As a result of your suggestions, we'll operate a little differently from now on. The very first thing we'll do is disable or severely modify the Vote Up/Vote Down button in the "Comments" section. That button has buried a great many worthwhile thoughts, and it'll be gone within the week. My apologies to those whose opinions have been stifled.
Second, we're going to begin networking with other blogs so that we may cross-post their best pieces and vice-versa. We're a non-profit, and uninterested in "exclusive" stories. We're interested in getting out information, sharing ideas, and growing the global skeptical community. If you have a regularly updated blog that deals in skepticism and critical thought, or if you know of one with which we might productively collaborate, please drop a line.
Third, we're going to post more JREF stuff. In the past, we've felt a little guilty about posting too many self-referential articles. Commenting on hate mail or talking about Randi's latest adventures feels like the easy way out, since the material is readily available and publishing it requires very little effort. I don't think anyone in the office, least of all Randi, had any idea that people cared about the profoundly unglamorous and frequently frustrating day-to-day operations of the JREF. Apparently, you do. Thanks for that. In the coming week, we'll figure out how to get Randi/JREF-related information posted here without distracting Randi too much from work on his book. (It's called A Magician In The Laboratory, and it's gonna be huge.)
Disabling buttons, dishing about Randi's exploits, and coordinating with other blogs are all relatively simple things, and we can do them quickly. Some of your other requests are trickier. Establishing regular columnists takes time. So does creating original multi-media content, cleaning up the website's template, finding intelligent pro-woo writers brave enough to defend their positions here (good idea, Gazcam), devising a "Resources" page, and building an online skeptical resource for kids.
But we will do those things. We have a tentative launch-date for a new, improved, richer version of the website that will incorporate almost all of these suggestions. And though I'm not yet allowed to divulge that date, I can tell you this: you will all see the new Randi.org well before our civilization is destroyed on December 21st, 2012.
In the meantime, please have patience while we line up new writers; create new content and arrange new content-swaps; experiment with new columns and try to revive some old ones. And, if you would, please take a minute to answer a few burning questions:
Should Swift cover only those lapses of critical thought involving the supernatural? What about unsubstantiated claims regarding science, history, politics, and ethics? Should Swift publish only material germane to the JREF's mission, or should it publish anything of likely interest to those visiting the site? (For example: the JREF has no official position on the existence of deities, but we bet most of the site's visitors are interested in the Vatican's attempts to keep contraceptives out of Africa. Should we cover that?) And which articles are better: funny ones, snarky ones, scholarly ones, sober ones, sad ones, or celebratory ones? Or should we publish them all?
Please let us know. And remember, if you'd like to contribute to Swift, you may request a copy of the writer's guidelines by emailing This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it..
Thank you very, very much. - BKT