The main agenda is $. The rest of what we witnessed are branches stemming from that main route.
How do you figure that, IC? If the main agenda was cash then you would see the Google Ads across the top of the page and in the middle of the page instead of shunted off to the side and down at the bottom. You would see the site promoted much more to increase traffic. You would see a daily newsletter like Mike Adams has with Natural News with very pricey sponsor ads in the middle of the page and numerous graphic sponsor ads prominently displayed like you see on every NN page. Or you would see regular newsletters with product ads and stories promoting products as well as all the product ads on the website such as Mercola has. And those websites are often held up as examples of more popular alternative health sites.
How exactly does the "dwindling numbers" fit in with an agenda for cash? Sites and people who have an agenda for money actively boost their traffic. Do you think for a minute that the WM is not sharp enough to be able to do that, or does not have the contacts or know-how to hire it done if making money is his primary motive? Though you say that "rumor has it" that people have had their IP address banned for raising the issue of revenue, I am not aware of it nor are any of the mods I know. I think it is telling that you have made several posts about the revenue issue and, as far as I know, every one of them is still up.
Beyond the issue of revenue. I am a bit amazed to see people saying that they no longer respect people who have disagreed with them or refer to them as butt-kissers. There are a number of people here who have disagreed with me. With the exception of those who have done so with repeated slurs and personal attacks, such disagreement has not changed my regard for them one bit. It also amazes me to see people make statements to the effect that this is no longer a place for healing due mostly to not getting their wishes in the debate forums or not liking what happened in the debate forums. Since when do debates on abortion and politics and such have anything positive to do with affecting healing?
Failing to handle disagreement well is a downfall for too many folks here - whether they respond with personal attacks, complaining, abusing the alert button or simply continuing to try to keep an issue going and getting in the last word if they don't win over the majority opinion or don't get the action the want. You and I both know one or two extreme examples of people who don't react well at all to disagreement, but it appears to me that more than just one or two people have that problem. I realize that debates are often contentious by nature, but on a healing forum the place for contentious debate is questionable to many of us - particularly when it descends into the gutter.
I also keep seeing allegations about a "hidden agenda" and/or references to some negative agenda here. If such were the case, I would think I would know about it. After all, besides moderating a couple of forums I know several other moderators including global mods. None of us have a clue about any hidden or ulterior agenda.
In the final analysis, a healing forum whose stated purpose is "Educating instead of medicating" is a questionable place for debate anyhow. A great many of us who support keeping the debate forums relatively user friendly and agree with the WM's decisions are not kissing anyone's butt. Instead, we are supporting the purpose of this website - and I submit that it is both unfair and improper debating technique to denigrate them and place a blanket label on them in order to poison the well and caste doubts on the legitimacy of what they post or how they vote.
Others may disagree with me here, as is surely their right. How they choose to disagree might be their revelation.
All the best,
DQ (Tony)