Not signed in (Sign In)

Vanilla 1.1.9 is a product of Lussumo. More Information: Documentation, Community Support.

    • CommentAuthorHarry Gindi
    • CommentTimeJul 24th 2010 edited

    Currently, topics with new posts are shown at a very very light pink. However, it often blends into the background, and the only way I can tell there are new posts is to look at the post count of the thread (which appears red). Is there any chance we could use a slightly darker shade of color for new posts?

    • CommentAuthorAndrea
    • CommentTimeJul 24th 2010

    +1 :-)

    • CommentAuthordanseetea
    • CommentTimeJul 24th 2010

    (Shouldn't this be in

    I agree.


    Meanwhile, our meta is a hundred times more useful than the SE2.0 meta.


    Pink? Looks yellow to me. It should be #FEFECC if I read the CSS correctly; that is a light yellow. Maybe you need to calibrate your monitor (or perhaps your eyes). Anyhow, making it a tad darker wouldn't hurt. I have no difficulty seeing the colour myself, but I can easily imagine it being difficult if your screen calibration is off.


    I use a laptop, and it can be hard to see if the angle of the laptop is off. I would also appreciate a darker color; maybe an orange.


    Enter the Stylish firefox extension ...


    Weird, I see two easily distinguishable shades of yellow!


    I'll happily change it if we can resolve the pink/yellow confusion going on here (and will actually, definitely change it if someone tells me exactly which file in the Vanilla installation to tweak).


    @Scott: These lines in vanilla.css seem relevant:

    .NoNewComments, #Discussions li.Read ul {
    background-color:#FFFEEC !important;
    .NewComments, #Discussions li.Read.NewComments ul {
    background-color:#FEFECC !important;

    Word of warning: the default css file is compressed, meaning that all unnecessary white-space has been removed making it pretty unreadable. Assuming (as I think is correct) that you are using the default style in the default theme then you want to look at:


    There's an uncompressed version at:


    You could look at the uncompressed version, figure out what change to make (Harald's right, by the way), and then try to find the right place in the compressed version. Or you could change the uncompressed version and compress it, replacing the compressed version. Or you could just replace the compressed version by the uncompressed version and change that. The difference on my system is 7k, or about 1/3rd of the compressed version.


    Heh. Yeah, I never looked at the css file itself; I looked at firebug's (uncompressed!) rendering of it.