Ah, good point. Thanks!

I am not answering each comment, but I read them all and keep notes.

I changed it, then I questioned what I see, and reversed it..

Don't you feel that "terminology" means the same, but is just less common speaking?

Terminology sounds more "scientific" but less "everyday words" to me.

I have made a bunch of little design polishing for those who didn't like the current design. More gradients, less extreme contrasts, some colors are less bright, some icons that were too abstract were replaced or improved, it is now easier to notice that the top menu is a menu. Etc.. No major change there. But a lot of little improvements.

Before you comment, make sure that you empty the cache of your browser correctly. Otherwise you will most probably see deprecated styles.

Here are comparing before/after screenshots :

(deleted)

Thanks!

It's up to the developers I guess. So far, this project gained their attention and I've adapted the content to a lot of feedback already. I think it's just a matter of time before it is considered mature enough to be used.

As Mike said earlier, this is only a starting point. We are probably not going to wait for the FAQ to be complete before publishing the first version.

At least two issues that remain are :

1. The design (many people seemed to say that the current design needed improvement, but didn't go into details).
2. Blockchain/my wallet (there is so far as many people that wants blockchain in the "choose-your-wallet" page then people that wants to remove it)

Nice work. Though I think we can't make this the default starting point. This is a known rule when creating website : if we fail to explain things to the user within a few seconds, then we just lose these visitors. Period. We can gain full attention of our visitors only if we succeed to explain things in a very concise way first. And only then, more extensive content can be added (and is in fact very needed in my opinion). But it should never be the starting point otherwise the website will do the opposite of what we want : it will confuse or scare people.

I am not against adding this content as "the long/extended version" of how it works. We could add a link at the bottom of the page saying something like "Want to read more, see the extended version of this page, or Bitcoin wiki..". And if we don't do that, I think that all points in your texts must end up somewhere at least in the future.

Also if we go in that direction, I will comment your texts and prepare a list of suggestions. I think your general approach and texts are good. The geek facts bubbles is a good idea.

Thanks for your feedback and pull requests. We have already many updates completed based on them. I'm keeping the website always up-to-date with all recent commits. Feel free to provide more improvements.

Awesome! :-)

Absolutely! This website is only a start. I would also link to see more and more high quality content. And I have in mind to have it translated to many languages. So that Bitcoin can better expand in every possible countries (this is decentralization).

Thanks! I'm a member of the foundation and I don't know that much about theirs resources yet. But so far it seems like bitcoin.org could be managed in team the same way than bitcoin-qt is developed.

Feel free to prepare and suggest improvements on the design.

I know that we tend to take security of online wallets very seriously (and we should). But we should not forget to look at them in a relative way. I'm not the one who will decide of this in the end, however I think that blockchain is needed there. Because it is more secure for some, less for others (depending on the use and on the technical skills of the users).

However this makes one thing clear : We should bring people to the extension and present it like an absolute security requirement.

Thanks for the commit. I will let Mike review it.

But wait.. concerning blockchain, as far as I know, blockchain stores an encrypted version of the wallet on their server and send it to the browser and the decryption only happens within the browser on client side. Which means if someone hacks blockchain, or if blockchain disappear, they won't be able to steal the Bitcoins. The plugin only increases the security, by having the javascript pre-loaded so that any potential malicious javascript injected into the website wouldn't be able to sniff the decryption keys during a time. If I'm not mistaken, this is much more secure than traditional e-wallet. And on the matter of computers failures and viruses, this is even more secure than software wallets because you have a remote copy of your wallet without the traditional risks of a online backup.

The consensus on the current "choose-your-wallet" page is very fragile. The only thing that seems to have enough acceptance is to only display online wallets that cannot use, lose, steal their user funds like blockchain. For the other category (walletbit - paymium - coinbase), most probably that an "acceptable level of insurance" needs to be discussed.

Also, promotion of any businesses on bitcoin.org does not generate a lot of enthusiasm so far for many legitimate reasons. Just like bittorent.com does not link to specific BitTorrent businesses. I think a complete website should be entirely dedicated to the promotion of good e-commerce / wallet / merchants. So far weusecoins does this to a certain degree and we link to it everywhere. And if something friendly and more extensive is done, I will (and I think other will agree) gladly put a lot of visibility on it.

Yet I think that the real reason why we have to list Bitcoin wallets at all is that the default client is not suitable for most users.

+1, but..

I just found it more cumbersome to write a page about the foundation to respect that rule. So if you see a solution where the foundation has the same level of visibility without the side-effects, I would love this.

Get started seemed important to me. Because weusecoins is a concrete list of wallets, payments processing services and merchants that accept Bitcoin. (And it is friendly). That brings us back to the question of promoting such services by ourselves.. And I don't think that a lot of people will agree, me the first. However, perhaps it can be merged somehow with "Choose your wallet", and then weusecoins would have a good visibility there. Two members on the forum said it was confusing. What do you think?

I think it should serve content both for technical, business and normal people. Bitcoin is likely to interest a lot of different classes of people. And this is why I made the "For Individuals / Organizations / Developers / Enthusiasts" menu. Because each of these people live in a different world, have different needs and speak a different language. And I think we should try to find the best balance between "easy-to-understand for noobs" and "concrete-detailed-content". Sometime separating the two.

Perhaps we could redirect them more directly there : http://www.weusecoins.com/merchant-tools.php
(You are listed there too ;-) )

So far, this version of bitcoin.org delegates all promotion to weusecoins (except for wallets). This is something that can be discussed in the future however. But I think that a formal website from the foundation should stay as neutral as possible.

Also, weusecoins will be multi-language and will often have a translated version available for each language that will be supported by bitcoin.org in the future.

This part is really tricky. I think we should do all that we can to keep away from unnecessary technical details there otherwise it will immediately turn into something complicate and drown people in confusion. I think that we need a page with a very quick overview, with as much understandable, concise and accurate words as possible. And so far, this page was the candidate for this task.

As for the details, we can create more pages with much detailed content. A complete FAQ is already needed for this.

Thanks for your work,

For those who think the new website is not professional, I'm curious to have your opinion on a version with much less icons :
http://174.142.20.147/en/

In fact, I created a lot of icons this weekend in order to see if it would improve readability. But to some point, I asked myself if it was just too much because we have a lot of titles. So the above link gives you a idea of what it looked like 3 days ago. Perhaps we should keep it simple?

Also if you add negative comments, please be more descriptive so that it turns out to be constructive. It can be hard to find out exactly why you dislike the website if you don't give more details.

Mistakes and typos : if you don't get to play with github, please tell us what you found (and clearly say the page where the typo can be found). It will be fixed in a very short delay. I am not a native english speaker myself and Mike already did a good job at improving the texts so that it sounds less confusing.

Graphics : If there is something specific about the graphics that you don't like, don't hesitate to be more descriptive. Maybe that I can improve some of them. Most of the graphics are 24 hours old so I didn't have time to refresh my mind.

Get started / Learn more : Right, I see! Get started goes to weusecoins where there is concrete resources for merchants and people that want to buy things with Bitcoin, which is something bitcoin.org will probably delegate because of its "official" status. So the real purpose here was not really to give "more information" but "more ways to get started with using bitcoin". Do you feel that "Learn more" is still appropriate in that case? Or is there a better way to say this?

I also see this project like a beginning. I would like bitcoin.org to become more dynamic with continuous improvements over time.

Thanks for your feedback!

Concerning the translation of bitcoin.org, I did much more. Here is the resulting work in progress :
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=148712.0