And yet it is actually extremely content-rich, with a very good signal-to-noise ratio. For a free product whose only monetization scheme appears to be dev job ads and clearly-marked sponsored technical posts, it is really quite useful to have in my inbox every week. I also find myself browsing the archives not infrequently, and the generally no-frills UI makes it much easier to use for that purpose than most fancy custom content UIs. HTTP+HTML are already _quite good_ for browsing hyperlinked textual content.
Thank you, that's very kind. If you have suggestions, please do just reply to an issue. We're improving the sites substantially for next year, but don't worry, no JS frameworks will get involved, all plain and fast HTML (just a better layout).
I should say I am also a subscriber, I'm not trying to shit on the contents. Literally the combo of underlined main link then the paragraph underneath and the author in lighter grey looks just like a Google ad/dodgy search engine.
Our archive pages are, yeah, not great :) Being redesigned for the new year. We are "email first" and most of the page is the raw HTML straight from the email. However, we hand curate for many hours every week and have been doing so for six years now, so you can trust this isn't just some random bundle of links (essentially, they're the ones most clicked in issues this year).
