This Week in D is a valuable source for information, but it is also on the front page and shapes how D is perceived.

It just doesn't look good or factual when it talks about "flame throwing" and "flamewar". I don't think there has been anything that warrants that kind of terminology this week. Other weeks, maybe, but "flaming" usually refers to prolonged personal attacks.

Maybe one should reconsider the entertainment aspect of the newsletter and stick to factual information that is relevant for the reader.

On Monday, 30 November 2015 at 12:52:43 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad wrote:
> ...

There we go, another +200 replies and drama.

On Monday, 30 November 2015 at 13:34:20 UTC, Bubbasaur wrote:
> On Monday, 30 November 2015 at 12:52:43 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad wrote:
>> ...
>
> There we go, another +200 replies and drama.

No drama, the sole purpose of the front page is to inform newcomers and it has much more impact than the forums. It would therefore be a good idea to keep the front page professional.

If there is not enough factual content for a weekly newsletter, then move to a bi-weekly.

On Monday, 30 November 2015 at 14:07:03 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad wrote:
> No drama, the sole purpose of the front page is to inform newcomers and it has much more impact than the forums. It would therefore be a good idea to keep the front page professional.
>
> If there is not enough factual content for a weekly newsletter, then move to a bi-weekly.

Sorry if it seemed rude but the message wasn't for you and in fact I agree with you, it was a bit strange that mention on the newsletter.

Bubba.

On Monday, 30 November 2015 at 19:01:59 UTC, Bubbasaur wrote:
> Sorry if it seemed rude but the message wasn't for you and in fact I agree with you, it was a bit strange that mention on the newsletter.
>
> Bubba.

*hugs*

I'll change it to "thread" on the front page.

On Monday, 30 November 2015 at 14:07:03 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad wrote:
> therefore be a good idea to keep the front page professional.

"professional". this means "boring, uninteresting, written for witless idiots without sense of humor". the worst think we can do is start attracting such kind of people.

On Monday, 30 November 2015 at 20:07:10 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
> I'll change it to "thread" on the front page.

:-)


On Monday, 30 November 2015 at 21:47:21 UTC, ketmar wrote:
> "professional". this means "boring, uninteresting, written for witless idiots without sense of humor". the worst think we can do is start attracting such kind of people.

You have 3 seconds to convince a random visitor that the site is worth his/her time. If I am looking for a tool the last thing I want is to try to download something from an emotional boy scouts club. But then again, may you are right. Maybe the forums need more boy scouts.

On Monday, 30 November 2015 at 21:52:34 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad wrote:
> You have 3 seconds to convince a random visitor that the site is worth his/her time.

That's basically why i use the word 'flamewar' - it fits into a tweet while being pretty descriptive.

Though, indeed, the meaning among hacker communities and other parts of the internet is a bit different* so might as well reword it on the front page (I do think the content inside stands up pretty well though, and several of the posts match 'flame' by either definition).

* A flamewar among hackers doesn't need to be personal, profane, or particularly insulting. Just invested, long, and esoteric (which often appears pointless to those on the outside).

On Monday, 30 November 2015 at 22:32:50 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
> * A flamewar among hackers doesn't need to be personal, profane, or particularly insulting. Just invested, long, and esoteric (which often appears pointless to those on the outside).

Follow your own instincts, but I would personally be a bit careful about writing about emotional quarrels. Sometimes people are hurt on a personal level, whether they admit it or not, and getting it into an announcement might make it "more real" and make it more difficult to move on.