First, and because of my style, I've got enemies, over here, perhaps less so, but in particular over there, and some users read and/or post here and there. It's not only one user who I could identify, it's also some more user(s) writing here and there, and which I could NOT yet "identify" (= in the sense of knowing this avatar here is that avatar there), and such a situation triggers paranoid (over-) reaction to some point.
This is not the first time that you've alluded to the same. I don't think you have "enemies" here. I'm not sure what other site you're talking about, but here, we have disagreements- some heated. But we have a first rule of respect, and the second of community. We respect each others' rights to have opinions, and the community's right to have reasonable conversations. Which is the reason that the basement was created in all honesty. And because of that, everyone is a member of this extended community, and there's no place IMO for enemies in such a construct. It's counter productive to said goal. Which leads into your second point:
As said, I had understood you in the line of "your thread should not have been created in the first place". Then for the absence of advertizing. Now let's get serious, please.
I am *totally* confused by this line. Can you unpack it a bit?
The very first element to advertizing is traffic: done. Second point to consider: qualified traffic. Do we need to discuss this, for DC? There are not THAT many such fora in the web, just some "general pc help" fora, and then those "technics" sites, often offsprings from pc magazines: No pc experience sharing.
I don't know what percentage of readers here do also write here, to some notable extent, but I bet you've (/ dare I say, we've?) got a LOT of readers, and they certainly come back with some regularity, because of the non-irrelevancy of our posts.
So what? Can't we all grasp that all prerequisites for good advertizing revenue are present? Or is general traffic only so-so? But why then is DC very high in google's list for every subject that's treated here? mouser, why not start a thread giving some statistics out? Thus, I convene, you first would need some figures, then only we could start discussing if it's worthwile to try to up those numbers, and in case, how to do that. Your next step would be, identify competing ad prices: How much "coverage" sw developers and such would get here, by advertizing here, and at which cost? In other words: Is DC's reach to small so that advertisers would either to have too high ad prices, or that advertising revenues would stay minimal anyway (i.e. by applying prices in accordance with alleged "minimal" reach)?
Then, there are some sites getting money from bringing in contact developers and customers; some such sites do make TOO much money from this, so there should be some possibilities in that, too: There's some room for a site that would take its share if that's a more decent share.
The point of it, at it's root, is the subtitle of DC's banner, i.e. For Software Connoisseurs, or more to the point, in my opinion, for Software Enthusiasts.
DC in my experience, is a lot like the BBS of days gone by. Where the reason for doing it was the love of doing it. At that time, there were not many options for even *making* money off such an enterprise, so it came not into being for that reason... but for people with similar interests to connect and communicate. At the root, that's what DC is about. So even the talk of the relative value of content or page views or monetization of the site is counter again to that idea of community and sharing of ideas. The value of the content to the site is that it is content to help others. Not in page ranks or page views or any such thing. I've never even looked at or though about such, personally.
And that brings us full circle to the talks about your posts. People aren't attacking you in the least about your posts, at least as far as I've seen and as much as I know. It's more suggestions because your posting style tends to make the content that you put forth less digestible to the masses. So they're suggestions as to how to make them better, and you can take them to heart in such a way... or not. Your choice.
Personally, I enjoy reading a wide variety of opinions and experiences, even if I might not necessarily agree or relate. But I do so from a perspective of entertainment and fun. And when a post is more effort than that, I tend not to read. My loss, certainly. But that's also my choice. And I don't think I'm alone in that approach.
These are just my observations and my .02- hopefully you will take them in the vein that they are intended.