When you publish an article entitled "the web looks like shit" on a page that looks like shit, and people quite reasonably call you on that, you want to own it, because then you look subtle and smart and clever.
Whining about how people are pointing out your page looks like shit just makes you look whiny. And the page still looks like shit.
Frankly, that's a very subjective conclusion. While I think that those article pages are still too large and slow to load on poor connections, aesthetically The Outline looks and feels pleasing, original and well designed. In my opinion.
While your opinion is just as valid I have a problem with the absolute way in which you express it.
Didn't expect to find you here though.
So just want to add - The Outline is one of the freshest aesthetics I've seen in a long time. I get it and I love it. Nice job.
That said, good call not breaking reader mode, so the less avant garde among us don't have to choose between bouncing and getting a headache. Super-saturated background for unsaturated text? Seriously? I mean, the luminance contrast is good and all, but Jesus. How is this not literally painful for you guys to look at on Apple displays? Even on a Dell it stings.
Unfortunately for you, the web _is_ for everyone. It's for everyone on HN, it's for people with disabilities, it's for people who have a 32" desktop screen that don't need your shitty hamburger menu and giant font size, it's for people with color blindness, it's for people who want to read the content, not marvel at your silly squiggly lines.
Saying that "my design is not for everyone" in such a dismissive manner is deliberately showing the middle finger to everyone who is outside of your group and people are calling you out on that.
Your submission is objectively ironic, regardless of what YOU think.
Definitely classifies as "looks like shit" in my book.