Ok, I have bit my tongue and not commented on the changeover to the new site. I wanted to wait and try to learn the subtleties. I figured most of the stuff was there, I just had to find it. After a few weeks, I must say I am extremely disappointed.
I work in the public arena and realize how little changes can affect a large portion of those I serve. We only try to change when it is absolutely necessary or we can dramatically improve a product. It was my understanding that this change was a little bit of both. There were underlying technical issues that needed to be addressed. These are things that the average schmoe like me would never encounter or understand. It is also my understanding that there were also opportunities to make this site better. That is a good reason for change.
My problem is with the change itself. If you are modifying/improving a successful product, you should start with the premise that "we only improve, not delete". Take the foundation of what you had and then build upon it. It is why some car models evolve very slowly (Mercedes, Subaru) and some reinvent themselves every year or so (Saturn, Hyundai...) In my opinion, the new version is not any better for the user than the old version, and in many cases, more frustrating. We now have Wiki (whatever the hell that is) but no legitimate search function! Was there not a beta version of this that was vetted through the admin group in order to spot these problems? If so, why? Progress should be forward, not back.
Thank you for allowing me to vent.