Guest:Shenandoah, and Jon do raise some interesting issues. I've been avoiding this sort of discussion for six months because it never seems to change and because It aways seems to lead to name calling of one sort or another. I hope this criticism is constructive. I am going to be very honest and blunt.

Let us take a step back and examine what is best for the site.

Is the site owner interested in serving the needs of the community?

I sent a $100 check with a personal note, because I thought this was a community and Max and I were both members Max being the much more senior one. The only response I got back was a cancelled check.

Was Max within his rights as laid out by the "guard dogs" on this thread? Yes! Will the lack of response affect any future donations? What do you think? Could Max have done better?

I'm saying this not to ask for credit, One hundred dollars is not a big deal. But I get thanks if I hold a door for someone. I know I have the choice to go elsewhere. It is not good P.R. and not good business on Max's part not to say you thank for $100.00. I know that Max is busy, but he probably can use some help in relating with his subscribers.

If Max is going to get grants or Tax-free status then accounting is necessary. Also , opening the books to donors, if the books are as we all expect, will tend to increase the size and regularity of donations. It would be good for Max to have accounts. But as you say, it is his choice.

It is an excellent point that Max owns this. What is to prevent him at any time from going commercial and charging a fee or subscription for DT? If he does he will be within his legal rights to charge money for your work. That is the way it is things are set up. Take it or leave it. Who knows if the site would grow if DT was made public property?

Shenandoah: I am against making DT more academic. Unless it is the only way Max can get a grant to support the rest of the functions. Right now it is the result of a community effort, shared experience, opinions and knowledge. I do not see how it could be otherwise without professional editing. And I doubt that many of us have the time or the means to do research to come out with the "right" answers.

Mick, Spaw, Susan et. al

Maybe you should rethink your reactions to criticisms of Max and Mudcat. You all seem to jump in so quicky and so hard that it is difficult to have a free discussion. I am confident that the points you all make will be made by others and a feeling of community will be fostered. Why don't we try to eliminate the appearance of cliques. I don't see how perceived "insiders" such as yourselves, telling us what you are sick of, appointing your selves guardians and telling people to "f" off, is helping Max. Often times less is more.