Thanks for the kind words and for sharing your ideas. Derik responded to a few points already. Some other notes:

We faxed in the ISSN application on Wednesday. We hope to have something lined up in 6-8 weeks.

We’ll likely include abstracts on the front page, instead of the first few words of the article as we do now. Unfortunately, that probably won’t meet your needs, but you did get us thinking.

If you ask each of us, you’ll probably get six slightly different responses, but for me the inspiration behind our version of peer review is primarily essayist and VC investor Paul Graham, with a considerable debt to The Code4Lib Journal as well.

I think that, for nearly all of your potential users, the shortened content makes sense. I’m not at all suggesting that you change it. There aren’t going to be hundreds of people doing quantitative blog analysis; probably not even three. It would be absurd to change a good, working design to suit one person!

The problem with the archive page is that it’s showing zero comments for both posts, which is wrong in both cases. Probably just a tweak…

For what it’s worth, the shortened content on the home page is because our articles are going to be long, and we wanted (or at least I did and no one argued me down) to let people see something about two posts at a time. Sometimes I found a new blog and the first post may be great, but then I discover it was a bit of an anomaly.

I’ll look into the archive page displaying. That’s harder to deal with until there are a few posts to archive.