Love it 
However just a quick note - by greying things out you are saying āthis is not that importantā, but by highlighting things (such as by bold) you are saying this is more important or requires your attention.
Some might argue it is a trivial distinction. Personally I think Iād prefer saying threads with unread posts are something that require your attention (though happy to live with this for a while to see how it feels). Either way, I am VERY happy you have decided to add this 
This new feature helps with my own continuing quandary on older topics I donāt know exist (pre-registration) but get updates to this day.
This new color change to topics completely read will help me understand what I may have missed in a visual manner.
As for the color being grey, that does not always imply ānot importantā. One has to consider the context of the color when used in an online community ui and not an actual program or tasking application of some kind.
This is correct, a topic where you have read every post is less important ā thereās nothing in it you have not seen already. Thatās why it is dim/grey.
Correct, topics with stuff you have not yet red are more black and āboldā and thus stand out more, requiring your attention. E.gā¦
Yes, I know 
aside from the psychology of design (would we rather highlight/promote things that may need our attention, or mute/demote things-that-still-may-be-of-interest that donāt) we need to remember that even fully read threads may still be of interest - whether thatās because people are browsing categories, bookmarked threads or in search results. Then it becomes a design issue (are dimmed out threads an ideal choice for these?)
As I said I havenāt given it deep enough thought, and obviously I need to live with it for a bit, but I think the key in deciding will be whether the marking system keeps track of all threads or whether there is a cut off limit (days or visits). If there is a cut off limit then browsing through old threads will show threads as dimmed out, which is far from ideal.
Iāll post my thoughts once itās on my forum and I have lived with it for a while.
I agree. I am a hoarder and bookmarking is a pasttime of mine. I use it to winnow the important bits of info I know I may need someday down the line from everything else.
That sounds like you donāt want your entire topic lists dimmed for yourself. Have other users read every single post in every topic that currently exists in your community?
Sure, a topic list completely grayed may drab your ux a little, but then when new content comes in via posting those topic titles start lighting up. Itās like Christmas Day in your brain.
Iāve encountered this before. Be aware that as an admin you might end up with an edge case when it comes to specific design elements. This is one. You will have probably read every single post on that community. Your users? Not so much.
On this topic, this is why my theme used the more traditional color at the moment
Its a bit weird, the decision to āsuper light greyā is better for the vast majority of users but hurts power users that track tons of stuff.
I dunno, maybe bookmarked / watched / tracked should not get that treatmentā¦ unsure, logic gets complex.
I wonder what @awesomerobot thinks about the visited styling here?
Another couple of points or ref:
Whirlpool (Australiaās most popular forum) uses this
ebay does the same purple thing as Google.
Yeah the blue and purple is just 1996 era HTML defaults for visited and unvisited, e.g. Links: Differentiate visited and unvisited links
The standard browser default is to color unvisited links blue and visited links purple. This combination is the most universal and will be generally recognizable, even with some variation in saturation and brightness (perhaps slate blue and violet). However, since this combination is so universal, designers should avoid using its opposite: purple text for unvisited links and blue text for visited. Another approach is to use a saturated color for unvisited links and a less bright, less saturated version of the same color for visited links
Less saturated is what we are doing now.
Iām not so keen on that tbh @sam.
Personally I think it would be better to have a standard colour/style for topics, and then something to signify that a topic has unread posts. Whether that is by colour/weight or icon. (As opposed to ādemotingā threads that you have fully read.)
I havenāt looked but I presume this can be changed in the CSS so itās not a big issue either way.
Slightly off topic, but what would be nice when it comes to styling, is being able to see (and add icons or style accordingly) topics that:
And then maybe:
Basically the sort of stuff a user would find interesting as browsing down the list of threads.
Except that we are doing the opposite of the above recommendation, the recommendation is to emphasize visited
No, read it again.
Black vs. grey. Grey is less bright, less saturated than black.
Another example would be dark blue for unvisited, and a lighter faded blue for visited.
Getting mixed messages from this
I assumed that was a typo. Iāll just delete that section, since the intent is clear. Dimmer, less saturated is stuff you have already read. You want to call more attention to what you have not seen ā unread stuff should be brighter, more visible.
Or maybe they meant ādarkā as ādimmerā ā¦ dunno but the bolded text was quite clear.
As best as I could tell with a quick look, topic links have one of these classes
Shouldnāt be impossible for users to tweak.
EDIT
Maybe not so easy. I did a wee bit of testing and the results were far from as hoped.
Lived with it for a while now and Iām still not keen on the dimming, so have changed it on my forum to emphasise topics with new/unread posts rather than demote those without.
If anyone else wants to do the same, just add this to your css:
.topic-list a.title { font-weight: bold; color: #333; }
.topic-list a.title.visited:not(.badge-notification) { font-weight: normal; color: #444;}
Just posting a quick update to say I much prefer promoting over dimming:
I think it will encourage more user engagement because it screams āHEY!! Click me! Click me!ā
Its a tricky balancing act, on very active forums āpromotingā can lead the general population to just have one huge bold page that never goes away.
On small forums where you read almost everything I think it can be very effective.
I agree Sam. I think it would need to be tweaked for very busy and very quiet forums with the default suitable for something in the middle.
For example, on busier boards you might opt to use a font that works better bold (so not as overpowering) or use an icon, or mimic what you have here now.
It needs to be part of the system though, as (and although I didnāt spend much time on it) it wasnāt straight forward to apply the same changes to non-logged in users. (There seems to be a third anonymous view too).
So Iād suggest a style for standard topics, and another for those with unread posts. You could even offer a āmark forums readā button or allow users to set a cut-off rate, such as to only show whatās new since last visit, or as far back as three visits. In the old days, post marking only went back as far as last visit (so only posts made after you logged out (or got logged out) were count as unread). Iām not so keen on this - but setting it to last 3 to 5 visits is worth considering (lower number for busier forums, higher for quieter ones).
Hell no. That is the āwe are giving up on design, read tracking is too hardā button. If the styling is so loud that you are considering that option, the styling is wrong.
It is his site he can style it how he wants, regardless, the reality is most people will read a tiny fraction of what is on offer at any given day.
It is the exception to read āeverythingā, not the rule.
