MMario, I don't think intent is necessary. Failure to provide conditions in which some people can feel free to participate will exclude without intent on the part of others. People who have fought hard to gain wheelchair access to various buildings discovered this. The important test is what happens when someone makes a complaint. If the response on the part of Mudcat is to say "Whoops! Okay lets see how we can fix this problem and let you in." then the Mudcat is not intending to exclude. However if when a problem comes up the response is to trivialize the complaint, blame the complainer or simply ignore it then the Mudcat is trying to exclude.

I think that former accusations of cliquishness and hierarchy have been met with the second response which has infuriated me at times. Complaints have often been met with "If you don't like it, leave!" Which indicates a hardening of the intellectual and social arteries. There have been some nasty flames and trolls I agree, but there are also those who seem sometimes to post anonymously because they don't feel comfortable saying negative things about the Mudcat under their own names. That's an indication of cliquishness to me.

I think one of the unstated rules of Mudcat has been that you cannot say unkind things about the Mudcat without getting a lot of rather silly posts basically saying "The Mudcat is fine because I think it is, therefore the problem is with YOU and your expectations of the place." I think the Mudcat should relax a little and understand that often those who are saying these things want the Mudcat to be a great place, are frustrated when it falls short, but haven't given up enough to walk away in disgust.