I'm not saying there aren't generalities and non-constructive posts that get thrown about but there are also a lot of substantive comments that get made by skeptics on this forum. These tend to get less attention than the throwaway lines of course.
But do people really want to give up on skeptics and proponents working together to discuss these issues? Do we really want to send everyone off to their own corners - never interacting? Does that sound like progress? Has segregation like that ever really worked? Do you think it will benefit either side to lose that engagement? Don't we benefit from having our positions challenged, and requiring ourselves to answer challenges?
I get that there are many who aren't interested in that. I don't have a problem with that. It's not for everyone. But surely there are some who see the value in continuing to dialogue in a collegial way, probing these studies, analysing them together, trading ideas? I know there are since people have commented on this in the past. And certainly that's where Skeptiko started.
I used to see Skeptiko as a bridge. I know it once had that potential Maybe its a pipe dream, that's quickly fading away, but I still think its worth salvaging. It doesn't have to be all of the forum - but why not make it part of it? Come to think of it: maybe that should be the name for the current CD forum: "The Bridge: a place for skeptics and proponents to come together to discuss parapsychology and related issues in an effort to further mutual understanding, challenge pre-conceived notions, and generate new ideas."