I think we can agree on a set of requirements. A replacement, however, would be a serious undertaking. It's not a case of build it and they will come. There are at least 40 science collaboration sites and I think it's fair to say there's been no real clear success in that space. - Mr. Gunn

Agree, Mr. G. Even more so, not even sure we could agree on a set of requirements. :) - Steve Koch

I think we could agree on basic requirements, since the original FF interface met most of our needs quite nicely. Basically, just go back to content-centric form and function. At present I think FF is workable, and better than trying to build a separate site. It remains to be seen whether it stays that way... my own hope is that it will always provide enough options (skins, pause button) to keep us content-focused types happy, while also finding a way to make money. - Bill Hooker

Of course, in this thread we can't even agree on whether we could agree on something... :-) - Bill Hooker

LOL, Bill. The widescreen userstyle, removal of avatars, and the replacement of the service icons has done a lot to get me back to my happy place. I do agree that it's probably going to continue to change in the wrong direction for us, since Paul Buchheit seems to have made his decision about which way he wants to go. - Mr. Gunn

I'm willing to accept that PB knows an awful lot more than I do about how to make money from FriendFeed. I just hope that whatever he needs to do to make money leaves room for the kinds of uses we (biogang) are making of FF. That way we get the best of both worlds: FF becomes financially viable, and we don't need to migrate. - Bill Hooker

Word. - Mr. Gunn