There's no reason not to support them both. There's room in the community for two magazines, I think, especially if they're inexpensive enough for folks to get them with pocket cash. | [reply] |
I think it's a content problem, not a consumer problem. It's the CableTV dilemma. More content is better, only if the average quality of the content can be maintained. Is the reward of another outlet worth the risk of all the outlets 'cannibalizing' each other for the quality content?
With this ultimately reducing the overall quality of all publications?
I'm not saying that's the way it WILL be--I'm in no position to judge the availability of the people who do/can contribute to the magazines. Perhaps with the current job market, we'll need 8 more magazines to keep everyone busy :-/
(Edit:) thelenm++ for the important announcement.
--
May the Source be with you.
You said you wanted to be around when I made a mistake; well, this could be it, sweetheart.
| [reply] |
There's plenty of content to be had. A the moment content for perl magazines is limited by the number of people each magazine is in a position to browbeat out of authors. (Except in those cases where actual beating is necessary) That's a not-inconsiderable amount of work.1
Multiple magazines can, at the moment, make it fine. The community of readers is large enough. I have no doubt that they can both succeed if done carefully.
1Speaking as one of the authors in regular need of browbeating to make deadline...
| [reply] |