digg

Join DiggAbout

Donkeys and Elephants and Delegates,oh my!
Check out the most popular Elections 2008 content on Digg.

The Worst Designed Site on the Web - WTF!

havenworks.com — Truly awful looking website. After looking at it for 5 seconds, I wanted to throw up. Someone needs to hunt down the designer and giving him a good beating.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • amandaworld, on 03/16/2008, -7/+117Ohh my god WTF this is a classic, must send to everyone
    • jdh24, on 03/16/2008, -1/+69Sidescrolling = automatic worst site ever.
      • kevxross, on 03/16/2008, -2/+94Ha! That's actually quite impressive; this is the first website I've ever had to scroll sideways on a 1680x1050 resolution.
        • RedGreen1, on 03/16/2008, -1/+54I just stretched it out across both my 1680x1050 displays. No side scrolling. Maybe this is how were supposed to look at it. The designer was just future proofing it?
          • cam503, on 03/16/2008, -0/+14Perhaps... if their aim was to future proof it from working at all.
          • wbagdon, on 03/16/2008, -0/+21i was kind of disappointed it didn't link to myspace
          • tkotam, on 03/16/2008, -0/+3holy crap. this is like cnn, reddit, yahoo, google, myspace and aol all thrown in one. it's the multi-vitamins of websites. you get all your "nutrients" just through 1 website. i am deleting all my bookmarks and just make this site my homepage.. that's all i need!! :-)
          • theodenking, on 03/16/2008, -0/+2The man responsible:
            http://havenworks.com/web-design/
        • Bulletbillx, on 03/16/2008, -0/+12horizontal scrolling at 1920x1200. WTF @ this site.
      • Karmavs, on 03/16/2008, -4/+23Not necessarily: http://www.thehorizontalway.com/
        • diggduggjoe, on 03/16/2008, -0/+12Not a bad looking site compared to the one submitted. Too bad mice are designed for up down scrolling. If, only the IBM mouse with the stick was more popular, this site would be quite usable. I found it exciting to see a site offer a complete paradigm shift. Unfortunately, the momentum of modern website design is likely unstoppable.
        • badjoke, on 03/16/2008, -0/+4This page won't load for me, but it can't be much worse than hrodc.com.
      • Strikersgun, on 03/16/2008, -4/+1Horizontal scrolling at 1920x1440. WTF @ this site
        • RedS0x, on 03/16/2008, -1/+1You can't even copy and paste right...
      • Books, on 03/16/2008, -0/+3Man, we don't even need to list all the cliche reasons as to what makes bad web design. This website is just plain old ***** and hideous to look at.
      • avisotin, on 03/16/2008, -14/+7. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . _________
        . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ./ It’s a trap!
        . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . _,,,--~~~~~~~~--,_ . . . . ._________/
        . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ,-‘ : : : :::: :::: :: : : : : :º ‘-, . . /. . . . . . . . . .
        . . . . . . . . . . . . .,-‘ :: : : :::: :::: :::: :::: : : :o : ‘-, . . . . . . . . . .
        . . . . . . . . . . . ,-‘ :: ::: :: : : :: :::: :::: :: : : : : :O ‘-, . . . . . . . . .
        . . . . . . . . . .,-‘ : :: :: :: :: :: : : : : : , : : :º :::: :::: ::’; . . . . . . . .
        . . . . . . . . .,-‘ / / : :: :: :: :: : : :::: :::-, ;; ;; ;; ;; ;; ;; ; . . . . . . . .
        . . . . . . . . /,-‘,’ :: : : : : : : : : :: :: :: : ‘-, ;; ;; ;; ;; ;; ;;| . . . . . . .
        . . . . . . . /,’,-‘ :: :: :: :: :: :: :: : ::_,-~~,_’-, ;; ;; ;; ;; | . . . . . . .
        . . . . . _/ :,’ :/ :: :: :: : : :: :: _,-‘/ : ,-‘;’-‘’’’’~-, ;; ;; ;;,’ . . . . . . . .
        . . . ,-‘ / : : : : : : ,-‘’’ : : :,--‘’ :|| /,-‘-‘--‘’’__,’’’ ;; ;,-‘ . . . . . . . .
        . . . :/,, : : : _,-‘ --,,_ : : : ||/ /,-‘-‘x### :: ;;/ . . . . . . . . . .
        . . . . / /---‘’’’ : # : : : : : | | : (O##º : :/ /-‘’ . . . . . . . . . . .
        . . . . /,’____ : : ‘-# : , : : : : ‘-,___,-‘,-`-,, . . . . . . . . . . .
        . . . . ‘ ) : : : :’’’’--,,--,,,,,,¯ :: ::--,,_’’-,,’’’¯ :’- :’-, . . . . . . . . .
        . . . . .) : : : : : : ,, : ‘’’’~~~~’ :: :: :: :’’’’’¯ :: ,-‘ :,/ . . . . . . . . .
        . . . . .,/ /|| | :/ / : : : : : : : ,’-, :: :: :: :: ::,--‘’ :,-‘ . . . . . . . .
        . . . . .’| |/ ‘/ / :: :_--,, : , | )’; :: :: :: :,-‘’ : ,-‘ : : : , . . . . . . .
        . . . ./¯ :| | : |/ :: ::----, :/ :|/ :: :: ,-‘’ : :,-‘ : : : : : : ‘’-,,_ . . . .
        . . ..| : : :/ ‘’-(, :: :: :: ‘’’’’~,,,,,’’ :: ,-‘’ : :,-‘ : : : : : : : : :,-‘’’ . . . .
        . ,-‘ : : : | : : ‘’) : : :¯’’’’~-,: : ,--‘’’ : :,-‘’ : : : : : : : : : ,-‘ :¯’’’’’-,_ .
        ./ : : : : :’-, :: | :: :: :: _,,-‘’’’¯ : ,--‘’ : : : : : : : : : : : / : : : : : : :’’-,
        / : : : : : -, :¯’’’’’’’’’’’¯ : : _,,-~’’ : : : : : : : : : : : : : :| : : : : : : : : :
        : : : : : : :¯’’~~~~~~’’’ : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : | : : : : : : : : :
    • BlueSkyfish, on 03/16/2008, -0/+14Just as planned
      • travisMarc, on 03/16/2008, -0/+7funny thing is your absolutely right, it shouldn't count when they do it on purpose like this other one:
        http://www.miauk.com/
        • vikingboy, on 03/16/2008, -0/+6that site may cause epileptic fits... seriously
          at the least it'll make your eyes bleed.
        • tatltat, on 03/16/2008, -1/+4paper planes might be one of the coolest songs i have ever heard.. everyone should go listen to it.
        • kainnation, on 03/16/2008, -0/+1I wish you would have advised me to drop some blotter first. THANKS DUDE... THANKS!
    • fuzzmeister, on 03/16/2008, -27/+1To counteract this atrocity, I submit my favorite website design: http://37signals.com/

      Any other nominations?
      • RedGreen1, on 03/16/2008, -1/+10You could have at least spammed a decent website, not something with pages of lists of text.
        • fuzzmeister, on 03/16/2008, -4/+3You actually think I run 37signals? It's a pretty well-known company, I just like their simple design.
          • shawnz, on 03/16/2008, -0/+2the fact that you got that from his post when he said nothing like that implies that you do
      • bitterbug, on 03/16/2008, -1/+1smuggled.com
        Bring your epilepsy resistant glasses :P
      • Ribbed4U, on 03/16/2008, -0/+1That website is horrible.
    • kodek, on 03/16/2008, -0/+19Whoa! This is the ultimate portal for...stuff! Homepage'd
    • TRScheel, on 03/16/2008, -0/+10It is literally hundreds of tables... and updated recently which is worse. I want to know the thinking behind designing it like this.
      • yojiffyskippy, on 03/16/2008, -0/+3"thinking"? Obviously there was very little "thinking" involved in designing the site.
        • tbranch227, on 03/16/2008, -0/+1I disagree. This seems really intricate. Person definitely has some personality issues, right? ...but it was thought out. Just the process was faulty.
        • AlexanderBlue, on 03/16/2008, -0/+4I have to agree, at least from an esthetic standpoint - it is just so damn LOUD.

          But the next thought that I had was how much content they have on the site, and how it's all linked and categorized. If you can totally overlook the style, they have a LOT of content. Hell, pick the state you live in and click on it. Notice they have listings for local cities, TV Stations, etc. It's really odd to see a site with such a sucky design that has so much content that is so organized. Where the heck is all the content coming from anyway? Is this one guy in his home office who's obsessed with news, or is there a team of people gathering news? Are the articles pulled in dynamically, or is this somebody's labor of love?

          Simplify, put a pretty face on it, add some social networking crap (to act as glue ;-), and this could be something...
    • godofpumpkins, on 03/16/2008, -0/+26the dude who makes it is doing other sites, too!
      http://havenworks.com/web-design/

      and the genius is hermit: http://havenworks.com/hermit/
      • TheAmbushAhead, on 03/16/2008, -0/+15How could you possibly find those links on such a poorly designed site?!
        • donotronix, on 03/16/2008, -1/+3He didn't find the links, he knows Hermit personally.
      • iofthestorm, on 03/16/2008, -0/+2Love that blatant keyword spamming, as if robots are fooled by crappy SEO techniques like that anymore.
      • tbranch227, on 03/16/2008, -0/+1OMG this guy sucks. maybe these sites are just ancient, but WTF the recent updates....BARF
      • eliot2000, on 03/16/2008, -0/+2Brilliant designers use common, subtle themes throughout their oeuvre. Notice how in many of his other designed sites, including his own, he includes large font emoticons? They're like faces, but MADE OUT OF TEXT.
      • stalefries, on 03/16/2008, -1/+6The site's down, here's the archive.org mirror:
        http://web.archive.org/web/20061111104950/http://h ...
    • TimDigg, on 03/16/2008, -1/+3almost as bad as Staples.com
    • analbumcover, on 03/16/2008, -0/+22the web design world's version of a rickroll!
    • bowe, on 03/16/2008, -0/+16I was going to suggest that someone try to make a custom css as a challenge, but...looking at the source and all of those tables, that would be too cruel.
      • tbranch227, on 03/16/2008, -0/+6I think this is a possibility. Who's in?
      • Karmavs, on 03/16/2008, -0/+16* {
        display: none !important;
        }

        Much better.
      • Karmavs, on 03/16/2008, -0/+16I tried for real… It was scary.

        body *{
        text-align: left;
        background-color: #fff;
        border-style: none;
        color: #000;
        text-decoration: none;
        text-transform: none;
        list-style-type: decimal;
        overflow: hidden;
        font: normal normal normal 10px/1.5 Verdana, "Helvetica Neue", Arial, Helvetica, Geneva, sans-serif;
        margin: auto;
        padding: 0;
        }

        HTML > body::before {
        content: 'HAVENWORKS';
        display: block;
        margin-right: auto;
        margin-left: auto;
        width: 8em;
        font: bold 100px Rockwell, Georgia, "Times New Roman", Times, serif;
        }

        blockquote * {
        padding-bottom: 32px;
        }

        html {
        background-color: #e8e8e8;
        }

        html>body>table>tbody>tr>td {
        display: none;
        }

        :link, :visited {
        color: #003d7e;
        border-bottom: 1px dotted #5d8aba;
        font-size: 1.2em;
        }

        blockquote>font>b>a {
        font-size: 1.3em;
        font-weight: bold;
        }

        :link:hover {
        color: #007bff;
        border-bottom: 1px dotted #005aba;
        }

        body > table > tbody > tr > td > table > tbody > tr > td font {
        font-weight: bold;
        font-size: 2em;
        display: block;
        }

        html>body>table>tbody>tr>td>table>tbody>tr>td>center>table>tbody>tr>td>center {
        display: none;
        }

        body>* {
        width: 800px;
        height: auto;
        overflow: hidden;
        }

        img {
        display: none;
        }

        blockquote center {
        display: none;
        }
        • WZot, on 03/16/2008, -0/+7Wow...that's actually pretty good. Kudos to you!
    • GramarNatzi, on 03/16/2008, -1/+6I'm sure the site administrator just needs to restore the css stylesheet and all will be well.
      • stupidStan, on 03/16/2008, -10/+6yes, restore the Cascading StyleSheet Stylesheet...
        Why don't you check your Network Interface Card Card as well
        • pendrachken, on 03/16/2008, -1/+4I don't know about you, nut I hear "NIC card" a hell of a lot more often than just plain old "NIC"
          • stupidStan, on 03/16/2008, -4/+6I know... it annoys the hell out of me.
            Pardon me while I go to the ATM Machine.
          • specialK16, on 03/16/2008, -0/+4Can't be worse than hear people saying Raid Array
          • andre321, on 03/16/2008, -0/+4I can't use ATM Machines :( Forgotten my PIN number!
        • robdiggity, on 03/16/2008, -0/+4I'm pretty sure NIC means Network Interface Controller, so NIC card wouldn't be redundant.

          I'm pretty sure NIC means Network Interface Controller, so NIC card wouldn't be redundant.

          There, I built in some redundancy.
    • sERIALeATER, on 03/16/2008, -0/+3***** that page was almost 1mb
    • Dotcommer, on 03/16/2008, -0/+13The funny thing is... this guy is getting a ***** ton of page views right now. We're encouraging this horrible design....
      • TheOneTrueGod, on 03/16/2008, -0/+8Don't worry. The Digg-effect has caused it to be down right now. This might make the owner invest more money. But soon he will be forgotten again. And lose money over it.
      • raquo, on 03/16/2008, -0/+1Hey, it's no longer the most horrible website - there's now "account suspended - exceeded bandwidth" message. Digg's making web better! :)
    • xlar54, on 03/16/2008, -0/+17For only a dollar a day, you too can support an autistic web developer....
    • amg0927, on 03/16/2008, -9/+2Digg took another site down.
      Google Cache:
      http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache:TeMr6km1km0J: ...
    • parkermauney, on 03/16/2008, -0/+5Mirror?
    • stevene, on 03/16/2008, -0/+10Google Cache got it: http://72.14.253.104/search?q=cache:TeMr6km1km0J:w ...
    • mnocket, on 03/16/2008, -1/+6Must have been written by the same person who wrote the Digg Comments code.
    • jamesallen74, on 03/16/2008, -0/+2looks like an old set of legos i had when i was a kid
  • SheridanPassell, on 03/16/2008, -1/+99I like it. You guys could pick up a thing or two. Wait a minute, I feel sick.
  • bonsomme, on 03/16/2008, -3/+118I like how colorful and busy it is. There is plenty to occupy your eye.
    • TestamenTT, on 03/16/2008, -0/+7With no room for text...
    • satanswetnipple, on 03/16/2008, -1/+15They do that deliberately. they hope that Bush will visit their site one day, and when that day comes, they need a lot of moving things to keep him occupied for more than 5 seconds.
    • gmprunner, on 03/16/2008, -0/+19I just found a new homepage.
    • RyGuyX, on 03/16/2008, -0/+22My ADD is satisfied.
    • ThankTheCheese, on 03/16/2008, -0/+10I've had clients that ask me to make a website "look busy", as thought clutter and busyness is a design principle. The websites they use as an example for the look and feel they want look a lot like this one unfortunately :-/
    • Zindrix, on 03/16/2008, -0/+2My eyes are bleeding.
    • r3574r7, on 03/16/2008, -0/+2It just keeps going!!!
  • jggube, on 03/16/2008, -21/+7Oh That's Hawt.
  • hemnathacharya, on 03/16/2008, -21/+202One year old news.. popular one year ago... http://digg.com/tech_news/This_has_to_be_the_Most_ ...
    • psevium, on 03/16/2008, -7/+28Submitter just took it from reddit
    • LongShlong, on 03/16/2008, -0/+16Goes to show how easy it is to keep most of us amused... *sigh*
    • fuzzmeister, on 03/16/2008, -0/+9Always nice to remind people what _not_ to do every once in a while.
    • h4mx0r, on 03/16/2008, -0/+40it's on the very bottom of the page.... it says Nominated for Worst page by digg.com
      • bromac, on 03/16/2008, -0/+18I didn't know we had awards.
        • TRScheel, on 03/16/2008, -0/+10If we had that award it would definitely be nominated
        • jbhannah, on 03/16/2008, -0/+12I can totally see that though: The Diggies or some s**t like that. Categories include Jackass, Most Blogspam, and Worst Web Design.
    • mydigga, on 03/16/2008, -0/+6True, that is when they received these prestigious awards -
      !-! Nominated for Most Poorly Designed Website in the World by Digg.com
      and "El peor diseño del mundo" by elMundo.es
    • diggimator, on 03/16/2008, -0/+2How does the digg submission system work? If I tried submitting the exact same URL as a previous submission, do I get a warning?
      • Dalogi, on 03/16/2008, -2/+5I submitted the site to Digg assuming that if the exact same URL had been submitted before, it would definitely flag it up. But it didn't. Not sure how this one slipped through the net.
    • Samsong, on 03/16/2008, -0/+2I remember this from a year ago...
    • UnkelJethro, on 03/16/2008, -2/+0Welcome to digg. You have zero life. And you've just realized it now.
    • AustinGoodchild, on 03/16/2008, -1/+1I think after a year finds like these should be allowed to resurface. Personally speaking, of course.
    • smek2, on 03/16/2008, -0/+2One year old news? Well, of course it must be on the front page then. That's Digg for you.
    • zongamin, on 03/17/2008, -0/+1They even link to the original story on their front page. Daloqi is a ***** idiot.
  • NinjaPirateDude, on 03/16/2008, -4/+153DO NOT WANT!!
    • m0rtified, on 03/16/2008, -7/+1stupid cats stupid cats ccaattsatt tatsa ddd
    • Archer007, on 03/16/2008, -0/+1My eyes...
    • digichris, on 03/16/2008, -5/+2MOAR GTFOMOAR GTFOMOAR GTFOMOAR GTFOMOAR GTFOMOAR GTFOMOAR GTFOMOAR GTFOMOAR GTFOMOAR GTFOMOAR GTFOMOAR GTFOMOAR GTFOMOAR GTFOMOAR GTFOMOAR GTFOMOAR GTFOMOAR GTFOMOAR GTFOMOAR GTFOMOAR GTFOMOAR GTFOMOAR GTFOMOAR GTFOMOAR GTFOMOAR GTFOMOAR GTFOMOAR GTFOMOAR GTFOMOAR GTFOMOAR GTFOMOAR GTFOMOAR GTFOMOAR GTFOMOAR GTFOMOAR GTFOMOAR GTFOMOAR GTFOMOAR GTFOMOAR GTFOMOAR GTFOMOAR GTFOMOAR GTFOMOAR GTFOMOAR GTFOMOAR GTFOMOAR GTFOMOAR GTFOMOAR GTFOMOAR GTFOMOAR GTFO

      /b/ is that way ------->
  • wolphcry, on 03/16/2008, -5/+61That's the best Front Page design I've ever seen
    • mydigga, on 03/16/2008, -16/+5No, that was obviously created with somebody's .mac account.
    • kutateli, on 03/16/2008, -1/+75And it still loads faster than Digg
    • Awspire, on 03/16/2008, -0/+8Yes, I think they built it using the "Tetris Technique".
    • Zindrix, on 03/16/2008, -0/+15This one is much better http://www.dokimos.org/ajff/
      • boxd, on 03/16/2008, -0/+2what, no blink tag?
      • praisethelard, on 06/06/2008, -0/+3THE POWER OF CHRIST COMPELS ME!!!
      • feliks2, on 03/16/2008, -7/+3ahhhhhhhhh stupid christian supremasists trying to get non-believers to die of a seizure and/or fright and go to hell
      • str1fe, on 03/16/2008, -1/+7I like the IE-esque warning bar at the top
      • sexybobo, on 03/16/2008, -0/+1That website is bad on purpose.
        • theafroguy, on 03/16/2008, -0/+2I really, really hope you're right. "Down with the web 2.0 net police"
      • raniya, on 03/16/2008, -0/+1Omg...now I know how an acid trip feels like..
    • boxd, on 03/16/2008, -0/+9not Front Page, possibly worse:
      meta name="GENERATOR" content="Mozilla/4.8 [en] (Windows NT 5.0; U) [Netscape]"
      uhh, WhoTF codes in Netscape?
  • Strawgate, on 03/16/2008, -4/+77No one actually uses that site, the only reason why it exists is because people like you post about it every 5 minutes, and it brings page views to the website.
    • Condottieri, on 03/16/2008, -0/+20"!-! Nominated for Most Poorly Designed Website in the World by Digg.com
      and "El peor diseño del mundo" by elMundo.es"

      Thats at the bottom of the page.
      • TomFrost, on 03/16/2008, -2/+10Damn you're fast! I finally got down about half way, then my mouse wheel wore out.
        • Condottieri, on 03/16/2008, -1/+12You use your mouse wheel? I just dragged the scroll bar.
        • Viroz, on 03/17/2008, -0/+4My "end" button broke.
    • Aidje, on 03/16/2008, -1/+8But for that to be profitable, people would have to click the ads. I don't think anyone could find the ads even if they wanted to.
    • 1timeuser, on 03/16/2008, -0/+1whoa... thats genius!
  • praveenmarkandu, on 03/16/2008, -4/+12its not that bad..... at least a link was provided at the bottom of the page to snap back to the top
  • diggduggj, on 03/16/2008, -2/+23That literally made my eyes hurt.
    • TremorX, on 03/16/2008, -0/+17Bookmarking this for the next time someone says "I wish you could punch someone over the internet"
  • canthraxp, on 03/16/2008, -1/+103Holy crap, just the html is 905KB
  • GeekMadness, on 03/16/2008, -16/+6Definately done in FreeWebs.
    • ZachTorpy, on 03/16/2008, -1/+9You couldn't ***** a website up this bad with FreeWebs.
  • tdwester, on 03/16/2008, -2/+25I am blind!!!
    • gmprunner, on 03/16/2008, -0/+9I WISH I had been blind before I clicked.
  • MonsieurShak, on 03/16/2008, -5/+17What. The. *****.
  • bonyicecream, on 03/16/2008, -3/+33my eyes... they bleed!
  • Rhenthalin, on 03/16/2008, -2/+28Its like a time warp to the nineties!
  • hdmoncue, on 03/16/2008, -11/+46kinda looks like fox news.
    • EllimistX, on 03/16/2008, -4/+5I thought it was fox news at first...
    • VoodooPunk, on 03/16/2008, -1/+0It looks more like the DailyKos than Fox News. And of course even a cursory glance at the site will confirm that it was created by a liberal nut job.
  • scrotumbrau, on 03/16/2008, -2/+24"Site Design by Hermit" and he admits it!!! Ha!
    • thesonofdarwin, on 03/16/2008, -0/+6Not sure why you are being dugg down. I scrolled down the monstrous beast just to see if someone claimed responsibility for the abomination.
  • stonebone4, on 03/16/2008, -1/+15I think that just gave me an aneurysm or two.

    CTRL + U that! It takes like five seconds to load!
  • evilflames, on 03/16/2008, -1/+21If you loved that design, look at all of his other ones.
    http://havenworks.com/web-design/
    • woofers07, on 03/16/2008, -0/+28I am a web designer, and I'm seriously pissed that this guy is actually taking money from people to design sites, that is if design really means puking, ***** and pissing over an html document then mixing it all together.
      • tavisjohn, on 03/16/2008, -0/+3Just what I was thinking! How the HELL does he get paid for that!!!


        Wait, I think I know the answer... He is CHEAP! And some people will take cheap over usefull! (Morons should not be allowed to have MONEY!)
    • PeterODactyl, on 03/16/2008, -0/+10Andy Warhol lives again.
    • dondara, on 03/16/2008, -0/+10No *****. With a resume like that he could get a night shift job at Burger King if he was lucky. Thats the worst ***** I ever seen.
      But I thought the Digg story link was going to be myspace.
    • Chordinator, on 03/16/2008, -3/+4You see, this is what happens when we teach the internet to old people.
    • xbytes, on 03/16/2008, -0/+1Aspect ratio isn't one of his strong points :)
  • AzureRise, on 03/16/2008, -6/+21AAAAGH!?!? My eyes!!! My ***** eyes!!!
  • Dyner, on 03/16/2008, -4/+2It's like texture popping, but....more painful.
  • ghgh1313, on 03/16/2008, -2/+23it looks similar to a ***** myspace page
    • error792, on 03/16/2008, -1/+11It looks similar to a GOOD myspace page. The really bad ones are beyond terrifying...
    • cheekdog, on 03/16/2008, -0/+3yeah....only *****...
  • whataboutdave, on 03/16/2008, -2/+11Of all the "worst designed site" articles that have made it to Digg I think this takes the cake.
  • Scaryclouds, on 03/16/2008, -6/+41My eyes! The goggles do nothing!
    • medj, on 03/16/2008, -1/+7Thanks god for The Simpsons.
      • praisethelard, on 06/06/2008, -1/+1No, thank Matt Groening.
        • solid12345, on 03/16/2008, -0/+1More like, "thanks Al Jean", Groening is a hack who never writes episodes and barely comes to the office.
  • MarkTaiwan, on 03/16/2008, -4/+12wow, I'm.... back in the 90s again.
    • bob12321, on 03/16/2008, -0/+7This is my 3rd time visiting the 90s. I should never go back again.
  • linkin2, on 03/16/2008, -1/+178I think it looks great.
    this is infact web 3.0
    • tbranch227, on 03/16/2008, -0/+15OMG. I am quitting web design.
    • dannyminick, on 03/16/2008, -1/+2LMAO. yes, web 3.0 looks a little downgraded compared to 2.0
    • HueytheFreeman, on 03/16/2008, -0/+10What? Where did all my Web2.0 glossy shine and reflections go!
  • pjpark, on 03/16/2008, -2/+56Buried for lack of "Epileptic Seizure" warning. I broke a lamp!
  • chingy1788, on 03/16/2008, -14/+3*****
  • Matt1215, on 03/16/2008, -4/+2sweet jesus!
  • chingy1788, on 03/16/2008, -2/+11BLINK
    • MrRio, on 03/16/2008, -0/+1<blink reflection="on">Web 3.0</blink>
  • mooseontheloose, on 03/16/2008, -25/+38It's still better organized than Digg's comment system
    • ucdbunny, on 03/16/2008, -5/+15you must be correct...DUGG DOWN BIAATCH
  • vircity, on 03/16/2008, -2/+68archive.org looked at it and said "well, ***** that".
  • the3stars, on 03/16/2008, -9/+8holy *****, what a ***** site, looks almost as bad as yahoo
  • mrblue182, on 03/16/2008, -7/+101THE GOGGLES! THEY DO NOTHING!!!
    • Deadpixel1221, on 03/16/2008, -2/+15From Wikipedia: Goggles are part of a meme stemming from a quote from the Radioactive Man episode of The Simpsons where Rainier Wolfcastle is faced with a tidal wave of sulfuric acid while filming a movie, his only provided safety precaution a pair of rubber safety goggles intended to deflect small amounts of acid. When the scene goes horribly wrong, he is swept away, his suit and prop goggles dissolving, spurring him to yell, "My eyes! The goggles do nothing!" This line is commonly misquoted as "The goggles! They do nothing!"
      • LadyA, on 03/27/2008, -0/+1Besides, two people have already done it.
  • L4mb, on 03/16/2008, -2/+231998 would like its website back.
  • AsianChopsticks, on 03/16/2008, -0/+10Holy crap, the first page goes on for miles.
  • bicyclefence, on 03/16/2008, -0/+27That website pretty much sums up the definition of "*****".
  • ThinkIcouldburn, on 03/16/2008, -2/+142BREAK IT DIGG!!!!! BREAK IT NOW!!!!
  • thurows, on 03/16/2008, -1/+33Their hits will go through the roof. Now they will get big advertising and can afford a real designer.
    • dondara, on 03/16/2008, -0/+4They could be getting a million pv's an hour and no real company would advertise there. Maybe a mortgage company or some dick pill scammers but nothing legit.
      • gkwillie, on 03/16/2008, -0/+2'damnit, by measuring it, you changed the outcome!
    • Ovalteen, on 03/16/2008, -0/+5That website doesn't need a designer, it needs an old priest, a young priest, and some ***** holy water or something.
  • mizarone, on 03/16/2008, -0/+31Think I just failed the ACID test...
    • jtbandes, on 03/16/2008, -1/+7Well, the designer was certainly on SOMETHING.
    • eliazu, on 03/16/2008, -0/+6The designer took ACID alright...
  • chuckpenzone, on 03/16/2008, -1/+14It loads really fast though.
  • katrayun, on 03/16/2008, -0/+9You know that post that was popular earlier today, about inspiration from the color schemes of various superheroes?
    Yeah.
  • realjames, on 03/16/2008, -8/+76I thought it was going to link to Reddit.
    • 74YLOR3k, on 03/16/2008, -6/+3Why you don't have a billion+ diggs on this comment is beyond me.
      • GhostyBoy, on 03/16/2008, -1/+9It's because less than a billion people dugg the comment.
        • epemac, on 03/16/2008, -1/+13or, a billion people dugg this up, and 999,999,950 reddit fans buried it.
    • rvandy, on 03/16/2008, -2/+3ZING!
    • juicebag, on 03/16/2008, -1/+4I agree. I always wanted to ditch Digg for reddit but the design is so difficult.
  • acherion, on 03/16/2008, -1/+7The markup is 906KB!
  • dressedindecay, on 03/16/2008, -0/+19Now the webmaster will look at all the traffic they got from this and add MORE content.
  • schneid4323, on 03/16/2008, -0/+9I havent even seen a porn site that bad since 2001.....
  • Shinobi326, on 03/16/2008, -2/+17Holy cow batman! I've NEVER seen a web page that I could not fix width wise on my 2560x1600 resolution! Whoever is the 'webmaster' should show himself so he can be stoned to death by all visitors!

    Truly speechless (minus the rant above!)
    • Daiken, on 03/16/2008, -0/+2I don't know about you but I have a 1680x1050 screen and the width of the CONTENT fit exactly to my resolution. I found that quite impressive actually. No wasted space on the left or right. You could scroll further right though but there was nothing there.
      • Shinobi326, on 03/16/2008, -2/+2Can't be. The title bar at my resolution goes farther to the right thus I have a left/right scroll bar.
        The top 1/3 of the page (excluding the titlebar) fits my screen
        about 2/3 way down it decreases in width a bit.
        Regardless, I'm still flabbergasted!
    • kingofnexus, on 03/16/2008, -0/+0The webpage scales perfectly @ 1920 x 1200. No side scrolling. Its an absolutely awful website mind, it doesn't matter whether it fits or not.
      • Shinobi326, on 03/16/2008, -0/+2I actually stand corrected because I forgot I always have my Firefox 'NoSquint' settings at 120%. I'll man up to when I'm wrong. BUT we are all still in agreement that its the most fugly site ever!
  • vibrokatana, on 03/16/2008, -1/+7good god, the first time I closed the tab almost immediately. The second time I tried to scroll down but the bile rising from my stomach told me I was about to throw up...
  • Anfidurl, on 03/16/2008, -12/+37Wow. This is even worse than Drudge Report. Dugg.
    • Jerk, on 03/16/2008, -4/+5Exactly my thoughts!
    • jnvt, on 03/17/2008, -0/+3hmmm.... I think the drudgereport is a Web 1.0 classic in design... its functionality and simplicity are highly disciplined. He could have cashed-in with ads all over the place, but again, discipline. 1 page of links worked well in 96, works well today. He was feeding before feeds were cool. All this said, he could use a design reboot...but I suppose he's been told that a million times. If it ain't broke...
    • licoricewhip, on 03/17/2008, -0/+2Drudge is a nice clean site.
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 100 of 420 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.