[theforum] Brief notes on the sanctity of theforum, and double-standards relating thereto

David Kaufman david at gigawatt.com
Sun Sep 17 01:11:36 CDT 2006

(Sorry, itchy trigger finger)

David Kaufman <david at gigawatt.com> wrote:
> Was just cleaning out the week's spam-user signups and noticed this:
> http://evolt.org/user/17906
> Aparently he took this spanking fairly personally.  But while I was
> happy that Alan stirred up the people and got some discussion going on
> hereabouts, I was annoyed by the unilateral homepage change.  Just
> showed a total lack of respect for the way things are done.
> I guess you can't blame him for assuming that quiet lists means
> everyone has gone home and no loger cares.

But I stand by my theory that no news is not necessarily bad news for 
evolt.  When theforum is quiet, the organization has nothing to debate. 
So what, must we debate endlessly to assert our consciousness?  The 
number of "old-timers" who've de-lurked and posted this week proves that 
we who care have not gone home and left the lights on.

We will have another site update as the new design gets deployed, and 
desdev will get some traffic, or a financial crisis that will engender a 
flurry of posts on finance... can't really imagine what a crisis of 
marketing might look like, but can't rule one out either, can we?

Meantime I'm happy some pulses were pounding of late, am glad to see 
some movement in the eop and evolters spheres and ...I hope Alan cools 
off and comes back to help me take out the spam :-)


> John Handelaar <john at userfrenzy.com> wrote:
>> Someone, over the last couple of days, took it
>> upon himself to make a radical change to both
>> the content and layout of the front page of
>> www.evolt.org .
>> No vote, nor even any opportunity for discussion,
>> was had on this list about either the wording or
>> the appearance of these alterations.
>> I consider this a security breach and am currently
>> dealing with it accordingly [...]

More information about the theforum mailing list