The new campaignforliberty.com is .....

[Joe3113]

..... one of the ugliest websites i've seen in my life.

The old one looked about 1000x more professional.

Who designed it? A 14 year old high school computer graphics student?

The countdown only increased the magnitude of the anti-climax.

I don't think the person who designed it was very inspired by the philosophical concept of individual liberty.

[jbuttell]

I was a bit disappointed by it too. The previous site definitely was more attactive to me. But whatever, so long as it's active and filled with great material, as it has been.

I didn't want to say anything - at the risk of offending whoever did it if it was free work or something.

[preserveourliberties]

Yes, I agree with the first poster. The old one was better.

[raiha]

Hi there Curlz...nice to see you again.

[kahless]

The old site was better and no change was necessary (especially not some count down to the new site which is childish). Looks like the kids over there just downloaded Drupal and then tried to update it with the old theme as best they could.

It is not so bad if you compare it to a site that is more of train wreck like Chuck Baldwins campaign site. Makes me think twice about voting for him when issues are sparse at it looks like a circa 1996 campaign site.

[Austin]

The design is lacking, but the content is there.

Once all of the bugs are ironed out, they need to hire Terra Eclipse for a redesign. I would throw 10 bucks down for that.

[Ninja Homer]

The design could use a little work, but it isn't that bad. What's more important are the tools that the site has. So far, I like it.

A little graphic design change is a drop in the bucket compared to the programming behind it.

What, specifically, do you not like about the site design?

I would change:
The background - the brushed aluminum just looks out of place.
The shadowing around the content pane is just too much and too dark.
The image across the top doesn't look like it fits real well... that needs some work.
The red and blue title bars, button bars, and content panes are too bright. I know they were trying to match it with the colors used in the Campaign for Liberty logo, but as it is, it is distracting from the actual content. Those colors need to be washed out or lightened up a little. Actually, now that I look at it more closely, the reds and blues used within the site are much brighter than the reds and blues used in the logo.

Those graphic changes should be relatively simple compared to the work that has gone into the backbone programming. I'm guessing that getting the tools working has been their top priority, while they "settled" on the current graphic look.

[mcgraw_wv]

I disagree, the previous one looked like an amateur blog... the new one looks like it's focused on getting people involved and far more professional.

Through the eyes of non-Paul supporters it is better, and that's what our sites need to be aimed at, attracting more supporters of the message.

[LittleCrittersWorld]

I like the new site design

[me3]

There are no RSS feeds. All of the old URLs are dead.

I tried to comment on a profile page and got sent to an error notice.

It's half done and not properly tested. This was a bad time to make the change over, when so many people are focused on the bailout.

Horrible time to disrupt the web operation just to keep an arbitrary deadline.

This is what happens to organizations that overvalue their own communication over the ability for their members to communicate.