For the people that mostly respond on this forum it's a waste of effort to make an ezine for LFS, as I doubt there is more than a sentence or two that could be written that we don't already know. Want to tell me about the auto-update feature? Well, sorry, but I already know everything Scawen has said about it, so the article would be useless for me and most here.
However, it's the people who aren't regulars here, or who aren't LFS players in the first place that would mostly benefit from such a publication about LFS, and they are harder to ask because, by definition, they aren't coming here.
But the same problem would exist with 'our' ezine as does with ASS, notably the lack of unbiased writing. If I write an article on an LFS feature it will be biased towards the mindset I have developed following LFS for 3 and a half years. And, in the same article, I wouldn't be able to discuss the pros and cons of similar features in other sims because I don't play the other sims enough to make an equally in-depth appraisal, and I don't play the others because I don't regard a single simulator to be on par with LFS in terms of realism and physics - not fanboy treatment, just the opinion I've developed after playing every single sim to some extent (nKP is close, but still have very peculiar physics bugs, as well as massive software bugs in general).
I don't think it's possible for a sim player to write entirely unbiasedly. The people that play lots of sims obviously have slightly lower standards about some things than me (I wouldn't sacrifice physics for modding or shaders even if you paid me), so their opinions on those matters would be less meaningful because (by the fact that they can put up with very different approaches) means they care less about them in the first place.
But then, car magazines aren't unbiased either - a roadtester might not like Ford, and so will rate the Ford product lower than a Ford lover. It's just that cars, roadtests and manufacture preferences are so ingrained and have nothing to do with some coders opinion about whether slip curves have two or more peaks. In sims we are testing, say, four different 'realities' in four different physical universes that utilise sound, feedback and graphics in very different ways.
The only fair comparison is between rFactor mods by the same person at about the same time - same mindset, same physical world (the joke called rF) and the same opinion on what makes a sim race car feel real.
However, that doesn't change the fact, for me, that any ISI/Gmotor simulation is only worth using as a frisbee, and has next to zero good points. And therefore I choke when I see ANYONE (including in ASS, or an LFS ezine) mount untamed praise on one of those sims' shoulders, because it quite patently isn't THAT good.