> 3) I considerably underestimated the amount of real work that goes into producing a presentable article.

Agreed. That's why I suggest the site is turned into something that's attractive but less work. i.e. a slashdot-style central portal site for other articles.

I disagree rather vehemently with that.  There are plenty of news aggregator sites out there.  Another is quite unnecessary IMO.    For those bits of news which may be worth the attention of the group there is the "Breaking news article".  

Now here there's something to consider;  I did the "Corporate IT Executives want free software" as a diary rather than an article because by the time it got throught article voting it would no longer have been contemporaneous with the root article.  But it wasn't just a rehash of the article, it was a couple paragraphs of my response to the article.  

No we don't need a news aggregator any more than we have with the Breaking news article, but a front page section of short articles of responses to article might encourage people to write more.

Once again IMO an "article" doesn't have to be 1000+ words of deathless prose, a couple of paragraphs clean enough to read without getting a headache is good enough.

I would much rather leave IPW a place where the membership (hey, feel free to join! ... and write) can write their own articles and get relatively intense scrutiny, even if it means only one or two articles a month than another news aggregator site where things written, even by the most dedicated habitues are blown through the system so fast that no real thought or discussion can occur.