There is one point in your post, truedog, that I think I can, and probably should, respond to.
Among other things, you say:
He [Steven Rogers] does not appear (literally) to be a regular on this thread and just pops in on infrequent occasions.
Truedog, this thread is in its earliest infancy. It was "founded" just 15 days ago, on August 29th. You showed up for the first time 9 days ago (Sept. 3rd); Steve showed up for the first time 6 days ago (Sept. 6th). But he has posted almost as many messages to this thread as you have -- 47 posts to your 49. So, I would call you both "regulars," insofar as such an infant thread can have "regulars."
But whether Steve in particular is a regular or not isn't the real issue, is it? I get the impression from what you say in this post, and in a couple of others I have seen, that you feel "regulars" should have more "say" than "newcomers," or "part-timers," etc.
It is true that somebody coming to an established thread can miss the thread's "group dynamics," and jump in incautiously. If that's all you mean, no problem. But somehow I sense that something more is involved here.
Generally, "newcomers" and "part-timers" are welcomed to a new thread; after all, they provide the fresh blood, without which the thread can't survive. And, as time goes on, some "regulars" drop out,while new ones come on board, and so the thread keeps on going. And quite frequently, the character and the focus of the thread change too. Is it this last possibility that bothers you? Well, one thread that you apparently have spent a good deal of time on, the Sanity Thread, had a very different orientation when it was originally conceived than it has now. The same thing could happen here. So? Life goes on...
You yourself are a relative "newbie" to SI, and only a coffee-shop member at that. I don't think you would take kindly to any suggestion that you should therefore shut up and defer to "tried and tested" SI "regulars." Similarly, I think one must be careful not to imply that anyone who chooses to post on this thread must first pass a "regularity test."
Maybe you did not mean to imply that, in which case I've wasted a half-hour for nothing. :-) |
