Greetings from Mahalo!

[CTMiller]

Hello, all...

I'm Chris, one of the developers at Mahalo. We wanted to thank you to bringing the printfooter issue to our attention. Since are actively looking for feedback, this is exactly the sort of thing we need to hear to make Mahalo better.

The printfooter was part of Mediawiki, as you've already noticed. We've left it in the main page template because of the print stylesheet. We can certainly understand your concern with hidden links, and some of you mentioned that you knew other ways of achieving the same thing without using hidden tags. We'd love to to hear about those ways, so that we can avoid these sorts of problems in the future.

Thanks for the feedback...we really do appreciate it!

-Chris Miller
Senior Developer, Mahalo

[ihelpyou]

Welcome Chris! :hi:

Thanks for acknowledging the issue and posting. :)

I'll ask my guys about the issue. I don't see it as a prob myself though.

I do see much that the software is doing as a problem, like the different url's bugs, etc that should be fixed.

[SEFL]

Welcome, Chris!

I don't see it as spam, either. But if you want to avoid it, this might work:

<div class="printfooter">
Retrieved from "<span class="underlined-text">http://www.mahalo.com/Main_Page</span>"</div>


Put the below code in your print stylesheet, and you're all set:


span.underlined-text {
text-decoration: underline;
}

You can still keep the print-only purpose text that way, and it's not a hyperlink. I don't know if ithis will placate everyone (it almost certainly won't), but it should at least placate some people.

Does this mean you're looking for other bugs as well, though? Because we've found a couple.

[CTMiller]

Thanks so much for the welcome, and the tips thus far. We're always looking to improve things, and this advice is exactly what we need.

Originally posted by SEFL
Does this mean you're looking for other bugs as well, though? Because we've found a couple.

Absolutely. Please...feel free. I'm all ears.

-Chris

[WebSavvy]

You can use CSS psuedo classes after: and print the line out that way, have the rule applied to your "print stylesheet" so it wouldn't require any hidden link.

IE below 7 does not support psuedo classes, so you'd need to add a conditional browser statement in the code that IE would see -- in this manner:


<!--[if lte IE 6]>
// Remove the comment tag and put print footer here
<![endif]-->


Search engines then wouldn't see the IE browser tag, because it's IE specific, and they wouldn't see the CSS pseudo after: line, either because it'd be in your print stylesheet only.

So this way it clears up any potential problems with "hidden links" and this method would work very well and wouldn't require more than 10 mins to implement.

You still have issues with multiple entry points for the same pages. This makes a duplicate content issue for you, while that's not a bannable offense, it still isn't good web development practice.

You can easily add a variable at the top of your pages before HTTP headers are passed, that gets the location of the page and then does an in page 301 to the correct page for both visitors and SEs.

If you're not sure what I'm suggesting, or have no idea about how to implement it, just ask.

And in case you're wondering, yes, I am a programmer and I do know what I'm doing.

[SEFL]

My way was better, Deb. My way was hack-free. (I don't care what anyone says...conditional comments are hacks, just differently named). :D

The other option you may want to consider is just to put rel="nofollow" on the link inside of the printfooter code. That would solve most major SE problems.

Chris, what Deb is referring to as far as the multiple links go (and this is a function of the Mediawiki software) is this:

http://www.mahalo.com/Bill_Cosby
http://www.mahalo.com/Bill_cosby
http://www.mahalo.com/bill_cosby
http://www.mahalo.com/Bill_cOsby
The first two links generate the same page, and #3 redirects to #2 (instead of #1, or not redirecting at all). #4 throws a 404 error.

What I would suggest you do is to 301 all the URLs to the lowercase version of "bill cosby", make sure that URL checking is case-insensitive and then it's not an issue in the first place.

And if you're SEOing it, you might want to put a hyphen in there and then do a regular expression check for any names with [( )-] where a hyphen is.

Mods: I hyperlinked the URLs for everyone's benefit. Chris can check the URLs for himself, and then we can check the URLs ourselves once Chris or whoever is working on this has fixed it and then we know he's got it right. If you want to remove it, that's fine, but I'd suggest leaving it there for those reasons.

Mind you, this brings us to the big issue I would say most of us have with the Mahalo site: why are you using something like MediaWiki instead of creating your own thing from scratch? This isn't meant to be accusatory; I'm just wondering given the deep pockets of guys like Cuban and Leonsis, that's all.

[WebSavvy]

Adam, using a browser specific rule isn't really a "hack" per se. It's just adding some conditional behavior rules to force IE < 7 into acting like other browsers do, automatically.

The method for the PHP location variable wouldn't require using any rel=nofollows because it would eliminate the problem altogether.

If I remember correctly, Adam, you don't know PHP, right? I do, and what I'm suggesting is very, very easy.

It's programming 101 -- very basic.

[CTMiller]

These are all good points and fixes.

WebSavvy...I take your point about conditional browser statements and the pseudoclasses. I've passed both solutions on to the dev team. There is a third option, which is to yank it altogether. We're talking amongst ourselves now, debating which is the best way to go.

On the matter of the URLs and redirects...you bring up a point that we've also discussed: using PHP header() commands to pass a 301 to the browser. Our main goal with using the internal Mediawiki redirect system is to get people to the results they want...which is a sizable challenge at times. Working in the industry as you do, you know that you are constantly fine tuning the site, and some things are higher on the priority list. Getting the search tuned to the point that it works as you would expect it is priority Number One. After, we'd have to look at what it would take to make this change. One thing we have learned with Mediawiki is that everything in the code is happening for a reason. Once we find the reason MW does NOT use 301's, we can begin to address it.

Adam: Why Mediawiki? We felt strongly that, if we were going to have real people working on this, it had to be easy to learn and use. Wiki is perfect for that, and Mediawiki is the best wiki software available today.

[SEFL]

Deb: I consider any browser-specific rule a hack. That's my definition. Like I said, I don't care what the conventional definition is. Conditional comments are hacks.

That isn't to say don't use them. They're not always bad, and sometimes they're necessary. It's just to say that most of the time there are ways to do things that don't require conditional comments. This is one of those times.

And no, I don't know PHP very well...but it's pretty easy in ASP too. Takes about 4-5 lines of code. That's what Mahalo should do...go all ASP. That'd just be sexy. ;)

[WebSavvy]

MediaWiki isn't the best software to use. It's a cheapie route.

The best software to use, would have been your own.

That's just like all of these directories that fall onto the Internet every week. They're all using off-the-shelf free software or some mass produced software requiring a low registration fee.

I happen to have a directory too, that's 8 years old. I didn't go the cheapie route with mine. I actually wrote my own software. It works well, and I've had other directory owners approach me about buying a copy of my script (it's not for sale at any price).

I also wrote our editor's dashboards which allow each editor to have their own login for the system and individual editing privileges. It's easy to use, and works well. In the 8 years I've been doing this there's only ever been one bug and it was a browser specific bug that didn't allow forms with #ids Vs forms using 'name'. So, that said -- it wasn't a bug in my programming to begin with, and was easily fixed.

Doug has custom software that his guys create that would have been a heck of a lot better than MediaWiki.

But, considering none of you guys are programmers and know very little about SEO it doesn't come as a shock you'd select software like MediaWiki.

It's a learn as you go type of thing. MediaWiki has so many bad code problems you'd be better off using a custom solution from the beginning.

Anything worth while doesn't take the free route, and that includes sites using free cheapie software and free web hosting and a free sub-domain on someone else's site.

A business that is serious, and professional would use its own custom software solution, its own domain name, and have real hosting.

There are a couple of really good research papers written by the Web Credibility group at Stanford, that you might want to read.

The information there would be both beneficial and enlightening for you.

The problem with using free software is, every "hacker" out there knows where you're vulnerable at. Think: phpBB.

Use your own custom software. You'll have more peace of mind and your time will be more productive. Because instead of wasting time trying to fix holes in someone else's lack of knowledge, you'd have that time to do what matters more -- and that's adding content to your site.

Hope this helps.

[ihelpyou]

Sure; it would have been better to build your own software, but they didn't do that and now they need to fix what they have. It shouldn't be hard to fix it so let's just wait and see what happens.

Most people are not as up on spiders and search engines as we are. Wikipedia is using it. Many others are using it. Now mahalo is using it. If nothing else, it's very good PR on wikimedia software's part to get all of these others to use their crappy software. :)

It's really the very same thing when it comes to shopping cart software and CMS systems in general. MOST are crap and cannot do everything an owner might want to do. It's the same stuff as programmers have to fix cart software as well.

[Connie]

Hi Chris and welcome. :hi:

In addition to the duplicate content issues that Adam linked to here is another one.

This is from one of the graphics on the home page, and the URL it creates.

http://www.mahalo.com/Image:Sudoku_lm_062707.jpg

That is a duplicate of http://www.mahalo.com/Sudoku

Those images change often, so that alone produces tons of duplicate content. Each of the duplicate content pages have the the hidden link for the correct page.

Personally I can't imagine anyone ever printing one of the search results. IMHO providing a hidden link for some so called user benefit is meaningless.

If there turly there for users then provide a like at the bottom of the page that a user can click and open his printer.

I think you need to make all the URLs
lower case. Use upper case in the anchor text not the link.

Insure that any page can only be accessed by one URL.

[Dave Hawley]

I do see it as spam. Why a link IF it's for humans if they print? Why must it be hidden at all??

[Dave Hawley]

Also, I have to wonder how Mahalo expects users to know of it's existence? Also, how to do guys find what you think is the best results for your users?

IMO, you would serve yourselves and your users better by dumping the silly free software so you can stop applying band-aid after band-aid.

[SEFL]

Originally posted by Dave Hawley
I do see it as spam. Why a link IF it's for humans if they print? Why must it be hidden at all??

Dude, seriously....you gotta let this one go. It's not spam.

[CTMiller]

Originally posted by Connie
...Those images change often, so that alone produces tons of duplicate content. Each of the duplicate content pages have the the hidden link for the correct page.


Thanks for the welcome, Connie, and you have a good point. This is a shade of the same issue that Doug and Adam brought up: it's an internal redirect within Mediawiki. Normally, clicking an image would should you the detials of the image...instead, it's being redirected to the result page. Still...it's worth looking at to see if we can improve the mechanism and bring it into line with current standards.


IMHO providing a hidden link for some so called user benefit is meaningless.


We're thinking much the same thing. We're either going to underline via a span tag and styles, or remove it completely. There is no need for an actual hyperlink on a printed page.

I think you need to make all the URLs
lower case. Use upper case in the anchor text not the link.

Again, a good point, and something we definitely need to consider.

[Dave Hawley]

Dude, seriously....you gotta let this one go. It's not spamIn your opinion it's not spam, in my opinion and in the opinion of others, it is.

Adam, seriously you have gotta stop trying to force your opinions upon others and telling others what they can post.

[ihelpyou]

Dave; Adam is simply giving you his opinion as well. His opinion about your opinion is to let this one go as it's not spam, and I certainly agree with him as it is NOT spam. :) Bad software? Yes. Spam? NOT. I've stated MY opinion about this issue from the very first post of this thread.

Who are these "others" who think it's spam? I don't see any others whatsoever at this point.

[SEFL]

Actually, the "let it go" part was the important part. We get it already.

[Dave Hawley]

No Doug, Adam and yourself have already your opinions in this thread.I don't see it as spam, either.So both Adam & yourself should take your own advice and THEN perhaps suggest it to others.

Who are these "others" who think it's spam? I don't see any others whatsoever at this point.Do you always only read only what suites you? I would HOPE you would know full well by now who thinks it's spam and who doesn't. As you don't though, there is no hope.

But again, this thread has now become pointless, so again I will walk my talk (hint hint) and no post in this Thread.

[Catfish]

Originally posted by CTMiller
Thanks for the welcome, Connie, and you have a good point. This is a shade of the same issue that Doug and Adam brought up: it's an internal redirect within Mediawiki. Normally, clicking an image would should you the detials of the image...instead, it's being redirected to the result page. Still...it's worth looking at to see if we can improve the mechanism and bring it into line with current standards.



We're thinking much the same thing. We're either going to underline via a span tag and styles, or remove it completely. There is no need for an actual hyperlink on a printed page.



Again, a good point, and something we definitely need to consider.

I find it hilarious after the owner of the search engine went to great lengths to criticize this industry, that one of his employees is in here for advice. If SEO is all crap shouldn't you guys already know all this dude?

[Catfish]

And by the way Mr Employee of the Guy that knows so much about SEO, having a redirect on your homepage that doesn't return a redirect code also creates duplicate content between your homepage and http://www.mahalo.com/Main_Page. You will note that both pages are listed in Yahoo. But I am sure that you guys already knew this and you were just seeing if we would notice to test our SEO skills. And by the way, capitalizing the first letter of each of the folders is not in your best interest because people when they link organically often times omit the capitalization and thereby cause duplicate content issues as well in addition to splitting your back links between the capital and non capital version of the page. Also I noticed that you guys use underscores instead of hyphens despite what Google recommends:

http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/dashes-vs-underscores/

No offense to you Miller but the owner of your company is a pompous ass who should already know all this stuff if he is gonna get up in front of everyone at SES and explain how basic SEO is.

[ihelpyou]

Yes, and I think we have already went over all the mistakes. Most mistakes are because of the mediawiki software being used. The wikipedia is the very same way if you look.

MOST programmers I know out there have NO CLUE about search engines Catfish. I think you know this. They have to be taught. I think it's very good Mr. Miller is trying to learn. We all had to learn somehow. I know I have taught my programmers much of what they now know about search engines. They have always been good programmers and could program anything, but now they are great programmers who can program anything. :)

All JC voices is how the industry is seen from the outside. It's seen this way no matter how much we dislike it. Spammers being "asked" to speak at conferences over the years certainly does not do the industry any good whatsoever in this regard. Putting spammers on a pedestal never has done this industry any favors in regards to how the "outside" sees it.

[WebSavvy]

I'm a programmer, and I know about SEs. You have to want to learn the stuff in the first place. Perhaps he finds the SE end of it, boring?

I think SEO is extremely boring, myself. Programming, Design, and Web Accessibility aren't. ;)

[ihelpyou]

I doubt it. SEO is NOT taught in schools when programming is taught. That's why most don't have any clue about it. It's true that you have to want to learn, but that goes with anything. I think most programmers think it doesn't involve them and that is why MOST in our industry think SEO is something done "after" the site is built. It's very wrong and very false, but that is what they think.

[WebSavvy]

That's because programming can be taught in schools and one can earn a degree. The same cannot be said of SEO.

By the same token, I know tons of SEOs that don't even know basic HTML code. Come on now, what's that all about? sheesh.

I actually learned programming, design, and search engine stuff all at the same time.

I learned accessibility, afterwards.

Now when I'm designing something I approach it from an accessibility POV -- giving programming, design, and SEO equal importance.

If you're going to run a site and have any hope for it to be successful, you really do have to be a Jack or Jane, of all.

[g1smd]

>> By the same token, I know tons of SEOs that don't even know basic HTML code. <<


Those will be the "SEO"s that think that "SEO" is all about meta tags and building links and don't realise that covers about 1% of what actually needs doing to most sites... bwahahaahahahaahah...

[SEFL]

Originally posted by Catfish
I find it hilarious after the owner of the search engine went to great lengths to criticize this industry, that one of his employees is in here for advice. If SEO is all crap shouldn't you guys already know all this dude?

If it's crap, how the hell could any outsider be reasonably expected to?

Like Doug said, Calacanis is only saying what the outside world is thinking. The problem isn't what he says, but how much of it is true. You can get all pissed off and call him a pompous ass (which sort of makes you look like one too...no offense, but that's how it comes across), but the reality is that SEO is, by and large, a shady industry (notice how I italicized the by and large part...it doesn't apply to everyone. So no one crawl up my ass over this.) There's more than enough noise surrounding the SEO industry to disgust any outsider (and insiders with any ethics.)

Calacanis is criticizing the industry because it deserves to be criticized. And if his employee is confused, it's because the industry created the noise that confused him. So rather than getting up on your own high horse and calling him a pompous ass, maybe you should look at why Calacanis says the things that he says.

Quite frankly, I think the whole thing is hilarious for different reasons...Calacanis pulls strings, and SEOs dance like marionettes. He says something outrageous, all the egomaniacal jackass SEOs "put him in his place", and he draws attention and gets free feedback on whatever it is he's working on. It's ironic how the people who want this guy to fall on his ass the most are the ones most likely to help him succeed.

Hell, I want him to succeed just to see the idiotic things most SEOs will say when he does. This guy rocks...he's a tenth-degree puppetmaster.

[ihelpyou]

If you're going to run a site and have any hope for it to be successful, you really do have to be a Jack or Jane, of all.
No you don't Deb. You just have to surround yourself with people who know what you do not know. I don't know the ins and outs of programming, but I know how things should be done as to search engines and programming. As long as you have the people who either know or who can be taught, you are just fine. It's very rare one person knows ALL things. It's actually rare that one person knows most things.

[SEFL]

Very rare for one person to know all things? I'd venture to say non-existent.

[WebSavvy]

You're saying it's "nonexistent" for a person to know programming, design, seo, and web accessibility?

No, it isn't, not really. Irina knows all 4 of those, so do I, and so does Blue. Danny knows all of it except for accessibility, but he's picking it up from me and Irina.

I guess it all comes down to what circles you hang in. The four of us seem to spend a lot of time together because we do have so much in common.

:cool:

[Dave Hawley]

But to be able to run down anything, one SHOULD know at LEAST as much as those they run down.

Don't get me wrong, I agree with a lot of what Jason stated, but I now KNOW he's is talking from a position of ignorance and is simply parroting words.

I would bet money it's all hollow Grand-standing for publicity. Which quite frankly, is only going to ADD to the SEO industries black-eye.

Doug and Adam, don't get sucked into constantly defending this guy and speaking on his behalf. He ONLY cares about himself and WILL do more harm to the SEO industry than good.

[SEFL]

Originally posted by WebSavvy
You're saying it's "nonexistent" for a person to know programming, design, seo, and web accessibility?

No, it isn't, not really. Irina knows all 4 of those, so do I, and so does Blue. Danny knows all of it except for accessibility, but he's picking it up from me and Irina.

I guess it all comes down to what circles you hang in. The four of us seem to spend a lot of time together because we do have so much in common.

:cool:

No, I'm saying it's non-existent for a person to know PHP, ASP, ASP.NET, Ruby on Rails, Javascript, Java, HTML, CSS, graphic design, Flash, SEO, web accessibility, online marketing, offline marketing, server configuration, security, and the thousand other issues that pertain to web design.

I'm pretty sure that's what Doug meant, too.

Dave: he may be parroting words, and he may have vested interests. So what? What difference does that make?

I don't care if the only thing in his world is Jason Calacanis. He's the only outsider who consistently has the balls to say things that he does to insiders, and be right about most of them (if not all of them). Like I said, I just think it's funny that he gets everyone all riled up, saying stupid things, and exposing the mass ignorance of the SEO community in general.

My rooting interest in this isn't because of who he is personally...I don't even know the guy. I just want to see what would happen if someone who managed to piss off 99.9% of the SEO community succeeds. There's a lot of high comedy potential there, and it needs to be explored...I've got three bags of microwave popcorn just waiting for a special occasion like this one.

[Dave Hawley]

Dave: he may be parroting words, and he may have vested interests. So what? What difference does that make?If you have to ask that question Adam, you will never understand.

Put it this way, do you think Sergey and Brin were parroting words and had vested interest when they 1st started Google?

BTW, Like I said, I happen to agree with a lot of what he said and he doesn't ruffle my feathers in the slightest. However, it appears those speaking out against him has got you riled up and constantly speaking in his defense. Why defend a parrot?

Trust me, grandstanding only works long term if you are doing so from a solid foundation and you KNOW the subject. Jason is on sinking ground and knows zip on the subject.

[SEFL]

Originally posted by Dave Hawley
If you have to ask that question Adam, you will never understand.

Put it this way, do you think Sergey and Brin were parroting words and had vested interest when they 1st started Google?

No, but what you're forgetting is that the parrot is largely, if not completely, correct. I don't care what the motivation is behind someone being right. When they're right, they're right. And Calacanis is right in much of what he sees and says.

Originally posted by Dave Hawley
BTW, Like I said, I happen to agree with a lot of what he said and he doesn't ruffle my feathers in the slightest. However, it appears those speaking out against him has got you riled up and constantly speaking in his defense. Why defend a parrot?

I don't defend parrots. I defend what's right. If a parrot happens to be right, then I defend the parrot.

Originally posted by Dave Hawley
Trust me, grandstanding only works long term if you are doing so from a solid foundation and you KNOW the subject. Jason is on sinking ground and knows zip on the subject.

If that's the case, then maybe instead of sticking our (and i use the word "our" very loosely) collective noses up in the air and being all high and mighty toward the guy, thereby giving him even more fuel and more reason to grandstand, we should be taking the time to be a little more reasonable with him and the Mahalo team and educating him without acting like our **** doesn't stink all the time.

How the hell is anyone supposed to learn anything if we all go around talking down to people that don't know as if we're somehow part of some mystical secret society full of witchcraft and spells? There's the real bullshit in SEO right there.

[Dave Hawley]

No Adam, I'm not forgetting anything as I have stated it twice now in my last 2 posts. Perhaps you forgot that between reading my posts and replying?

Adam, if you choose to constantly defend and speak on behalf a parrot who has no clue, don't complain when you are dragged down with him.

I don't care what the motivation is behind someone being rightOh boy, you should.

How the hell is anyone supposed to learn anything if we all go around talking down to people that don't know as if we're somehow part of some mystical secret society full of witchcraft and spells? There's the real bullshit in SEO right there.I can't believe you just wrote that! What do you think the parrot you are defending is doing? Let me tell you, exactly what you refer to as "bullshit".

Trust me Adam, this guy cares ONLY about himself NOT the greater good of SEO industry.

[ihelpyou]

Well sure Dave; he is "speaking down" to us. The thing is; he is "not" in our industry. He's on the outside. That's the whole point. MANY out there speak down to us even when they have no business to do so. We shouldn't be bashing those people who are actually saying things that are true, but should be "teaching" those people that there are "some" of us in this industry who are not like all the others. When there are constant screams about how JC is this and he is that, etc, there is NO way he will listen to 'anyone' in this industry as this industry is certainly proving his point for him.

Do you think it would be better if "all" of us in the industry bashed and trashed him? I truly do not think so. It's not a matter of "defending" him at all, but a matter of defending OUR industry and showing those "outside" of it that there are some "good" things about the industry.

[SEFL]

Exactly my point, Doug. If everyone sticks their nose up at him, he's going to respond in kind. It may not be right...I'm not going to debate the relative merits of that attitude. But it's very understandable.

Take this thread for example...Chris Miller came in looking for answers. He probably got bored and stopped reading it because of the pissing contest that will inevitably ensue every time someone mentions Mahalo or Calacanis.

Dave: if you want to know why I won't respond to your comments anymore, that's the biggest reason. This was supposed to be about helping someone who asked for help, and we all got sidetracked, including me. I'm doing something about it right here and now...anyone who wants to join me is more than welcome.

Hey Chris Miller, are you still with us? I saw you guys removed the printfooter thing. Even though it never bothered me, it's a good start.

[Dave Hawley]

Do you think it would be better if "all" of us in the industry bashed and trashed him? Who suggested that? But as you said so and you agree with Jason's grandstanding bashing approach, why shouldn't we?

Doug, I have said many times now that I agree with much of what he has said. But the person speaking, what we consider the truth, is simply grandstanding for personal gain and has no clue about the subject (parroting), more harm is likely to be done than good in the long run. He could NOT careless about the SEO industry and would jump ship in a heart-beat if/when the grass becomes greener.

If you associate, defend and constantly speak on his behalf now (which both you and Adam are), you will find it VERY hard (or impossible) to have your good white hat name who DOES care about the SEO industry, become dissociated.


Make no mistake, this guy is out for personal gain, today he is stepping on black-hats to be seen, but tommorrow it could well be white-hats and the SEO industry in general.

Wake up guys, you don't need/want this type on your side.

[ihelpyou]

Quite the opposite. You didn't read my post. I AM defending our industry and showing the outside there are some level heads in it. Bashing and trashing those "outside" will get us no where quickly. It makes the industry look like fools and jerks....

[Dave Hawley]

Doug, it's not any just that any single post makes you look like JC follower, but also all your posts on the matter in this thread and others. Trust me, I have read every single word in ALL your posts on the matter. Some twice, because I couldn't believe what you wrote!

I AM defending our industry and showing the outside there are some level heads in itBy defending, speaking on his behalf and ageeing with Jason you are you are showing the "outside" your head is not one of the "level" ones though. Surely you can see that?

While guilt by ascociation may not be fair, it IS a reality.

[Connie]

Dave your beating a dead horse on this issue. :horse: Although I agree with some of your points, You are doing more to promote JC than Doug or Adam ever have.

Let this thread die. That's what I decided to do a long time ago.

In all fairness CT Miller asked a question in here about the problems with Mahalo.

I think he has to be commended for that.

Due to all the criticism of Mahalo it was kind of like stepping into the Lions Den.

Personally I do not think this thread has that much to do with JC.

[Dave Hawley]

While I might be beating a dead horse, I'm certainly not the ONLY one, unless you have your blinkers on.

You are doing more to promote JC than Doug or Adam ever have.No idea how you come to that conclusion without applying total bias. The post count ratio between dave:doug/adam is roughly the same. The BIG difference is, I'm not speaking on some parrots behalf and defending him.

That's what I decided to do a long time ago.Apparently not.