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.<p>Unfortunately I found there wasn&#x27;t much there. Whilst some (most?) of the articles seem to dig into some depth, it&#x27;s all over shadowed by a negativity that has nothing to back it up, just empty criticism. It&#x27;s telling that I can&#x27;t even determining if he&#x27;s arguing from a pre or post-modernist perspective, or even from a different perspective completely.<p>I found it all a bit disappointing really. I <i>think</i> 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&#x27;t prune it from all the dead-wood of negativity.<p>I really hope the author does dig in and argue a point, because like I said, it certainly feels like he&#x27;s arguing from a position.<p>I just hope that after all that, his point isn&#x27;t &quot;design is art&quot; because he can GTFO :)