I am not saying that you, or the people who make up hypography, purposely set out to do this, but the systems in place combine to result in tendency towards slight elitism. In some members it becomes amplified and can ruin otherwise objective, informative tendencies.
I am not saying that the purpose is to do this, I am saying that counter to the purpose, the system in some cases serves to positively feedback and select for these tendencies, in some cases. Lately my best examples are Turtle and Uncle AI. I commend them for their contributions, however their bed side manner could use improvement, IMHO. Not to say I am without sin, but as I have said before I am not immune to critism, nor improvement, nor should I be.
At current I am too tired to objectively identify exactly what is the cause, but I know that it can lead to the alienation, and lead away from naturalization to the hypography environment.
Now, I won't dispute that the number of people who are registered grows, but the number of people who participate, would seem to me on a superficial look to be somewhat lower. It would seem to me that in general the long standing active members are the few, the proud, etc...
I would like to see the diversity of participants from day to day and thread to thread increase, perferablly at a similar rate as the number of people who join the site day to day. However that means allowing the new members a place to interject, a way of demystifying some of the more arcane threads, collecting the majority of data into a single easily traversable information entity.
That also, as I have said means getting older members actively involved with the new members. many people in my experience wait to be invited into the existing social structures for fear of retribution for slights, real or perceived. In some cases that reactionary elitism thing can get in the way of that. I consider myself a pretty tough person intellectually, Uncle AI's early comments didn't help my uncertain social esteem.
Now like I said, Hypography would be well served by a wiki of some kind, the more integrated with the forum and news the better. The more diverse the fields of inquiry that we discuss the better, and the more structured (of the form following the function, that is structured not for structure's sake but for function/purpose sake.) our discussions the better.
Take for instance the rules. In the rules we have a beautiful set of information regarding fallacies, however the context, accessibility, and usuability of those rules are not optimal. Fallacies take place in discussion or debate, why is it that we do not like wise have rules for our (essentially) structured and peer reviewed discussions? Without the implicitly or explicit (better for new members) structure, objectives, rules, boundaries, the individual is left to find their own form of debate or discussion which may not live up to the community standard resulting in the ridicule or pre-mature banning of individuals due to the unspoken rules of conversation.
One of my experiences of this in play was in my tango with Buffy over a new member of hypography. Now admittedly the word used by the member has negative connotations.
The reaction to the unconventional member was rather strong. This is a case where the member was expected to know what is and is not acceptable, implicitly (unspoken rules). This may seem reasonable to the people who are used to hypography and have been around, but it isn't reasonable for new people.
Now I am not saying that Hypography should engulf smaller forums or any such. I was merely suggesting the possibility of a merger. The purpose of that purposal was towards an expanded community. As currently, form where I am at there are hypography only links.
For an example of what I mean by community, I would suggest taking a look at this. Total Annihilation Universe. The reason, is this. That community started shortly after the game was released and is one of the largest longest lived game communities on the Internet, even today. The structure of the site is very simple, but is very much to the point, and makes it a point to build in connectivity and community to the site itself.
We could do likewise with Hypography, excepting that we would try and seek out to form a community out of more academic circles. The idea is to enlarge exposure both of hypography and the sites that we support. For instance, I would wonder if perhaps anyone has approached the Associations for the Advancement of Science.
In America alone we have:
United States National Science Foundation
American Association for the Advancement of Science
Just to name two off the top of my head. Undoubtably if this is as Wiki says:
then the afforementioned organizations would be interested in this network. If not willing to promote the site, publicly.
one of the most intellectually rich and diverse online science communities on the Internet.
My main purpose in this all of course is to increase the quantity and quality of hypographers participating, and by proxy myself.
I am of course reasonable, and would like to hear alternative solutions. I am only purposing a few upgrades or additions to the Hypography features list.