thanks. I still want to know who made the decision. Webmaster?

thanks Ami. It *does* look more and more like a storefront, with the added *attraction*
of abuse, and being told now that you can only expect not to be ignored, or thought of as a troublemaker or ‘spoiler’ if you are one of three people who’ve filled out his “study guide” for his “schooling”. (149.00 to start) When he says " for entertainment purposes"
I used to think it was somewhat naive, innocent almost. A sign of his being simple and straight-talking. Now I see that statement as very telling, and the reality as far more insidious. And the energy seems to have naturally spilled over into other forums, where people try to make sense of it all or at least process events. There are (or were) more people on that forum than only Joel who offer(ed) real value and share (ed). In fact it seemed the forum got along very well, on the whole, while he was away, except for those who missed his ruling brand of "entertainment". I wonder if that wasn't getting to him, as he may have feared a loss of absolute followers, and began to really pump out the product announcements.

What I really wanted to know is WHO made this decision? If it is the webmaster, I feel particularly disinclined to remain involved here. Just gut-wise, it feels wrong. Like the foundation is bad. If it is Barefoot's 'doing' (or the doing of a few moderators who agree) then I can live with that and leave his environs, and still share something of value with some others. It does seem odd though that there are moderators that remain invisible, while hiding or moving threads and/or wanting people banned. It’s weird to be ‘in the dark’ about that. It gets more and more bizarre. A bit like the Island of Dr. Moreau. Thanks for your reply.

Maybe time for one of those Korean films.




Tweet