Gordon Phillips, who edited the local magazine under its old name for more than 10 years, said the Guild's board of directors voted for the makeover to satisfy some of its advertisers. He said some business owners felt the GayDaytona name was costing them business.

Phillips discussed the change at a May 23 meeting of OneDaytona, a gay-lesbian advocacy group.

"Personally, I'm 100 percent opposed to this philosophy, but I understand where these business owners are coming from," he said. "The Daytona gay community is still mostly closeted, and the owners need straight business to survive."

The new look was introduced in the magazine's June issue, which was presented online May 28.

The new cover identifies the magazine only as "Daytona Beach Guild," but inside pages label it Halifaxbiz Magazine. A promotional poster on the cover advertises an upcoming show by Suzanne Westerhoefer and Andre Kelley, but doesn't identify them as gay comedians. However, the cover does tell the reader that inside pages include an article about a "GLBT teen center" and a tourism piece titled "Traveling in our Fabulous Gay World."

The Guild will continue to maintain its gaydaytona.com web site in order to help out-of-town people find out about the gay aspects of Daytona Beach, Phillips said.

Other changes in the 16-page print magazine include a larger 8-by-11-inch format and the introduction of color printing. Greg Neely, owner of the NewAge Touch massage clinic, has replaced Phillips as editor. Phillips said he stepped down because of other business demands on his time, not because of the name change.

The magazine, given away free at several bars, hotels and other businesses, is written and produced by volunteers. After the Orlando-based Watermark newspaper stopped distributing to the Daytona area last year, it became the only local GLBT print publication available in the Daytona area.

I read the transcript of Obama's speech to the HRC dinner Saturday night. As feared, it was great rhetoric but lacking specifics. I was hoping for more on the Don't Ask, Don't Tell issue -- Obama had a perfect opportunity to announce an executive order, what with the army brass blitzing the talk shows to drum up the pressure for more troops in Afghanistan. If Obama didn't want to appear to be thumbing his nose at the DADT law, he could have confined a stop-loss order to the Afghanistan operation. Or he could have worded it to slow down, but not entirely halt, the discharges. After all, Bill Clinton himself, who signed the act, said recently the military basically did a double cross: that the original intent of the DADT compromise was that the services would use discharges sparingly, and soldiers would be free to have an openly gay life off-base and not fear a witch hunt.

Instead, we're left with a putrid status quo that ruins the careers of hundreds of service people every year. Who knows how much longer it will take congressional committees to study the DADT issue to death? We are already getting into the 2010 House campaign, so don't expect any conscientious action from that body.

Yet Obama has let that possibility pass.

Still another missed opportunity: Obama has sent up trial balloons about reforming Social Security. We know that won't happen soon, probably not until his second term (if he makes it that far.) But he could have told the HRC dinner that one of his goals for SS overhaul will be to give gay couples the same entitlements that hetero couples receive automatically. This could add significant income to the households of many LGBT retiree couples, plus enhance the financial security of future retirees. Instead, gay couples will continue paying into the system but get only the benefits provided to single people, with not a penny more paid after one of the partners dies.

The numbers game: I poked around the mainstream media and couldn't find anyone willing to give a figure for the Washington turnout. NY Times said "thousands" and the AP upped it to "tens of thousands." Very few aerial photos, but one from AP showed a crowd that was maybe at most a quarter-way down the Natl Mall's reflecting pool. Did anyone who was on hand get a clearer picture or impression of the crowd size? I hope Phil Reese's estimate range of 100-250K is at least ballpark accurate, but how many big media outlets used figures that large.

Barney Frank was quoted by the Times or the AP as saying the only pressure that would result from the Washington march would be "on the grass." Typical Frank frankness, but for now I have to agree with Barney. I hope the March leaders, with all their organizing workshops and such, came up with some concrete "next steps" leading up to the 2010 elections.

Maine and Washington State are the immediate battlegrounds, just around the corner. How much money did the March raise for those two campaigns, and how many charter buses will be going to Portland and Seattle next weekend? Looking beyond this November, how many gay or gay-friendly House candidates are we recruiting for key swing districts where the LGBT movement might be able to knock out Republicans or Blue Dogs who vote against equality?

Or is this to be another Post-Prop 8 firecracker -- one big weekend rally, followed by one or two feeble follow-ups in street action, and then everyone heads back to the disco.