>I couldnt agree more.  My first question when hearing PostNuke, was
>Why?  I can speak from minor experience here.  For GNUe we used postNuke
>for quite some time (and its a lovely little system, I have few real
>gripes for it).  However, it was just overkill.  I think it will be the
>same for the PLUG website, I dont think we need something that big and
>cumbersome for what we do.

Yet again, I'll also agree that post/phpnuke are great systems, if you need
a lot of their features.  From what I can see, PLUG would not use 1/100th of
the features.  It would take more effort to turn off all the unused features
than it would to build something small, and with exactly the features we
need.  I forget who mentioned it earlier, but I too consider php/postnuke
sites to look too 'busy.' They contain a LOT of clutter, and just make it
more difficult to find what you want within the site.  PLUG's target is
newbies I assume.  If that is the case, then a difficult to navigate website
with clutter will not make life any easier to said newbies.

>I dont think the 'website' is the place to collaborate.  I think that
>email lists and irc are much more conducive to real time collaboration
>and for setting up things like installfests and such.  The website
>basically becomes information presentation and not idea exchange.  In
>which case phpNuke seems like a Forumla One car on a go kart track. :)

The website definitely wouldn't be able to replace the mailing lists, but it
would be able to suppliment them by centralizing information in a coherent
manner that is more easily accessible, than having to hunt through the list
archives.  Once details for an event are worked out on the lists, the
finalized information can be made public on the website.  This would prevent
users from second guessing information in the mail lists, and questioning
wether or not what they saw int he past is official.

Ditto on the F1/go-kart analogy.

Adam Rader