **Post date:** [September 16, 2026, 1:12pm UTC](https://forum.delta.chat/t/website-overhaul-should-drop-outdated-look/5174/22 "2026-09-16T13:12:50Z")
Damn, you totally got me there. Designers aligning with bloat do exist. I’m a designer. So I came here to propose bigger files and slower performance – design related differences would **of course** be only incidental. What a warm and welcoming attitude! 😍 Maybe I could spend time distancing myself from that stereotype to every non-designer in every thread, in every forum in every project all the time. But I’d rather spend it on blowing up file sizes and slowing down websites. ---
**Author:** ![ploum](https://forum.delta.chat/user_avatar/forum.delta.chat/ploum/32/3655_2.png) [@ploum](https://forum.delta.chat/u/ploum)\ **Post date:** [September 16, 2026, 2:14pm UTC](https://forum.delta.chat/t/website-overhaul-should-drop-outdated-look/5174/23 "2026-09-16T14:14:19Z")
What @bleb is trying to say is that, yeah, basically marketer and designer have broken the web and people like us don’t trust them at all, by default. So, as you come as a designer, you have to gain trust. This could be done by describing objectives problem with current website (and, yeah, it’s hard because design is often subjective) But, as you point out, this is informal discussion and not a real decision process. In the end, the only real decision is done by the person with commit access to the website repository. Welcome to the Free Software community 😉 ---
**Author:** ![mray](https://forum.delta.chat/user_avatar/forum.delta.chat/mray/32/10_2.png) [@mray](https://forum.delta.chat/u/mray)\ **Post date:** [September 16, 2026, 5:17pm UTC](https://forum.delta.chat/t/website-overhaul-should-drop-outdated-look/5174/24 "2026-09-16T17:17:24Z")
😶 WOW. It is raining hot takes right here: “Designers broke the web.” “Designers are not to be trusted by default.” Are you even real? Of course! In order to rectify the **unspeakable atrocities** my people have committed we all have to accept collective punishment and first gain trust, among them enlightened people that are not blinded by the misleading distractions of the modern day, like we the clueless eyecandy-addicts are. For we need to understand: non-designers are way better than any average designer (easily), and also everything was better in 1992. Building communities and foster open collaboration could be so much easier, but your mindset prevails. I’m aware. I have experience. I’m not new to the Free Software community at all. ---
**Author:** ![bleb](https://forum.delta.chat/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/b/c77e96/32.png) [@bleb](https://forum.delta.chat/u/bleb)\ **Post date:** [September 16, 2026, 9:45pm UTC](https://forum.delta.chat/t/website-overhaul-should-drop-outdated-look/5174/25 "2026-09-16T21:45:03Z")
designers and engineers broke the web together, in the pursuit of professional success under a mandate to maximize shareholder value. perhaps designers get an unfair share of the blame because their decisions are most visible to the user, and I can imagine it gets tiresome to be lumped in with designers with whom you disagree. I don’t know what punishments ploum would propose for merely identifying oneself as a designer, but I have enough inner light remaining to withhold prejudice. what troubles me is that you seem to want more than equal treatment: > [@mray](#): > > I’d be here to listen and be open to what the project needs, maybe steer and help to find out – but not to pretend to care about every opinion of any person posting anything, accepting that my voice is just as valid as any other. Because if that is the case I’m out. Sounds pretentious, I know - but if I’d be OK with that, everybody is a designer, and therefore nobody. ideally, expertise can be shared by explaining how it applies in a given situation. if a designer has better reasons for a certain choice than mere personal preference, those reasons can be explained and others can be persuaded to defer to that objective reasoning rather than squabble over subjective preferences. experts in any domain can be distinguished by the content of their contributions, rather than demanding deference on the basis of their status as an expert. ---
**Author:** ![mray](https://forum.delta.chat/user_avatar/forum.delta.chat/mray/32/10_2.png) [@mray](https://forum.delta.chat/u/mray)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2026, 3:34pm UTC](https://forum.delta.chat/t/website-overhaul-should-drop-outdated-look/5174/26 "2026-09-17T15:34:57Z")
After what you said it is nice to hear you suddenly withhold prejudice, _for now_. I’m seeking constructive exchange among peers, and if you frame that as “more than equal” I’m fine with that. Yes! I’m not interested in having to persuade every single body in order to make progress towards consensus. Especially since design hardly is ever “right” or “wrong” regardless of your expertise or perspective. The more important it is to have experience and expertise to face an interesting discussion. > [@bleb](#): > > ideally, expertise can be shared by explaining how it applies in a given situation. if a designer has better reasons for a certain choice than mere personal preference, those reasons can be explained and others can be persuaded to defer to that objective reasoning rather than squabble over subjective preferences. You are right to point out that experts should be able to break down their reasoning to make it understandable for everybody. That’s not always easy, but certainly an important skill. That does not mean experts have to convince everybody, though. > [@bleb](#): > > experts in any domain can be distinguished by the content of their contributions, rather than demanding deference on the basis of their status as an expert. I think that is correct, too. Talk is easy, show! But are you confident enough in your own design contributions to make that point? Oh, no …wait. Right, that’s not important anyway. On top of that being a designer is more of a liability than a benefit here. The irony to have this kind of silly back and forth – even absent of any concrete proposal at hand! – is just mind-boggling to me. ---
**Author:** ![SWEETGOOD](https://forum.delta.chat/user_avatar/forum.delta.chat/sweetgood/32/3217_2.png) [@SWEETGOOD](https://forum.delta.chat/u/SWEETGOOD)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2026, 4:10pm UTC](https://forum.delta.chat/t/website-overhaul-should-drop-outdated-look/5174/27 "2026-09-17T16:10:03Z")
Feels for me like this gets a more heated discussion with every post 😅 What about focussing on the topic instead? I try to sum up with my own words: There has been a wish to overhaul the website, see initial posting and also a [call for naming the issues precisely](https://support.delta.chat/t/website-overhaul-should-drop-outdated-look/5174/2). The discussion later showed that there seems to be no (formal) process to vote/get consensus on design decisions yet and there are people with “permissions” who can push changes if they want to. And it was clear that what makes a design “good” is highly subjective and can become an emotionally heated discussion in no time. My question to @bleb regarding the “stage” of the project has not been answered yet, too. This would have brought us to a discussion about bringing up kind of formal processes to allow easy participation for everyone. I personally feel that the current way website changes are being pushed is not as transparent and participative as it should be. Maybe we clarify first **if there’s an interest in improving things like the overall process at all**? Because we could just stop moving on with the discussion if devs and “people with permissions” are fine with the current state and don’t see a need to change anything. What do you think? ---
**Author:** ![bleb](https://forum.delta.chat/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/b/c77e96/32.png) [@bleb](https://forum.delta.chat/u/bleb)\ **Post date:** [September 18, 2026, 6:30pm UTC](https://forum.delta.chat/t/website-overhaul-should-drop-outdated-look/5174/28 "2026-09-18T18:30:42Z")
I didn’t realize I had evaded your question. No, I am not sure that the project is still in “alpha” and I’m in no position to say at what stage it would make sense to have more formal decision making procedures. Is there precedent in other projects for the type of participatory process you would like to see in Delta Chat? An obvious difficulty I see is how do you decide who gets formal participation rights? For example if there is voting, how do you prevent someone from making a bunch of accounts to multiply their voting power? Rather than establishing formal procedures, could your concerns be addressed within the informal structures that already exist, e.g. through more transparency and community engagement from those with commit access before making changes to the website? ---
**Author:** ![SWEETGOOD](https://forum.delta.chat/user_avatar/forum.delta.chat/sweetgood/32/3217_2.png) [@SWEETGOOD](https://forum.delta.chat/u/SWEETGOOD)\ **Post date:** [September 22, 2026, 9:23am UTC](https://forum.delta.chat/t/website-overhaul-should-drop-outdated-look/5174/29 "2026-09-22T09:23:41Z")
> Is there precedent in other projects for the type of participatory process you would like to see in Delta Chat? Good question. Currently I don’t know of such a project unfortunately. But I will add it here as soon as I stumble across it. > An obvious difficulty I see is how do you decide who gets formal participation rights? For example if there is voting, how do you prevent someone from making a bunch of accounts to multiply their voting power? I don’t think we need a system like we have at democratic elections where everyone is “authenticated” by receiving a letter or something like that. A bunch of accounts which multiply voting power is a problem which can be identified / prevented easily on a technical level. Also a voting is no decision so if there is the impression that there has been manipulation one could decide how to deal with that. At the end devs have to realize it so it depends on them as a last resort. I was thinking about tools like UserVoice to allow people to participate in a clear and transparent manner. An Open Source alternative would be [quackback](https://github.com/QuackbackIO/quackback), [ClearFlask](https://github.com/clearflask/clearflask), [Fider](https://github.com/getfider/fider) (Attention, AI seems to be used to develop these) or the old but usable [PHPBack](https://www.phpback.org/). With such tools people are able to vote on features / changes and discuss them. I know this is being done partly in this forum already [Feature requests section] but **a forum is different from a voting platform**. Also because you have no clear voting mechanism here. Flagging a post with a heart is some kind of indicator but as there are multiple posts and also multiple threads about the same topic the voting gets diluted and imprecise. Discussion is nice but at the end we need decisions and from my perspective this would help getting a better overview of what users need/want and “prioritize” things based on demand. > Rather than establishing formal procedures, could your concerns be addressed within the informal structures that already exist, e.g. through more transparency and community engagement from those with commit access before making changes to the website? Indeed. **I think transparency is king. Always.** So spread the word about even small things you are doing to keep people involved and show that there is steady progress. A very good example for how this works are the release notes of the recently forked mailclient [Tachyon](https://github.com/kimusan/Tachyon/releases). There’s no need to describe everything in detail like he does (even if I personally like it). But currently I don’t know of any way to stay up to date with what happens behind the scenes in the Delta Chat world. And with all due respect – as a multiplicator I don’t want to study commit messages to stay up to date or being notified of every new forum topic 😅 ---
**Author:** ![Low](https://forum.delta.chat/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/l/ecae2f/32.png) [@Low](https://forum.delta.chat/u/Low)\ **Post date:** [October 2, 2026, 3:40pm UTC](https://forum.delta.chat/t/website-overhaul-should-drop-outdated-look/5174/30 "2026-10-02T15:40:24Z")
> [@adbenitez](#): > > you are even a designer yet only bring stuff in a vague meta-level without bringing concrete suggestions As I said before, some random things like “increase padding here, add left margin there” does literally nothing. This project needs someone that actually owns the entire design language so it all coheres together and looks intentional. In other words, this project needs a designer that dictates vague meta-level things, yes. But there is no one that can approve a new design or even install a new design_er_. I’ve been told the project is a cathedral, not a bazaar. But this issue highlights that it is _neither_. ---
**Author:** ![ploum](https://forum.delta.chat/user_avatar/forum.delta.chat/ploum/32/3655_2.png) [@ploum](https://forum.delta.chat/u/ploum)\ **Post date:** [October 3, 2026, 11:08pm UTC](https://forum.delta.chat/t/website-overhaul-should-drop-outdated-look/5174/31 "2026-10-03T23:08:53Z")
> [@Low](#): > > But there is no one that can approve a new design or even install a new design_er_. I’ve been told the project is a cathedral, not a bazaar. But this issue highlights that it is _neither_. The wesite is open source so anybody could contribute: > **[GitHub - deltachat/deltachat-pages: Delta Chat Website](https://github.com/deltachat/deltachat-pages)** > > Delta Chat Website One could even fork it to make a more-in-dept proposal, doing wild changes or even posting mockups. Then, the more you contribute, the more you are trusted up to the point people give you the keys of the whole website because you are a key contributor to the project. Because you are still there even if half of your proposals were rejected. Because you listen to what the team wants instead of expecting the team to listen from you. That’s how every open source project work. That’s also why it is so hard to work with designers from the industry. Most of them are use to do mockups, get an agreement stamp for managers then get the devel team implement their mockups. That’s not how open source works and Delta Chat is, for me, working exactly as the bazaar I expected to find. ---
**Author:** ![mray](https://forum.delta.chat/user_avatar/forum.delta.chat/mray/32/10_2.png) [@mray](https://forum.delta.chat/u/mray)\ **Post date:** [October 4, 2026, 12:34am UTC](https://forum.delta.chat/t/website-overhaul-should-drop-outdated-look/5174/32 "2026-10-04T00:34:41Z")
> [@ploum](#): > > One could even fork it to make a more-in-dept proposal, 😲 That is LITERALLY not contributing. It is the complete opposite of joining efforts to reach a common goal together and means: “Let’s better go separate ways”. This is comedy gold: A proposal to “Just go and make your own damn website.” because a free software license allows me to build upon the existing material!!! _(who cares about trademark anyway)_ 🤣 👍 _\< sarcasm \> Thank you! Pointing out I can go and grab this piece of a 90s website and… update it for myself to look at. Why didn’t I think about that earlier? I don’t even have to ask anybody for permission, don’t have to care about anybody, don’t have to communicate, meet any-bodies needs or help build anything for anybody other than me. All I care about is my great taste in round edges and popping drop shadows. I can finally create that 240MB website in flash+javascript bloat, with lots and lots of unnecessary eye-candy, single-handedly destroying the entire web (as I usually like to do). \< /sarcasm\>_ This idea is so ridiculous, I don’t even bother to take it for real – or even address the ongoing **offending** generalizations and that condescending, clueless lecture of how “open source works”. ---
**Author:** ![bleb](https://forum.delta.chat/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/b/c77e96/32.png) [@bleb](https://forum.delta.chat/u/bleb)\ **Post date:** [October 5, 2026, 12:50am UTC](https://forum.delta.chat/t/website-overhaul-should-drop-outdated-look/5174/33 "2026-10-05T00:50:33Z")
On platforms like GitHub, forking a repository is part of the normal workflow for contributors who don’t have commit access. You fork the repository, make a branch in your fork, push changes to that branch, then make a request for the main repository to pull the changes from the branch in your fork (hence “pull request”). Convoluted, I know. ---
**Author:** ![mray](https://forum.delta.chat/user_avatar/forum.delta.chat/mray/32/10_2.png) [@mray](https://forum.delta.chat/u/mray)\ **Post date:** [October 5, 2026, 12:48pm UTC](https://forum.delta.chat/t/website-overhaul-should-drop-outdated-look/5174/34 "2026-10-05T12:48:37Z")
> [@bleb](#): > > On platforms like GitHub, forking a repository is part of the normal workflow I understand that it isn’t always obvious to see how code workflows differ from design workflows. So, thank you for trying to clarify, but I do know how git works. Typically there are things like useful coding guidelines to follow, merge request offering ways to discuss and dissect contributions on a per line basis, and commit access to the main branch is rather transparent. Unfortunately none of those useful features get even remotely addressed by whipping up a new website to then wait for feedback from random entitled people. Even if it was a git fork. Let us not beat a dead horse here, this issue is “resolved”. ---
**Author:** ![Low](https://forum.delta.chat/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/l/ecae2f/32.png) [@Low](https://forum.delta.chat/u/Low)\ **Post date:** [October 5, 2026, 3:06pm UTC](https://forum.delta.chat/t/website-overhaul-should-drop-outdated-look/5174/35 "2026-10-05T15:06:06Z")
> [@ploum](#): > > and Delta Chat is, for me, working exactly as the bazaar I expected to find. It’s supposed to be a Cathedral lol. The fact that you think it’s a Bazaar is the problem. ---
**Author:** ![bleb](https://forum.delta.chat/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/b/c77e96/32.png) [@bleb](https://forum.delta.chat/u/bleb)\ **Post date:** [October 6, 2026, 1:15pm UTC](https://forum.delta.chat/t/website-overhaul-should-drop-outdated-look/5174/36 "2026-10-06T13:15:03Z")
What gave you the impression that it’s supposed to be a cathedral? ---
**Author:** ![Low](https://forum.delta.chat/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/l/ecae2f/32.png) [@Low](https://forum.delta.chat/u/Low)\ **Post date:** [October 6, 2026, 6:27pm UTC](https://forum.delta.chat/t/website-overhaul-should-drop-outdated-look/5174/37 "2026-10-06T18:27:24Z")
> [@bleb](#): > > What gave you the impression that it’s supposed to be a cathedral? See here: > [@Small visual enhancements to make the desktop app less flat](https://support.delta.chat/t/small-visual-enhancements-to-make-the-desktop-app-less-flat/5475/23): > > I would like to refer you to the following article. What you seem to enjoy is bazaar-like development, while the developer team of Delta Chat prefer cathedral. There is nothing you can do about it other than sending over your CV to join the team so you would land inside the cathedral. [Previous page](https://forum.delta.chat/t/website-overhaul-should-drop-outdated-look/5174.md?page=1)