Which skin is preferable?
I'm doing some maintainance on my ArM wiki, and would like some input from you'all on which skin to use. I have a poll with the relevant options, please choose one. I'll go with the most popular.
Also, I'd like to take this opportunity to remind you that ANY fan created content may be put on the wiki. It currently contains not only spells, but also virtues, flaws, enchantments, and an index*.
- I didn't ask permission while incorporating the indexes of the Divine and Infernal - if the original writers are pissed, I'll remove these entries.
Is it possible to change that background picture from bamboo to something more Ars-esque? I know that http://scriptorium.columbia.edu has some very high-res scans of medieval latin and other texts. If such a thing is possible, then I'd say that, but if not, either snakeskin or qua.
Unfortunately changing the background doesn't seem possible. Not without an upgrade costing about 10$/month, which I don't really feel the need to spend.
I would also like a more Ars magiquesque background, but it is clear that that is not an option if it is more expensive. I will go for bamboo, then. it is a clear text (mor ethan the hyperreal one IMO), and this is what I like in a source like this
Just saying kudos to your work and that of the contributors as well
Snakeskin looks best i think.
Qua is also easy to read.
I think Bamboo and Hyperreal are too bright on the eyes.
Still, only Hyperreal is actually bad i think.
I'd favour Minimalist, but Qua after that. Bamboo is too random for ArM, and the other colour schemes are ... well, less aesthetically pleasing.
I'd choose Minimalist or Snakeskin for readability although bamboo would be nice indeed were it not for the... bamboos...
Snakeskin first, minimalist second. Both are easily readable, IMO