>>PMFJI, but that is the lamest excuse I have ever heard.
>
>Excuse??? Who's making excuses? I only made a suggestion as to what the community can do to improve the situation. You're right, technical guidance is up to the editorial staff, but that doesn't mean we can't nudge them in the right direction.
>
>I have no business ties with FPA or Foxtalk. I don't really favor one over the other, and have no motive to make excuses for either of them.
>
>FWIW, I subscribe to both, but if I had to choose one, it would probably be FPA because FoxTalk's technical content is only marginally (if any) better, and it's something like 4 times as expensive for less material.

Ok that's fair. I thought that you were submitting content to FPA from other posts. If you are that's great.

So I guess that I'm preachin to the choir again.

I felt that FPA was beginner content. They are the same price becasue one gives you the code, the other you have to buy it as an add on. In the end very close in $ for the final product.

The community can do alot. It does do alot. I feel that FPA should do likewise. They could have a defined tenure for top dog editor. At it's end they are replaced by another who is also qualified.

My 50 or 150 won't make them or break them. 100 of us makes a slight difference but not much. Having Hallogram step out would be a whole new issue.

What if they provided content of the articles 3 or months after publisihing? I think that they wine about paying the writers more money. So it's all about the writers and screw the readers?

I guess that I'll find more real time info here. What if they did a weekly ezine? I might subscribe to that? It would be alot more timely. What is their turn around 3 or 4 months?

__Stephen