Daisy,

Lest you think that you are alone, I totally agree with you. As an organizer of data for a living I find MudCat ecruciatingly difficult, slow, and tiring to deal with. When you log on you see a sea of blue text more or less jumbled together with nothing to draw the eye to the relevant points -- relevant being the ones your brain is interested in -- the first thought is usually, "why did I bother to log on?" Answer: habit.

Reading is, first and foremost, an exercise in spacial dynamics (whether the reader realixes it or not.) The web page is visually and mentally tiring. I often miss threads I do want to read and get visually stuck on the ones I don't. I get progressively annoyed and generally pissed off at the mish-mash, which to be fair, is in large part due to people not using the tools that are there like prefixes, insisting their particular political diatribe is not BS, or asking the same questions over and over because they don't use the one thing MudCat is 100% awesome at -- the searchable library.

Any more, Mudcat requires more effort than I'm willing to invest to read a thread. (And this comment comes from someone who will gladly type a 2000 word response without thinking twice or tackle 400+ manhour job of the Mudcat cookbook.) So, like you, I don't bother much any more. Oh well.

Anyway, this subject has come up before. Maybe 832 or 833 times :) Those that don't like it are inundated with "no's" from people who do like it. I honesty don't think the people that do like it constitutes a majority, but they are the vocal ones, so that's the way it stays.