User blog comment:Kirkburn/Technical Update: August 31, 2016/@comment-896291-20160902185433

I've also gotta chime in on the disagreement with the new Diff style format. On Wikias with darker themes, it's not entirely disagreeable: The inverted/white text against the dark background works with the light bubble highlights that denote the changes. But on Wikia's that use brighter themes, I think the highlights makes it hard to really focus on the list of changes verses what hasn't been changed.

I think the biggest hurtle here is the fact that what hasn't been changed on an article isn't being blanked out so the user's attention is only focused on what changed.

I've had my problems with the original Diff format in the past, but I do think the rudimentary red highlights and mint green background, accompanied by words or html that were blanked out (to indicate nothing was altered) made for a more concise definition of what was changed by another user.

If you block out what wasn't changed, the mind's eye focuses on what's important and that's the alterations. This new update is asking you to look at everything that isn't changed and has changed at the same time. It's not an impossible task, but it feels busy.

Hopefully, you'll take the critiques into account and find some type of middle ground between the older and newer styles to make it a little less chaotic and little more focused. Right now, this sorta feels like a early alpha version.