Carl,
If nothing else I think there has been general agreement that the site design should be a happy balance between development and other areas, that why design #2 (now #3) was carried forward.
It is not just a developer site, and I don't think there's any general feeling that it should be..
Relegating other activities to a subsite is not the solution. That may be where the content is, but we still need a 'common' design.
Much as I like your design, there seems to be some agreement that design #2(3) is the better start point and I beleive Jun is progressing from that basis. I don't think its worthwhile at this stage, dropping it and going back to the start again.
Surely some of the design comments/touches you've suggested could be incorporated into that...? This would be far more productive, constructive and thus keep things moving forward.
And, as I posted a little while ago, your design at present is barely much different from what we already have.
Simon
