>>
>I assume that Mike Helland made some remarks that caused this to happen.
>>
>
>That would be a good bet....
>
>>
>I asked others whether they too think that Foxtalk has deterioriated, in number of articles and in quality. I once again ask your opinion. Moreover, if you agree, what do you think should be done about it?
>>
>
>There are several problems with FoxTalk. I believe Whil has been at the helm since 1996 or 1997 (maybe earlier). After 7 years (and perhaps more) - a magazine needs a change. Also, you generally have the same group of people regularly contributing. I started writing for Foxtalk in 1993 and stopped in 1999. After 5 years - I had enough. You have some new contributors - but for the most part - there is a stale-ness to the content.
>
>Is FoxTalk still a good magazine? Yes - but it is not even close to being the magazine it was in the years 1995 - 1999.

Only coincidence that those were the years you were contributing? <vbg>