attempt 2:
1. The design is probably looking more modern but I am probably old school, and I like to read black characters on a white background.
2. The absence of the summary page has been tried to compensate with making selections possible on more than just the IMO number, but also on the basis of name and MMSI number, and more factors. That could be useful, but the summary page was a very useful tool for checking in which category a ship had been allocated, for instance for posting a ship for the first time. So bring back the summary table.
3. As a corrector I find the presented listing of new photos unworkable, I cannot immediately see what the category is, whether the IMO number is there and more. This means that I will have to open each photo individually, which is far more time consuming than just just glancing through the new entries like I do every morning. I cannot see a good reason why we get to see three columns of new ships, with only the name and the photographer mentioned.
4. A large section of the some is devoted to most popular categories: Views alone is not the way to go, because some broad categories contain many more ships, than other categories that have been broken down by age brackets etc. It is not for nothing that Chemical and Product tankers is the most popular category in the beta version, it contains all the ships built from 1970 onwards. As long as there is no algorithm combining the number of ships and the number of views per category, it is simply useless. The home page space better to be used for other things, such as an extension of the space foe making comments.