I don't agree at all with Sarus1984. Some changes are needed: better article editor, picking the right article to quote (the one in whose header the quote button is) instead of counting from the bottom of the page as it would be if refreshed now, ability to view one's questions after acceptance and before publication, stop comments pushing the horizontal capacity so that the whole page of responses is using 2732 pixels width (or something getting on that way) forcing horizontal scrolling just about everywhere, and so on and so on. There are a lot of things wrong with the site, things that will be understood and whose repair needs to be designed by HCI experts and by developers.

Unfortunately, the resource available for fixing appears to consist of people whose expertise is in producing layouts that conform to the latest passing fad or fashion and have no concept of what interface design is actually about, or how to determine what is required of an interface and ensure that it meets that requirement. I think that's what Steve has told us in some of his comments, although of course he didn't use those exact words. Actually my comment is a bit OTT, and I suppose the people concerned have more of a clue than my comment suggests (I don't imagine that Red Gate employs deadbeats), but we do seem to have been hit by change for change's sake and what I've seen inclines me to think that it was purely fashion-driven with no thought for the impact on users other than tablet and smartphone users (simply because tablets and smartphones are currently the height of fashion).

So we shouldn't be against change. As Jeff says, change is inevitable. I'll add to that: some change is beneficial. But, paraphrasing Jeff, it isn't inevitable that that inevitable change is beneficial, and that's unfortunate. And we seem to have been hit y some non-beneficial (fashion-driven) change.