It's funny to watch all of this stuff come together from what amounts to a schitzophrenic perspective: first and foremost, I'm an average consumer--a browser and user of websites of all shapes and sizes, but I'm also a web developer by trade. So there's always a part of me that rebels against folks messing around with stuff I've created.

On the other hand, I'm fortunate enough that I didn't graduate to the web from the print world. Most print-heads have a difficult time letting go of the absolute control they have over every aspect of design and presentation.

But all that said, more than anything else, I believe (always have, always will) that Content is King. If it's worth reading, it's worth reading. Design should compliment the content and it shouldn't get in the way of people finding what they need. If it does get in the way, or if it doesn't compliment content, or even worse, if it disables important browser functionality, it fails. In the past, there were only two choices: deal with the shortcomings of a crappy site, or forget about it altogether. At least now, if some hack does it wrong (like me!) users of the world can hack it back into shape.

What would be even better: if it were possible to build a tool like this that also pinged the server so that the developer knew exactly how users were hacking the site. That would kind of be like building a grassy courtyard with no pathways and then coming back six months later and paving the spots laid bare by foot traffic.