createBlog News. Options

[*Azarel*]

Okay, so seriously? There seemed to be some interest stirred when it was announced that we'd be giving the createBlog news a second try in this thread. A number of you registered, a good twenty or so, but barely even a handful of you have even logged in since you registered.

Yes, there was discussion on what to include on the return issue, but that's pretty much as far as it went. If you want the paper to work, it means that you who have decided to dedicate yourself to the paper will actually have to actively check the other forum for updates and also contribute, whether it be actually submitting your article or just bouncing around ideas. All of you. I will and have done all that I can for the paper in the past and even now, and so has James, but the two of us can't do this on our own.

This is utterly ridiculous--all of you joining and then not following through. Maybe you were told that we had enough articles for the return issue, and thus we didn't need anymore, but the fact of the matter is we have none because people are relying on other people to get their articles in, but it's simply not happening.

That was always the problem before--we weren't always sure that we'd have enough articles. Reporters would submit articles the day of publishing and we'd have rush jobs. Editors would end up writing articles. We'd freak out up until the very last minute before deadline and publishing. At least we used to get it done.

At this point, the cB paper is a lost cause, and unless y'all are actually going to do something, I'll be closing up registration & the forum.

[*Zatanna*]

Duly noted, as far as your visitations go. As far as my *supposed* visitations, I'd figure an admin would know. So I'm not sure where that comes from and I have no reason to make it up.

Actively participating? In the re-conception of this, how and when exactly where you active, other than lurking in your own forum?

You're barking up the wrong tree, Anna. I am simply stating that having nary a presence at all then making all these demands, threats, whatever you'd like to call them is not a good way to get things started or rekindled. That was all.

I also attempted to be cordial about it, which seems to be something you have yet to be able to learn.

For once, just once, can't you have a civil conversation without resorting to your biting sarcasm as a means to justify whatever it is you're trying to justify, or demand?

[*Azarel*]

Duly noted, as far as your visitations go. As far as my *supposed* visitations, I'd figure an admin would know. So I'm not sure where that comes from and I have no reason to make it up.

Actively participating? In the re-conception of this, how and when exactly where you active, other than lurking in your own forum?

You're barking up the wrong tree, Anna. I am simply stating that having nary a presence at all then making all these demands, threats, whatever you'd like to call them is not a good way to get things started or rekindled. That was all.

I also attempted to be cordial about it, which seems to be something you have yet to be able to learn.

For once, just once, can't you have a civil conversation without resorting to your biting sarcasm as a means to justify whatever it is you're trying to justify, or demand?

Oh, I'm sorry that I can't exactly be active if there's nothing to respond to. Oh, and also, I'm sorry if changing the forum layout doesn't count as active.

And, by the way, would you rather I just sit back and let cBn rot? Because that's what it was doing before, when there was no threat. Slack does not equate to efficiency or productivity.

Also, as James would like to point out on Skype, he was already planning on unregistering the inactive members who signed up. He opened up registration so that there was a large group of members to choose from, and it was easier to weed out the inactive members.