I had the same experience; signed up to the mailing list because the articles looked like there was real depth (at last!) really digging deep in the aspects of

I had the same experience; signed up to the mailing list because the articles looked like there was real depth (at last!) really digging deep in the aspects of design. I was also excited by the fact that he appeared to be arguing from a non-modernist design perspective, and as an ardent believer in modernist design, I was excited to have my beliefs challenged. Unfortunately I found there wasn't much there. Whilst some (most?) of the articles seem to dig into some depth, it's all over shadowed by a negativity that has nothing to back it up, just empty criticism. It's telling that I can't even determining if he's arguing from a pre or post-modernist perspective, or even from a different perspective completely. I found it all a bit disappointing really. I think he has a point to be made in there somewhere, he certainly begins his arguments from a position that seems tenable, but for the life of me I couldn't prune it from all the dead-wood of negativity. I really hope the author does dig in and argue a point, because like I said, it certainly feels like he's arguing from a position. I just hope that after all that, his point isn't "design is art" because he can GTFO :)