Ben wrote:To date, we haven't had a groundswell of interest to warrant the creation of a new subforum just on dana. However, we will be happy to reconsider if there is both interest and activity to warrant the creation of a forum.
I think Ben's point is crucial to any good number of sub-forums we could potentially have.
What I think is also important to note is that there nothing preventing anyone discussing these things as it is. Many of the sub-forums created to date have been created because the kinds of discussion they're designed to facilitate are difficult to manage without the appropriate constraints and guidelines in place. For example, the Mahavihara section exists so that people can discuss commentaries without having to justify the commentaries. The Suttanta meditation section exists so that if people wish to practice meditation as the Buddha taught it, they don't have to battle over arguments rooted in commentarial reasoning to do so. Likewise, the Dhamma Free For All exists so that people can discuss heterodox interpretations of the Dhamma they believe without being reviled as heretics. That's just a couple of examples. It's hard to see how people couldn't discuss dana within any number of the current forums, should the desire to do so arise.
“I hope, Anuruddha, that you are all living in concord, with mutual appreciation, without disputing, blending like milk and water, viewing each other with kindly eyes.” (MN 31)
What is the final conviction that comes when radical attention is razor-edge sharp? That the object of the mind is mind-made (manomaya). (Ven. Ñāṇananda)
"If you have always believed that everyone should play by the same rules and be judged by the same standards, that would have gotten you labeled a radical 50 years ago, a liberal 25 years ago and a racist today." (Thomas Sowell)