Affirmative, I am in the process of converting to Plone as we speak, not because of the level of support (which is always variable in any FOSS "product"), but because I lack some functionality and because I got feed up with how other people were treated.

Documenting the migration from Drupal to Plone on Drupal.org wouldn't really be appropriate, but I may open a blogline and document my thoughts/problems/etc. on this site, if you would think that would be valuable?

I refuse this attack and demand that you apologize!

I didn't know I attacked you, but your chances of getting an apology because I have a contrarian opinion to yourself, on my own site, is extremely slim.

You admit that certain censorship happens, but you believe there exists a good reason for it. This is your right, but I disagree and most explicitly will not make an apology because I disagree with you, especially as you (partly) confirms my facts.

If you feel, Drupal won't serve your purposes, feel free to change. Have luck.

I believe this is exactly what I am doing?

--

"This Is My Truth - Tell Me Yours", Aneurin Bevan

please do not blame the CMS package for the lack of activity on your site

I think we have some misunderstanding here; the lack of activity is on my part (i.e., I don't review as many books as I could be doing or write enough articles or update the ToCs as fast as I could or translate enough… ad nauseum) as I spend time converting from Drupal to Plone. The (user) activity on my site is perfectly reasonable for me, even though I miss a real WiKi-functionality to allow more open collaboration.

Regarding leadership: according to Drupal.org themselves, Drupal is managed by a troika. Also, the reasoning behind my article is not based on only the latest incident, but on my observance of of repeated and numerous incidents. I have not been on any receiving end of any of these arguments, but I don't allow censure here (even if the Spam Filter sometimes is a bit overzealous) and I refuse to support it in any way. I think that the so-called deception and innuendo is easily checked by anyone that participates and/or reads the Drupal forums regularly. Granted, mistakes happen and people sometimes are rude, and sometimes users make unreasonable demands, but it the moderators job to regulate that, not just censure some users and allow other (inner circle) users free reign.

In short, I use my right to vote with my feet and selects another software, where people usually are more polite and where it exists a number of forums where people can discuss the CMS and everything around it without being insulted/attacked regularly. Granted, Plone is not perfect and I have been relative satisfied with Drupal, but some of the functionality I am looking for is not present in it and there seems to be a small chance that it will appear. This combined with the attitude, makes a perfect reason for me to change.

--

"This Is My Truth - Tell Me Yours", Aneurin Bevan

ok, I thought you were refering to the lack of activity on your site as Drupal's fault.

Now onto the name calling.

I am getting a bit disappointed on the Drupal community. Not really the community, but the so-called leadership, that seems to enjoy calling newbies idiots, because they dare ask questions in the forums and to excel at telling the users that they are not entitled to have an opinion, as they don't really care what they think.

Where have any of the 'troika' done the above? You won't find it, not because it was deleted, but because it doesn't happen. Some other active developers do honestly respond that they develop for themselves and there own reasons, unless someone who demands features offers to pay for them. You have insulted the three people who have not been guilty of what you claim. And then you avoided answering the charge I leveled by claiming you don't censor. How does your not 'censoring' respond to your vicious attack on the troika's honor?

As to the removal of threads, Dries noted that he did it and indicated that those concerned could continue the conversation in the appropriate area. The other time I have seen action was when a thread was locked. Note, not deleted, locked. I was participant in that little debate and I engaged in no name calling.

You owe a lot of people an apology, but I doubt it will be forth coming.

ok, I thought you were refering to the lack of activity on your site as Drupal's fault.

It would be interesting to see how you managed to come to that conclusion.

Now onto the name calling.

Interesting, wonder who I singled out in my original message&hellip

I am getting a bit disappointed on the Drupal community. Not really the community, but the so-called leadership, that seems to enjoy calling newbies idiots, because they dare ask questions in the forums and to excel at telling the users that they are not entitled to have an opinion, as they don't really care what they think.

Where have any of the 'troika' done the above? You won't find it, not because it was deleted, but because it doesn't happen.

I think you may surmise from Steven's comment below, that he thinks he is singled out. It is not my intention of pointing any finger at Steven, but like many other people he has an aggressive attitude and are prone to tell people that they should look up stuff in the forums/FAQs before asking them in the forum (and usually in a less than friendly manner). This is an attitude that I can understand in one respect (especially if people have worked in a call-center), but that I believe is missing the important fact that newbies doesn't always search for the right keywords (Drupal, like any FOSS CMS, has its own vocabulary which you have to understand before asking the appropriate question) and therefore some leeway has to be allowed.

I am a former O/S architect, but I don't demean people if they don't know the difference between spinlocks and complex locks, even though I may point them to some litterature to allow them to find out for themselves, instead of answering in detail.

Some other active developers do honestly respond that they develop for themselves and there own reasons, unless someone who demands features offers to pay for them.

And the reasoning to see that this is a valid discussion is what? Oh, it didn't fit under the current forum? But that is a valid reason to ask people to take the discussion somewhere else, not deleting it! And in fact, I personally believed that killes attitude towards users were appropriate, as he may be seen as a key contributor (opinions may of course differ on that).

You have insulted the three people who have not been guilty of what you claim.

I think you will see that at least Steven is aware of the validity of the charges, even though he believes he has a reason to behave like he does (which is his right).

And then you avoided answering the charge I leveled by claiming you don't censor. How does your not 'censoring' respond to your vicious attack on the troika's honor?

Oh, so now you're the troika's honor spokesperson? The only one that has been in contact with me (in this forum) has been Steven, and he has firmly stated that he doesn't agree with me, but I don't see any charge that I insulted his honor. He even suggest that if I want to discuss this further, I should do it at Drupal.org or the ML. So, unless you're the official honor spokesperson for the claimed insulted parties, I don't think I have to answer any so-called "charges". And even then, I would suggest that you sue me in court, if anyones honor has been under "visious attack", as that would constitute libel (you can very easily find the contact information at this site). Good luck.

As to the removal of threads, Dries noted that he did it and indicated that those concerned could continue the conversation in the appropriate area.

I believe this is answered above.

The other time I have seen action was when a thread was locked. Note, not deleted, locked. I was participant in that little debate and I engaged in no name calling.

Now I see the light. Any opinion that you don't agree with, that avoids naming names, but instead talks about a sub-group, is now "name-calling". For the record, Dries has removed threads before. I have no issue with threads being locked (see above), but removal of them is censorship in any dictionary (see for example Dictionary Net).

You owe a lot of people an apology, but I doubt it will be forth coming.

I fail to see the logic in this. I have expressed an opinion about something on my webpage, in blog-format. Do you surmise that I may not express an opinion at my own web-page, and therefore should apologise for having an opinion?

Let us check what it says on the frontpage:

Welcome to The Buresund Pages
Where the Buresund family and friends express their opinions, regardless if the world wants to hear it or not!

Just for reference, I review books and sometimes I have very strong opinions about both the authors and the contents. Do any of the authors ever write me and demand that I apologize for having an opinion that is (a lot) less than flattering? No. Some of them may curse me in private (or even write on some webpage that they think I am totally wrong), but they don't try to get any apology because somebody have an opinion.

You don't like my opinions, which is your right, but I suggest that you refrain from starting some kind of holy war on behalf of other people (this is normally refered to as trolling) that don't even indicate that they have been insulted.

If you feel personally singled out, I suspect I touched a raw nerve.

Just to clarify, I will not "apologize" for having opinions on my own site. If you don't like my opinions, I am not exactly forcing you to read them, and I allow you the possibility of replying to them and refuting them. In fact, it is you who "levies charges" against me, on my site, not me that levies charges against you at Drupal.org or at your site. The question then would be if I would "demand apologies" for your behavior, as you are so rude as to attack me at my own site? My answer to that is that you're entitled to your own opinions, and you're even free to express them at my site, even though I obviuosly don't agree with them.

--

"This Is My Truth - Tell Me Yours", Aneurin Bevan

It would be interesting to see how you managed to come to that conclusion.

I misread how the last statement applied to some of the preceeding. It happens.

On to the discussion.

I am not the spokesman. You are entitled to your opinion. I am entitiled to be offended by inaccuraccies and name calling that go with that opinion.

This is the quote.

but the so-called leadership, that seems to enjoy calling newbies idiots,

Your rant started off with a specific claim and broad characterization of an unclearly defined class of people "so-called leadership". When you clarify that class in response to me, you cited the 'Troika'. I have never seen any of the three poeple you narrowed down to call people idiots.

You made a claim of name calling that is not backed by the facts. When I called you on the name calling, you went off in different directions. So I responded, I am not a writer by trade so tend to ramble and wander a bit when I write (I should perhaps correct this, but I prefer to read good books than analyze them). I suspect it is good that I do not write books as I would probably not fair well under anyone's review.

Steven is blunt and very straight forward. When he tells people to search, he often adds short links or specific information to answer the question. Kind of assistence by informing how to find the information in future. Understand that this was my introduction to him a year ago. When I have asked more detailed questions, I have often gotten more precise and specific infomration.

You don't owe anyone an apology for having opinions. You don't owe anyone an apology for not liking Drupal or not using it. You don't owe an apology for thinking people who take time to answer support questions are rude. Your 'fact' that you claim 3 people (you clarified as the troika) call people idiots is untrue. You owe an apology for that. That is what I found insulting. The rest was fine.

I do wish that I had been precise enough to be clear on that in the beginning. That's the problem of not doing a brief outline before writing. I suspect that if I wrote a lot for a living, that I could build the outline in my head.