New member
Feb 9, 2020
Look, you're revising the site for how it looks. It looks good.

But you're forcing AGGRAVATING BEHAVIOR onto the responses to clicking on links.

By forcing the page forward REGARDLESS of what the user did, you're destroying -- yes, DESTROYING -- the usability of the site.

Different people have different ways of using a site. And MANY of the file storage sites have a history of inconsistency and unreliability, as well as not having sensible file naming ("dflsfgjdh" rather than "artist == zzyywig", which means keeping a copy of the original site page open can be useful if
1) The download craps out, forcing you to step back and reopen the link page
2) Your browser crashes and you need to do the same
3) You want to figure out what the heck "dflsfgjdh" was.

I would much rather open additional tabs to track what I am doing. I grasp, others may not do this, but RAMMING A PAGE CHANGE DOWN MY THROAT makes this nearly impossible, and reduces the utility of the site by more than 75%, as it forces me to constantly re-open the site page at every turn, not only creating an excessive amount of effort to process through what is available, AND requiring a constant reloading of the site content (which surely increases your server load), but ALSO to make tracking what has been accessed/downloaded nearly impossible.

The specific behavior is the very recent change that causes the page to automatically switch to the clicked link REGARDLESS of left or right click, AND the simultaneous destruction of the "Back" link which allows you to at least REVERSE that activity, forcing the user to not only GO to the link they clicked on, but forcing a total reload of the page you came from (which may not even be the first page!!) when you wish to return to where you were -- this can be the case if you only wanted to look at the content and decide it was not actually of interest... I believe you can see that this can happen quite often -- The keywords and the art shown look interesting, but then you see the wider selection of art and realize it may not be content or quality which is of interest. With these new changes, getting back in track on perusing the site is literally painfully tedious...

It's your site, do as you wish, but I respectfully request you seriously reconsider this, IMNSHO, egregiously poor choice of site design, or at least make it something configurably removable. I find it beyond annoying and sufficient to make me stop using the site, if it continues.

Site navigation changes should make a site EASIER to navigate, not much much harder.
  • Like
Reactions: administrator


Tech Devil
Nov 14, 2019
Ok, we’ll consider your proposal, but we don’t have a person who can do this


New member
Feb 9, 2020
Not arguing, asking, but this is completely new behavior within the last week or so.

If it is an automatic "cannot change" feature of the site package you're using, then I suggest it is a major down check on the new software and a reversion is called for. Seriously.

I just noted an even more egregious instance of the behavior:

If you're on a link any you click on a PICTURE link to see more of what the download entails, it opens the picture and KILLS THE DOWNLOAD PAGE, as well as the "back" link to get back to it. So you're just dropped at the end of a natural process chain somewhere utterly useless to your page users. They'd have to go back to the original site using a scratch link, then find the download of interest (which can be on an advanced page requiring multiple clicks simply to FIND) and then open that. And if the chosen download link has been 404'd, so you need to use a different one...? No back clicks -- Back to square one, and start over...

I think you can see that this is beyond aggravating and seriously detracting from site usage.

P.S., I'm using the latest chrome. If there is a different behavior in another Windows compatible browser, I'm curious.

Thanks. Again, not demanding, but I assert that it does seriously harm the utility of the site, and I cannot believe I am alone in this feeling, even if I am alone in commenting on it.