Please considered sorting websites by last updated date by default, instead of alphabetical which is a pretty useless method of presentation. It works better for books and static pages, not dynamic internet content.

▲

philgyford 7 hours ago | parent [-]

It’s not “useless” it just depends on what it is a user is looking for. I decided that alphabetical as default makes most immediate sense to someone arriving at the site. “Last updated” could also look a bit random initially.

▲

deadbabe 6 hours ago | parent [-]

But random orders lend themselves better for discovery? If somebody’s site is just AAA they will be at the top of the list forever, what value is there in that?

▲

philgyford 4 hours ago | parent [-]

The value is that it's slightly easier to browse an alphabetical list than a random one (no, I don't have a citation for this).

But, yes, it would be nice to have the option to change the sort order, as well as the current filtering. One day, if it doesn't make the UI too complicated. I value simplicity.

	▲	deadbabe 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		if you know what you're looking for sure, but what if you're not looking for any specific site in particular, like the vast majority of people who visit?