Dan, thanks.  On the other hand, can't someone pick up a phone and talk with tech's that know what we are doing.   The site data could be obfuscated.  This would totally remove your liability issues regarding privacy and retain the data content.

 

sigh, i will read the rest of your post, but, once again, I name that my frustration is quite high, due to the lack of driving to a working solution and refusal to have an actual dialogue.

 

 

Dan,

I have read your post at least twice in full, plus a few sections a few more times.  Although I appreciate the validations regarding the value of the wondercafe community, you are dealing with a community that has been sorely tried by very poor behaviour regarding the closure of a service by the church and so, excuse me if I don't spend a lot of time on what feels like platitudes.  Others may feel they help, but, I am looking at this sorely from a customer service perspective and how I would manage an app shutting down to a set of my customers.  I would be receiving a 'does not meeting expectations" rating if I handled it the way this one has been, even if funding isn't available, even if there are no options.  At this point, in my organization, I would anticipate the customer would say "forget IT, I am getting my own service provider solution", which to be fair, is sometimes a reasonable solution.  It is best though if done with both agreeing and no hard feelings, ie a mutually agreeable upon solution.  Basically, wondercafe will leave the united church of canada domain, similair to a church parting company from the wider church.

 

Clarification/ confirmation?

Naming: I have heard that we have approval to use a name that is not wondercafe but is somehow correlated, such a naming will be a fun challenge for the community. I  personally will recommend we proceed with that action immediately. (Crazy, htat would be a fun thread for you to start)

Site: As there is no way for the church to block the startup of a 2nd site, other than through legal recourse due to proximity to name or usage of united church logo, we shall proceed with design of the site .  Showing our willingness to be good citizens, I will recommend that site and name be run past your representatives prior to final deployment.

 

Additional support: once the site is ready,  we may approach your delegates for redirects, advertising.

 

 

I think Dan has left the building.....probably just a driveby posting.

Thank you pinga for your responses. 

I think he makes perfect sense. You could not expect more. People who try to get to WC will be forwarded to a new site.

If you wanted more, you would have to have a negotiator buying dan lunch and figuring out a win win deal where there is something in it for the church too.

 

Why have you and the UCC refused to engage with wondercafe. Other than prouncements no one has answered our questions. I took considerable time writing a letter, (ed) last year and I never even recieved an aknowledgement. let alone a response.   And as Pinga points out there are solutions that would solve all of the problems you raise, yet you have refused to engage with the members.

 

But you choose to ignore us, you choose to not reply to letters, you choose to believe that talking to people is not worth it. This only leads me to suspect  you are being decepetive and hiding something.  

 

I would say other things but I suspect that you have posted and will not read the replies.

 

Greetings Dan....

 

I appreciate that you have taken a measure of time to share your insights and encouragements. 

 

George

 

Hello each and all...

 

The preceding note took me less than half of a minute. I wonder how it is that neither Gary or Nora managed the simple courtesy of giving half a minute to my personal note in the recent past? I am neither disturbed or offended, only puzzled and sad. I wonder if Dan, as Executive Minister for Communications, appreciates the irony.

 

George

 

 

 

I'm truly scared that you really believe that people can have a decent discussion on any of these sites.

 

I can almost accept people believing in Jesus, but this is too much.

 

I like WC as I can remain anonymous so I can seek help with my personal problems I would not dare to post pubically.

It is curious why he would name instagram as discssion form. It could the letter is meant to impress boss people who are not online 

 

Mind boggling, isn't it?

 

Indeed. 

Daniel - the alternate online communication venues you mention are all close to useless when compared to a properly set up discussion forum. Your words here seem to illustrate the disconnect -

 Once again, everyone is invited to continue to connect with the wider United Church community online, on our Facebook pagesand groups, on Twitter around the #UCCan hashtag, onUnitedFuture.ca, on our YouTube channel, the Church Leadership Network, Google+, and, our newest channel, Instagram.

 

The sites you mention are so dreadfully limited and liniting.  All they do is  connect - "Hi - A few words - Bye."  Meaningful human connection demands far more than that.

 

Thank you for all you have done to make WonderCafe the success that it has been. Your community and commitment has been a blessing to our journey of faith together.

This sounds patronising to me. You weren't there - other than the wonderful Aaron, no-one from the "Office" seems to have participated in a worthwhile manner.  You and they weren't there in the beginning, during the years of wonderful wrestling with a myriad subjects - nor at the end.  Just "We are closing the WC".

 

No wonder people leave churches - they have such a long history of treating people badly.

I thought what Dan wrote was reasonable and courteous........

 

Wondercafe has given me much, but I've come to know that we have to treasure moments - and accept the inevitability of change.

 

If Wondercafe can continue in some form I'll be happy to support it -otherwise I've come to know and care for many wonderful Canadians, as well as visit your country.

 

Gratiude for moments shared, is where I'm at ........

Hi DanielB.B.

 

 

I venture that the rest of WonderCafe regrets this as well.  Especially in light of the obvious grief that the initial announcement caused and the admission that the communication of that initial announcement could have been handled better.  Not to mention the time an effort undertaken by members of WonderCafe.ca to explore ways that the site or the essence of the site might be saved.

 

 

Well, that is something at least. More than nothing certainly. It is hard to determine just how much more than nothing it is. Respectfully, I don't think it represents an actual improvement from the initial communication.

 

 

 

With respect, this comment does not hold water.  I appreciate that Gary, Nora and yourself have very busy agendas and a lot of responsibilities demanding your attention.  WonderCafe simply is not one of them nor is the membership.  The sense of distance inherent in the the first communication has actually been reinforced.

 

You are here now.  True.

 

How long will you bee here now that you are here? 

 

We haven't seen Gary here.  We haven't seen Nora here.

 

It would take very little imagination to read what has been written by others and to come to some appreciation of what the loss represents.  It takes a little more effort to provide a presence than lurking briefly and reading occasionally.

 

Pastorally, the announcement to close and the follow-up in wake of that announcment is best described as debacle.

 

]

 

Respectfully.  I don't think it is true.  Members of this community have been mourning since the announcment.  Have you been here with them since blowing that announcement? 

 

No.  Nary a peep.

 

Some months later you share that you lurk and you read.  Your body of material, the visible posts, which we count as your actual presence is amazingly slim.

 

Again, I respect that Gary, Nora and yourself are busy with other responsibilities and time that might have been spent here helping us to process that grief is not a priority.  We can do without the empty words and platitudes.

 

 

I'm sure that we all hope that.  At present that is what WonderCafe.ca and its closing represents.  Loss.  I really hope that you are not coming here just to communicate that we ought to be celebrating.  That we have had more than enough time to process the closing and it is now time for all of us to suck it up and move on.

 

It may just be my grief talking.  Personally I'd feel that was understood better if it was allowed to be.

 

 

Understandable.  Predictable.  Reasonable.

 

Of course in light of the poor communication it reinforces that the idea of WonderCafe has value as one more thing the United Church can pat its own back over while no longer bearing the cost of the expense of maintainging the site or actually providing the service.

 

But hey, I'm glad that WonderCafe.ca still has value as an idea even if it has no more value as a ministry.

 

I apologize if my cynicism is over the top and I appear to be lashing out here.

 

 

Seriously.

 

Our.

 

There is no our.

 

Not in this.

 

At least not an our that extends beyond the membership of WonderCafe.ca and those involved in the hands on Admin thereof.

 

At best this is business.  No hard feelings right.  The lease is up now get out.

 

And I get that.  I'm dealing with budgets in the local Church, Presbytery and Conference yearly.  I know how difficult it is to make ends meet on the revenues flowing in.  As a chair of a committee I know that we are no longer trimming excess fat but increasing slivers of protein.

 

So I get the reality and the necessity of the decision.  I'm not happy with it obviously but that is part of the deal right?  Those effected are permitted to mourn what they are losing.

 

I'm thankful that you have shown up at all.  I can't imagine posting here represents a feel good exercise for you.  I sincerely wish that I could be more gracious when you eventually do show up.

 

I suspect I would have an easier time of it if I got even a whiff of sincerity.

 

I know I'm grieving and I'm probably being unfair to you.  I'll regret that later when I'm not grieving.  Suffice it to say as harsh as I am being on you now I am really reigning it in.

 

I empathize that the decision to close or maintain WonderCafe.ca is something that has fallen upon your shoulders and something that your name is now attached to.  I do not expect that you count it as anything approaching triumph.

 

I do not see your investment in WonderCafe.ca being on par with the membership's.  I don't deny that you haven't played your part in its ongoing presence.  In the end we are a budget item and it really is us or something else.  If you spared us then the flack would be coming from whomever got cut.

 

I appreciate that there is no happy ending for you and that next year you probably get to go through all of this again with some other group.

 

What I would appreciate most now that the deal is truly done is that we be allowed to mourn without platitudes or any kind of expectation that we should just put on a happy face and not burden everyone else with our disappointment.

 

I know that our collective sucking it up and being cheerful would be easier for all those responsible for making the decision.

 

I wish I could deliver that.

 

I can't.

 

I will try to be fair.  I am not going to be dishonest about how I feel.

 

I don't think the initial communication about WonderCafe.ca closing was handled well.  I am supremely unimpressed with your follow-up.  It does not, to my mind, represent anything approaching improvement.

 

I tip my hat to Aaron who has functioned as an intermediary for us and more as a shield for those who made the decision to close.  I think Aaron deserved better than that.

 

I also think that the general membership of WonderCafe.ca deserves better than to be a topic of conversation by folk making decisions for us.  It is good that Gary, Nora and yourself have been reading our letters and responsing to them as you are able.

 

If the word "our" is going to have any meaning I suspect the three of you need to deliver more than that to this grieving family.

 

And please.  Stop telling us about the other social media options.  We aren't luddites or clods.  We do know about them.  Some of us are on them.  There is a reason why we are here instead of over there.

 

I wonder how many times that has to be repeated before it is heard and understood.

 

I regret that our only conversation has been about this matter and how displeased I am about it.

 

Grace and peace to you.

John

 

 

 

 

RevJohn, 

 

Thank you for expressing yourself so eloquently and sincerely. You have put into words what many of us on this site are thinking and feeling. 

 

I had been wondering when you would check in on one of these threads. 

 

Thanks again . . . p3

It is interesting that our pilgrims progress reads days post as reasonable and courteous, whereas the Canadians name platitude and bs.

Pilgrims progress had shared how Australians are blunt compared to us

I wonder if it is our culture that makes us read the post differently (in combination with the other communication or lack thereof)

Interesting stuff.

Everytime I open Wondercafe, at the top of each page.

Turn Around, Take Off!

Waterfall, thank you for my morning chuckle.

Ok, if Dan's letter didn't address your concerns could you please let me know what else you would like to know and either I'll try to answer it or see if I can find out for you?

 

The way I see it Aaron, this is Dan's lesson to learn. He's lucky we're here to help him. :)

It was exactly that - a letter. Not even a drive-by post, but a letter, probably written in Word or some other word processor (quote it and take a look at the formatting in the plain text editor), then pasted through Dan's account to Wondercafe, probably by you, Aaron.

 

Not that it matters much, but it's even harder to take that seriously.

 

And like John, if anyone else from the UCCan so much as mentions Facebook as an option to Wondercafe, I think we are going to collectively lose our shit. Anyone who so much as suggests that exposes a massive ignorance.

 

And Aaron, please fire your web consultants. Preferably out of a cannon. Suggesting Drupal for the next Wondercafe because you wouldn't be able to find the delete button there was insulting to you and irresponsible on their part. I'm not joking - they're useless.

 

You guys have had months to arrange a call with Pinga. Information and decisions come to us in drips, months apart. Even above, it looks like Dan posted, but it's not even that he's not coming back - he was never here. There is no dialogue with anyone other than you, and you aren't making the decisions.

 

Part of me wants to ask if the site data could be obfuscated as Pinga suggested, but at the current rate I know the answer won't come back until after Wondercafe closes.

 

It seems that the best we can hope for is a redirect from wondercafe.ca to our new domain. No post archive. Maybe a mention on a church website and on Facebook, between quaint motivational posters.

 

What any new site will have going for it, is it will blow unitedfuture.ca out of the water in terms of user experience. It will be hard not to. Hopefully we can also attract some conversations out of that hellhole and to the new site.

 

 

This.  Thanks, RevJohn.

I appreciate that you have posted here DanielB.B. - its always best to have all parties involved, in the same room, to dialogue/resolve issues.  Hope you continue to post.

I, too, am concerned that you are being advised that instagram, twitter etc. are viable replacements for Wondercafe.

There is no doubt that Wondercafe (as a budgetline in General Council's budget) has to be cut - however, in the history of the UCCan, have we learned anything about the decison making process or deaing with difficult issues?  Peter Short (a former Moderator of the UCCan) told us years ago that the founding charism of the United Church has exhausted itself - I tend to agree with him.

I believe Dan addresses this in the post, right? It was decided not to transfer the threads and users to any new site.

 

Yeah!

\

Okay, let's go through this step by step. Here's what you pasted to the forum on behalf of Dan:

From this, it seems it's the user accounts that are the problem.

 

This was Pinga's reply:

What Pinga is suggesting, is that all personal information, including usernames, could be "obfuscated", which means physically altered so as to remove privacy concerns, but still work in the database, while eliminating all personal information. This is something that we keep bringing up but never gets addressed, which is just one more frustration.

 

If you need to teach your web consultants what "obfuscation" means, have them look it up. Tell them to try www.google.com.

 

Yes, that was discussed and it was decided against that for a couple of reasons - legal and trust issues, staff time, and not feeling the capacity to continue hosting these threads into the future could be guaranteed.

 

Or ask a politician. They are masters at obfuscation.

Aaron, again, it comes down to people working in a silo, which is my fricking frustration.

 

The quotes they are giving you for a simple data drop is ridiculous.

It is possible the contractors you use aren't incompetent or ignorant. 

It is possible that they just aren't hearing the solution we are talking about due to it being miscommunicated up the thread.

It is possible that leadership truly is not aware of social media and online forums and so truly does not get how the litany of apps suggested are one and the same  It is kinda like saying, well, we are taking away your truck, but, we know that lots of people are using bikes, motorcycles and cars to travel.   It is possible they are not idiots.

I offered to have us help in multiple manners multiple times. 

 

I did my best to avoid taking my frustration to the public eye and being the supporter of the United Church of Canada to this community.

 

Yet, to Kay's point, this is one more example of a broken organization totally missing the boat.

 

You had volunteers who had skills sets that can run light years around your resources, with deep deep technical networks.  They were volunteering to do work, in a secure fashion even signing a DNA and even assist with funding.

 

The answer ultimately was, 'No', it's too expensive.

 

The quote of $10k to do a simple data dump of a couple of threads, even a test thread so we could identify the mapping capability on your behalf was fricking insane.  I relaly don't care that they have to use super-admin.

 

What I do get, is because of the requirement for that account, you can't help us Aaaron, ie, they (the contracting house), has the United Church of Canada over a barrell. 

I also recognize, aaron,  that much of the work you do now for this site is on a volunteer basis and you give up valuable family time.  I recognize you are an advocate where it is possible that voice is not always welcome.  I recognize that you, Aaaron, know the importance of this community, the hit rate , the content store, and the potential .  I do not hold you accountable in this fiasco. 

 

I do hold accountable the decision makers and those who are responsible for the contract with your service provider.

 

 

I hope that I never hear  your service providers names as I may be tempted to suggest we flame them... They have made a hefty sum off of the United Church of Canada, given questionable consulting services technically, not provided reasonable upgrades/technology and now want to rape you to get the data out.

 

Incompetence is the least of the adjectives that should apply.

Thanks Jayne. Because the idea of volunteers was floated, I wasn't thinking any paid service providers would be needed at all, so I didn't include that above. There is a concern that the United Church GCO would not be keeping its side of the agreement if it transferred the threads and users to a third party...even with confidentiality agreements, it wasn't something people were comfortable with.

 

It was asked and considered, but the answer was no.

 

Is the transfer of threads and users essential to a future version of WonderCafe? Especially when many of the original posters haven't been active participants in the community for a long time anyway? It doesn't seem essential to me, but that's just my opinion.

It would be nice for continuity. And, it can be done without any personal information being transferred.

 

Do we even know how big the WC database is?

 

I've heard it described as "really big." Unfortunately, our web manager is out for a while so I can't get that info right now. But in any case, I don't think there's openness to transferring it.

 

Any other issues people don't see in Dan's message that you would like to know and maybe I can help with? 

Hi Waterfall,

 

 

Hahahahahahahahahahahaha.

 

Good Catch!

 

Grace and peace to you.

John

Hahaha! 

 

It is a good one. 

 

But why? Is it possible the person who is not open (and part of the problem is that we do not know who made the decision) knows how it can be done to satisfy them.

 

Pinga mentioned silos. Could a conference call or an online meeting be of use?

 

 

 

These are the main reasons Alex. I'm not sure a call would help to change these... would it?

It may. I am just imagining that with all the staff cut backs and rearranging of staff responsibilites, things are being overlooked. There were likely things that should be covered by existing staff, but due to what happens when organisations downsize (and the GCO is a particularly difficult place to work with before the cut backs due to it's nature) it gets overlooked.  It's also easier for people to admit to not knowing things in a meeting than through correspondence. We tend to want to be definitive in our writing, and less so than when talking.

 

That said if you bring some WC members, togetherr with GCO and hold at least two  discussions. Than you may flesh out a solution.

 

Frankly many tech and community people do not understand community building and many community people do not understand the interent and WC.  I suspect, that due to Dan letter and lack of participation, that Dan do not understand how community work onlinme, and that Nora does not understand tech. I could be wrong, but apathy in my experince usually comes fromn not knowing, and opposed to not being able to care. 

 

It would be important to include other staff beside  communication staff (Nora plus others)  becasue as I see it Wondercafe was started by them but is is not longer just a tool for the UCC to connect to the outside world, but a community that brings various people together. Including non church membrs, but also church membrs who by reason of disability or geography  can not attend a local church.  

I think Rev John sums it up for me the best. I can't add a lot to what others have said about how this closure has been handled.

 

I just want to say that I am sad and disappointed with how all of this, and even a lot of UCCan things have been handled. I was honoured (and slightly overwhelmed) to have had the chance to go to GC41 in Ottawa. I learned a ton there. I learning things that were both good and bad. I try not to think that the UCCan is just rearranging deck chairs on a sinking ship. When I heard a radio program that had a group of people in 1963 talking about the future of the church, I realized I have been part of exactly the same conversation. 50 years later.  It did not inspire hope.

 

I too do not see the other social media options listed as viable alternatives to this forum. WC for all its faults has provided a relatively easy venue to have discussions. It has been easy to keep track of the conversations of interest and participate when possible. I have learned a lot in here, even from the trolls and the folks who hold entirely different views from mine. Perhaps those are the people from whom I've learned the most.

 

I have a vague memory of the beginnings of WC. There was a lot of fanfare and advertising. Someone I knew outside of the church was very impressed and intrigued. What happened to the advertising? I also have a vague memory of some kind of bequest that may have funded WC for a few years. Is this an accurate memory?

 

I totally get that there is no will to find a way to continue WC. That is too bad. I think this type of venue is one place where church can live. If there was a will, I am quite confident money would be found.

 

It is just sad.

Northwind. I,  too am sad and disappointed in how our church works. Those who wield the power ( and it is not the grass roots) don't care.

Hi... 

 

I suspect they care. It is what they care about that troubles me.

 

George

 

 

Aaron, I cannot begin to count hte number of problems which have come to resolution through phone calls with the correct parties engaged, including technical and business.

The church as a whole continues to make these kind of "write your story" "i will respond" kind of problem solving which puts people into an adverserial role  It also denies that there is knowledge on both sides that teaming could find resolution.

 

I do not support the premise that there is no way the data can't be masked.  Because I do not support the principle, all the other items which stream from that premise are invalid....including that you woul dhave to host the data.  

 

Again, at this point, i have given up.

 

I get that there are people out who are key players who could not contribute.

I get that the consultants have the United Church of Canada locked up.

I do not let the GC staff off the hook for this stuff, and given that, I also wonder how much else is poorly run and executed and leads me all sorts of places that I am not going to go, coz I dont' have the time or the energy....and to be fair, it isn't fair ...but dang, it sure does feed some previously planted seeds.

I think it goes far beyond words like 'sad'.

 

 To me it says that the highest levels of the United Church of Canada spent a rather large sum of money without careful thought and planning.  The Emerging Spirit and Wonder Cafe campaigns were launched without adequately preparing the congregations and members.  I knew more about it than amyone else, (except maybe the  minister), in the congregation I was attending at the time.  Long time members of the UC expressed their horror and outrage to me at the stupid choices of of the highest levels of their denomination.

 

Members of the public who saw the ads and got excited by the campaigns showed up in local congregations and didn't find the vibrant communities they were expecting. They didn't find non-judgemental discussion and caring service to the needy.  They didn't find a community ready, willing and delighted to welcome them in and make help them feel comfortable.

 

As time went on it must have been obvious that the money supply was dwindling.  Did those charged with the two campaigns prepare to retain the working parts of the campaigns - mainly the Wonder Cafe? No.  Did they ask WC users for ideas to keep the site open? No. Did they research cheaper platforms? No, of course not. They just informed the WonderCafe congregation that they were being summarily closed as if they were a bus route that was no longer of value.  

 

To me this is so reminiscent of other experiences I, and many others,  have had with Christianity and its denominations.  In theory it sounds wonderful.  In practise it seems to suck. 

The only successful aspect of Wondercafe - this forum - could have been custom templated in vBulletin for about $500 and hosted for less than $500 annually. Something tells me the UCCan burned through a whole lot more than $4000 hosting this forum. What a clusterfark.

 

Aaron, who are these technical wizard consultants who created this place and who have you over a barrel?

 

Hi chansen...

Here is a hint from the GC 40 report on Emerging Spirit:

 

How funds have been used 2005 – 2008

 

1 - Research = 211,000

2 - Staff support, consulting, office & operations  1,500,000

3 - Congregational events 1,140,000

4 - Research & Development – Ethnic, French, First Nations Ministries 3 185,000

5 - Web resources, Creative services

      & advertising 3,630,000

6 - Total 6,666,000

 

I imagine that the majoity of line 5 went to a contracted corporate partner. Statistics are not my natural habitat and I may be off the wall on this.

 

George
 

 

 

Pinga, I have a gut feeling it's more a personal difference of opinion than a cultural one..

I wrote as you requested, and I got a gracious reply from Nora.....

 

I have the view that life is lived in moments -and that nothing lasts forever - no matter how much we would like it to.

You can choose to react with anger at it's passing - or value what it gave you..... (That was the only way I could come to accept my husband's untimely death - and that has possibly influenced how I feel.)

 

 

Who can say? Perhaps the "new" Pubcafe will be an even bigger success?

It just seems a waste of energy to me to do (and this is an Aussie expression) "a dummy spit" literally months after we have been informed of the demise of the original Wondercafe.

Perhaps the rudeness angle is a cultural difference? To me, who said, or didn't inform us, matters little. 

The fact is what interested me - that Wondercafe was to be finalised.

 

 

Unfortunately, apart from yourself, chansen and Mendalla - there just isn't enough of us capable of making Pubcafe a reality.

If you guys can make Pubcafe a reality I'm sure many of us will support you, including me.

 

Wise words, PP.
Somehow, these reactions remind me on what is going on in my real life congregation after now being amalgamated for two years.
The drama which of the communion plates to use they all had their "history". Why are we so stuck on the past?

I can see that the emotions here have more to do with the disappointment in the UCC as "our" church. A religious institution with a large amount of ideals tends to be judged by what they say.
We forget that they are still an institution. They might have a nice vision statement. So do other institutions. For example the health organization I work for. But the fact is, most times, it s the single workers personal work ethic that makes or breaks the reality of mission and vision statements.
Even the money wasted has a parallel to any other organization. Every front line worker can tell management where they are wasting money. This is two different worlds. Management will still hire a research team for it.

 

Been thinking about this, Aaron. For me it is the process which has been troubling.

 

I don't have the technical expertise of Pinga, Mendalla and Chansen but I hear their intense frustration. I didn't write any letters or emails but I feel the pain of those who hoped for a simple thanks for their efforts.  It seems that only a few people actually received replies. 

 

On a personal level it comes down to feeling that this site and its achievements are misunderstood and unappreciated by the powers that be.  The insistence that other social media will meet our needs keeps underscoring this. 

I suppose what many of us are going through is a natural grieving process, still in the anger stage and a long way from acceptance. Even a new site won't bring the old one back. Management has probably been  through this many times with other "churches" and I'm sure this is typical. After the funeral and everyone goes home the feeling of abandonment and loss, the process continues. Somehow we want to fill the void. If we learn anything, and this includes head office, it should be the importance of "aftercare" whenever a loss has taken place. This probably includes the admittance that without being overly involved that understanding is limited.

 

Something else I'm concerned about. On social it's been asked who will continue with the new site. The yays are few as are the nays. Is this indicative of our culture? Are there more out there that benefit from this site but just aren't voting? How would we know this? How do we determine if this site hasn't just become a service for a few instead of many?