Call me a heretic, but in an odd sort of way, I can see value to not having SSO. I'm a forum freak. At any given time I'm actively participating in three different forums on completely different topics. I've run my own on occasions, and stood as mod (and intermittently admin) at one place for 8 years. So registering for a forum was the most natural thing in the world for me.

Then, as I deepened in interest, I was presented with a reality check: wiki-editing/voting etc.. do you really want to go that far? Bug-filing... do you really want to be that involved? (NO!!! Bugzilla terrifies me!) and most recently "Are you willing not only to cherry pick what interests you on the forum but to have Maemo stuff up your maibox too?"

At each point, I was offered a choice of "No, this is involved enough for me".

SSO may be a Holy Grail, but we'd lose as well as gain in finding it.

As for 'where conversation happens' as a rabid forum freak with a deep, viscal loathing for mailing lists, you might expect me to feel strongly that all debate should happen here. But you know what? I hate certain types of music, too, but wouldn't close the radio stations. I loathe football (soccer) and believe only cricket or rugby (Union) are worthy of watching, but I wouldn't cancel Match of the Day. My preference is for worship involving lots of rousing hymn singing... but I can enjoy a silent retreat or a waft of incense now and again! There are people who feel as strongly as I do about fourms that mailing lists are the Only True Way to communicate. If I want to be in connexion with them (Methodist spelling - not a typo!) then I have to allow for and live with the diversity involved.

What I'm looking for in a council is people willing to live with the lumpy bits of our community and try to work with the amazing diversity we have here, not take sides or worse, try to 'cancel' the communication they dislike.