I am not advocating. I am investigating use of color on the web. I have two competing theories. They probably are both wrong and definitely both cannot be right. Theory 1 says, the primary text on web pages should not have artistic effects. That means the type-face is going to be normal, not special, the color is going to be black on white. This theory is a narrow and rigid form of the principles Holly explained about making the form of the text invisible to support the voice of the writer or the meaning of the words. Theory 2 says, good art added to anything functional always makes the result a world better than is reachable without art. Honest people know good art and people promoting piles of rusty metal randomly arranged as art are disqualified from participating in this discussion. We have good art on the forum. It is beautiful. Theory 1 says the art applied to primary text takes away from the product. Theory 2 says Theory 1 is moronic, and lacking something spiritual. Theory 1's response is, "Yes, it is lacking something spiritual, just like a lot of commercially optimized ways of doing things. The reason major online publishers nearly all use black on white for primary text is the result of exhaustive research and testing that shows the best results, especially long term results, of primary text comes from black on white. No matter how well another color scheme does at any point in time, like clothing fashion, styles changes and non-black-on-white will come to look like bell bottoms and weird hair from the 1970s, whereas black on white never goes out of fashion." Theory 2's final response: lighten up and enjoy life. And if our colors start looking like bell bottoms, we can change them! So my question is: what do you think about these color theories and what is your theory that helps you decide the colors you are going to run for primary text?