In terms of usability, there is an argument to be made for retaining the default settings; the more familiar the interface, the easier it is for the user. On the other hand, there is some pleasure to be found in having to learn your way around something different.

What is Brenda Laurel's argument against "a more pronounced division ... between 'form' and 'content'"?

This is a fun discussion, in all the different places it has surfaced.

Having made the xhtml/css leap a few short months ago I have to say that I love what it does for me in the future: I can change my mind and not have to tear EVERYTHING apart.

But this doesn't mean the interface is trivial. The classic black with the calm green links you have here asserts a certain sort of personality. I imagine this infiltrates your content whether you are aware of it or not. If you were to change the interface drastically, you might find yourself speaking in a new voice.

I've been writing over on my notebook that the interface I designed has started to generate a lot of new work. It's my "furniture" and I feel comfortable putting my feet up on it.

fwiw
eLF

There is also window resizing which nicely changes line endings...

And getting voice-synthesis
in the picture
adds an auditory dimension
to the form-influence

(by analogy with the bouncing ball, I sometimes use the cursor to feel the "scansion" of a piece of writing and size and shape of cursor matters)

There is also window resizing which nicely changes line endings...

And getting voice-synthesis
in the picture
adds auditory dimension
to the form-influence

(by analogy with the bouncing ball of the sing-along, I sometimes use the cursor to feel the "scansion" of a piece of writing and size and shape of cursor matters)