This has varied over time. At present, only Clarke participates on a regular basis. Every board member is a member of the forum, having joined at one time or another. They tend to immediately stop participating as soon as they are challenged or questioned on any issue.

Board members tend to view the forum as a hotbed of anarchists, a place to be avoided at all costs. In truth, this has been more or less the case since I kicked off the forum back in early 2004.

Some Board members have had many disparaging things to say privately about the general quality of the people on this forum. I respond by reminding them that perhaps half the OPA membership reads the forum, and these are the same folks who are likely to vote in OPA elections. Election polls on the forum are generally very much on the mark.

Last year, for example, the poll here was a precursor of the major upset that was to come in the actual election. I had a problem believing the poll numbers, until the actual election when the then board majority suffered a major defeat in spite of substantial spending on the campaign of two sitting board members.

Back in 2004 I placed an image of the OPA logo in a forum article or message and then president Dan Stachurski had OPA attorney Joe Moore contact me about the illegal use of the logo without OPA permission. He also had a friendly news reporter make an issue of it in print. When I explained to Moore that the logo image had actually been included for use in a OPA news release, the issue never arose again.

When I began to video board meetings about 10 years ago and put them online in the forum, a story appeared in the Independent regarding then president Dan Stachurski's behind-the-scene attempt to stop me. Stachurski insisted he would have never tried to do something like that. At the next board meeting a board member slipped me a copy of  a letter from attorney Joe Moore responding to Stachurski's inquiry about how OPA could stop me from doing the video. Never trusted him after that.

Bob Thompson has a very vocal and negative view of the forum. I'd say a similar sentiment was shared by his two predecessors.

There are nearly 300,000 messages to be read, going back to 2004. Would someone find the odd message in bad taste? Perhaps. However, I'd say this online forum is first rate, and the participants are generally a model of what online forums can be. Some verbal critics of the forum read it religiously but never post.  Claiming to not read the forum or disparaging the forum has become more or less a litmus test in some political and social circles around the Pines.

In truth, a place like this is a very difficult arena for managers or politicians, primarily because they cannot control it and it is non-stop. It can also expose a board member's or a candidate's lack of understanding on key issues or policies. Some past board members used the forum quite effectively as a political tool to show their opposition to a then current board majority. These would include past presidents Bill Zawacki and Bill Rakow, and of course, Clarke.

Clarke and I may frequently disagree on issues, but he is a master at using this forum. He does it naturally, perhaps not even thinking about it.

As an entity, OPA essentially ignores the forum. OPA's association members do not.  My purpose in creating the forum was to provide a place for free and open discussion of OPA issues by the membership.