PDA

View Full Version : "Last post" threads to be closed



GIK
04-18-2005, 02:25 PM
Edit: Admins are human and this is just another example.

Our bandwidth is very high for the month, which is why this was decided upon. Boss and I will work toward bringing the site in line one change at a time.

Thanks to all who particiapted.

Roy Tucker
04-18-2005, 02:31 PM
Just wondering GIK, is it because of the volume of the replies/views in the threads? Or are there other reasons?

RosieRed
04-18-2005, 02:33 PM
GIK, you're cutting off my oxygen. :( But, okay.

A few questions:

1. Does this go for the word association (and similar) threads too? Or just the last person thread?

2. Is this change and the change of restricting guests' access being made in an attempt to delay a switch to a dedicated server or in hopes of not having to move to a dedicated server?

3. If the site were moved to a dedicated server, could these kind of threads return?

pedro
04-18-2005, 02:41 PM
So when all the subscribers rant about this are you going to back down like you did on the post limits, which, unlike this, was a good idea?

You guys are doing your best to alienate the people who actually support the site to the benefit of those who don't.

That's just super.

GIK
04-18-2005, 02:43 PM
1. Yes. All threads with thousands of posts/views in this manner will be closed.

2. Yes and no. If it's shown that these type of threads significantly reduce bandwidth, we may be able to delay a move to a dedicated server. However, I still believe a switch will need to be made, but, without these threads we may not need to be on a more highly equipped (ie, higher cost) server.

3. Possibly. It depends upon cost.

GIK
04-18-2005, 02:44 PM
So when all the subscribers rant about this are you going to back down like you did on the post limits, which, unlike this, was a good idea?

You guys are doing your best to alienate the people who actually support the site to the benefit of those who don't.

That's just super.

pedro. Not really sure where this came from. My goal is to protect RedsZone's main purpose. That is the baseball forum. The non-baseball board was created secondly. If we are able to support it, then great, I'll bring these posts back. But not until then. Remember, as I said in the first post, this is an experiment to test the true strain these threads are having on our bandwidth.

KronoRed
04-18-2005, 02:47 PM
Would it help, if the posters of these threads stopped double/triple ext posting, and just made one post at a time? or maybe a limit on how many posts per day in the threads?

RBA
04-18-2005, 02:48 PM
I think you are giving into the non-subscribers. This is your site, run it how you see fit. But I don't have to like it.

GIK
04-18-2005, 02:49 PM
Guys, let me get this straight, closing these "last post" threads is giving into the non-subs? How is that possible? Are these threads only participated in by subscribers? I don't see the logic.

pedro
04-18-2005, 02:50 PM
pedro. Not really sure where this came from. My goal is to protect RedsZone's main purpose. That is the baseball forum. The non-baseball board was created secondly. If we are able to support it, then great, I'll bring these posts back. But not until then. Remember, as I said in the first post, this is an experiment to test the true strain these threads are having on our bandwidth.

Well then you shouldn't have backed down on the post limits. The way this whole thing was handled has made the subscribers feel like dirt.

REDREAD
04-18-2005, 02:51 PM
Guys, let's give Boss and GIK a chance here. It's their board. Let them at least try it and see if it fixes the bandwidth problem.

They are pretty much being backed into a no-win situation here. No matter what they try to fix the bandwidth problem.. people get POed..

Let's remember that we are guests here, they really don't owe us anything. They are doing their best to provide the highest level of service they can with their resources.

Let's calm down a little bit..

RBA
04-18-2005, 02:52 PM
Guys, let me get this straight, closing these "last post" threads is giving into the non-subs? How is that possible? Are these threads only participated in by subscribers? I don't see the logic.


I liked the other plan you had a lot better. When the non-subscribers did not like it, you folded. One of the reason you guys were taken to the woodshed by the non-subscribers is that they felt you weren't consulting them. This time nobody was consulted.

I don't see how this will improve the morale of the board.

LvJ
04-18-2005, 02:53 PM
Make them Hall of Fame only threads?

Red Leader
04-18-2005, 02:54 PM
Guys, let me get this straight, closing these "last post" threads is giving into the non-subs? How is that possible? Are these threads only participated in by subscribers? I don't see the logic.

I just don't get it. Last week when I gave my opinion in whatever thread that was where you asked for our opinions, things looked like they were headed in the right direction. Post limits for those who do not give money for this site, etc. I come back from a weekend out of town, and that is done away with...no posting limits, basically those non subscribers have the same rights I do (and a little avatar, more PM room, and the ability to post a poll, along with the snazzy HOF forum isn't enough of a perk). On top of that, really the only place I like hanging out at (the last person thread) which is filled with almost 95% subscribers who pay for this site to succeed are being done away with. Needless to say, I will not be subscribing and wish I hadn't re-upped my subscription last week. :rolleyes:

RosieRed
04-18-2005, 02:58 PM
Guys, let me get this straight, closing these "last post" threads is giving into the non-subs? How is that possible? Are these threads only participated in by subscribers? I don't see the logic.

It could be looked at like this:

1. You're having bandwidth problems.
2. The site costs money.
3. A dedicated server, which would help with bandwidth, costs even more money.
4. Subscribers PAY money to support this site. (Or "donate," whatever.)
5. The last post thread is chock-full of subscribers. It alone is the reason MANY subscribers come to board as often as they do, myself included.
6. Now the subscribers, who support this site financially, are having something they value taken away from them.

Baseball forum or not, I wouldn't be around a quarter as much as I am if it weren't for the last thread. So ... if it's gone, I'll certainly have a lot less to say around here. And guess what? That'll help with bandwidth too, as you'll have one less person perusing the board!

GIK, I don't know if you've ever been in the last person thread enough to understand it. It's like you're closing my favorite bar.

GIK
04-18-2005, 02:58 PM
RL, the reason why I "folded" is because the rule was implemented incorrectly, in my opinion. Money should not dictate someones ability to contribute. I think moderating the board more effectively can help this. We have also discussed other options in the HOF forum that can affect those who do not contribute without restricting their "voice", ie ads for non-subs. This seems like a more effective option to me.

GIK
04-18-2005, 03:00 PM
Rosie, again, this is an experiment to see what impact these threads are actually having on our bandwidth. We will never know this factor until we close the threads and see.

RosieRed
04-18-2005, 03:00 PM
Needless to say, I will not be subscribing and wish I hadn't re-upped my subscription last week. :rolleyes:

I, too, am suddenly regretting re-upping last week. A big reason why I did so was to ensure that I could still post on the last person thread, without having the now-nonexistant posting limits to deal with.

GIK
04-18-2005, 03:04 PM
I'm sorry you feel that way, Rosie. I honestly don't wake up in the morning trying to think of ways to piss people off.

RosieRed
04-18-2005, 03:08 PM
Rosie, again, this is an experiment to see what impact these threads are actually having on our bandwidth. We will never know this factor until we close the threads and see.

And if you close the threads and it DOES solve your bandwidth problem ... great for everyone else. Bad for those of us who frequent the last person thread and come here mostly for that reason. And there is nothing we can do about it, apparently.

GIK
04-18-2005, 03:09 PM
By the way, everyone, the significance is this: The site has used up 81.2953% of bandwidth so far this month (we're 60% through the month).

RosieRed
04-18-2005, 03:13 PM
I'm sorry you feel that way, Rosie. I honestly don't wake up in the morning trying to think of ways to piss people off.

I know you don't GIK. I know you're in a tough position, and I know you and Boss are trying to figure things out. I get that.

I'm just telling you how I feel about it.

LvJ
04-18-2005, 03:13 PM
GIK, visit this link: http://www.vbulletin.com/forum/showthread.php?t=29446&page=1&pp=15

Follow those tips and see if anything improves.

pedro
04-18-2005, 03:14 PM
deleted.

ochre
04-18-2005, 03:14 PM
turning off avatars would be one of the first things I would try.

GIK
04-18-2005, 03:15 PM
And if you close the threads and it DOES solve your bandwidth problem ... great for everyone else. Bad for those of us who frequent the last person thread and come here mostly for that reason. And there is nothing we can do about it, apparently.

When have Boss or I ever made decisions to maliciously hurt our members? We do this for fun, not for any sort of gain. We have always tried to listen to everyone. I have always welcomed contributions and expression on the site, welcomed emails and even have had a member or two call me on my cell phone.

Remember, I'm just another guy sitting behind a keyboard. I make mistakes too, but I've never tried to hurt anyone on here. This isn't a business, but don't you think that'd be a pretty bad way to run one?

paintmered
04-18-2005, 03:15 PM
Can we get rid of the picture forum as well?

All those pictures are hosted.

pedro
04-18-2005, 03:16 PM
turning off avatars would be one of the first things I would try.


we don't need no stinking avatars.

ochre
04-18-2005, 03:17 PM
Can we get rid of the picture forum as well?

All those pictures are hosted.
I don't think that forum gets a ton of traffic.

Attached images/the ability to attach images is another huge load. Even thumbnailed.

paintmered
04-18-2005, 03:17 PM
When have Boss or I ever made decisions to maliciously hurt our members? We do this for fun, not for any sort of gain. We have always tried to listen to everyone. I have always welcomed contributions and expression on the site, welcomed emails and even have had a member or two call me on my cell phone.

Remember, I'm just another guy sitting behind a keyboard. I make mistakes too, but I've never tried to hurt anyone on here. This isn't a business, but don't you think that'd be a pretty bad way to run one?


GIK, we understand you have to you what you have to do and that's there no ill intent here.

But it still hurts.

westofyou
04-18-2005, 03:17 PM
I turned mine off yesterday.

ochre
04-18-2005, 03:18 PM
Krono's avatar (with his post count) alone is probably 1/4 of our bandwidth :) :)

ochre
04-18-2005, 03:18 PM
content > graphics.

LvJ
04-18-2005, 03:19 PM
C'mon now, eliminating the beauty of Alexis Bledel will only do harm.

paintmered
04-18-2005, 03:19 PM
Mine is gone now too.

I miss that guy, whatever he was.

westofyou
04-18-2005, 03:20 PM
content > graphics.


Yep Content rules, BTW I never attach my photos and host them at my own site, though it was implied over the weekend that folks like me clutter the site up with graphics.

GIK
04-18-2005, 03:20 PM
I'm not sure how much of an effect avatars have on bandwidth. Good idea, though. Let me discuss that option with Boss.

How about this:

I leave up the "last post" threads, we move to a dedicated server and if subscriptions/donations/etc keep us afloat, fine, everyone is happy - and if they don't and we run short, the site is frozen or some other alternative actions are taken at that time.

I'm open here. Thoughts?

Raisor
04-18-2005, 03:21 PM
C'mon now, eliminating the beauty of Alexis Bledel will only do harm.


That reminds me, only 2 hours and 42 minutes until Gilmore Girls comes on.

So, if the Last Post thread goes, can the Game Threads be far behind?

Time for some banner ads, imo.

paintmered
04-18-2005, 03:22 PM
I'm not sure how much of an effect avatars have on bandwidth. Good idea, though. Let me discuss that option with Boss.

How about this:

I leave up the "last post" threads, we move to a dedicated server and if subscriptions/donations/etc keep us afloat, fine, everyone is happy - and if they don't and we run short, the site is frozen or some other alternative actions are taken at that time.

I'm open here. Thoughts?


Then I'd say it's time for a bake sale!

RosieRed
04-18-2005, 03:23 PM
When have Boss or I ever made decisions to maliciously hurt our members? We do this for fun, not for any sort of gain. We have always tried to listen to everyone. I have always welcomed contributions and expression on the site, welcomed emails and even have had a member or two call me on my cell phone.

Remember, I'm just another guy sitting behind a keyboard. I make mistakes too, but I've never tried to hurt anyone on here. This isn't a business, but don't you think that'd be a pretty bad way to run one?

In no way do I think you are making decisions to maliciously hurt your members.

That doesn't mean that the by-product of your decisions won't hurt some members.

Again, this is just my opinion. I am only one of many members here. I am fully aware that you don't have to cater to what I want, and I fully understand no one is making me be here.

pedro
04-18-2005, 03:24 PM
I'm not sure how much of an effect avatars have on bandwidth. Good idea, though. Let me discuss that option with Boss.

How about this:

I leave up the "last post" threads, we move to a dedicated server and if subscriptions/donations/etc keep us afloat, fine, everyone is happy - and if they don't and we run short, the site is frozen or some other alternative actions are taken at that time.

I'm open here. Thoughts?

I think it's reasonable to run tests for a week at a time to see what effect it has. If it does have a big effect then that's something that we'll all have to deal with.

But I think you also have to consider the post limit for non subscribers too. You guys caved too soon on that and let a bunch of whiners run rougshod over you. Now we'll never know if that would have had a positive effect on bandwith. (though I'm not convinced it would have)

Run tests in one week periods. One test at a time.

ochre
04-18-2005, 03:24 PM
I'm not sure how much of an effect avatars have on bandwidth. Good idea, though. Let me discuss that option with Boss.

How about this:

I leave up the "last post" threads, we move to a dedicated server and if subscriptions/donations/etc keep us afloat, fine, everyone is happy - and if they don't and we run short, the site is frozen or some other alternative actions are taken at that time.

I'm open here. Thoughts?
I am just a big advocate of establishing a solid methodology in regards to testing these types of situations. You have to establish a firm baseline to mesure from, i.e. avg daily bandwidth used since opening day. Make a change (I would recommend eliminating guest access). Monitor the avg. daily bandwidth used over a couple of days. Compare it to the baseline and decide it the change made enough/any impact. Repeat.

LvJ
04-18-2005, 03:25 PM
That reminds me, only 2 hours and 42 minutes until Gilmore Girls comes on.

So, if the Last Post thread goes, can the Game Threads be far behind?

Time for some banner ads, imo. :dancingco You're my new favorite poster.

BTW, new episodes back tomorrow! :dancingco

pedro
04-18-2005, 03:25 PM
I am just a big advocate of establishing a solid methodology in regards to testing these types of situations. You have to establish a firm baseline to mesure from, i.e. avg daily bandwidth used since opening day. Make a change (I would recommend eliminating guest access). Monitor the avg. daily bandwidth used over a couple of days. Compare it to the baseline and decide it the change made enough/any impact. Repeat.

word.

Raisor
04-18-2005, 03:25 PM
Then I'd say it's time for a bake sale!


I offered that opinion the other day, AND a car wash.

If you can't make money with cookies and Creek and TC in swimsuits soaping up cars then you can't make money.

LvJ
04-18-2005, 03:25 PM
I'm open here. Thoughts? :dunno: Well, did you goto that link I posted?

Puffy
04-18-2005, 03:26 PM
GIK -

I know your open to ideas and doing what you feel is right, and I once again appreciate you are listening to us here - and i just wanna add one thing, all the posters who frequent the last post thread are the same people who offered to throw in an extra $20 beyond the subscription in the sticky thread on the baseball page.

I'll help however I can, but if you take the last person thread away from us (which it looks like your not doing now) alot of us will have a lot less reason to help, simply because we won't be around as much.

I hope that all makes sense, I kinda rambled.

GIK
04-18-2005, 03:26 PM
OK, this is what we will do.

I am going to close Guest access to the site shortly and see if that helps us with the bots, etc, that troll the site.

I will leave up the "last post" threads.

I am also going to ask for more feedback in the HoF forum and I hope everyone participates who can.

Thanks,
GIK

GIK
04-18-2005, 03:27 PM
word.

I agree. We will try restricting Guest access first and observe its impact without any other factor playing a role.

westofyou
04-18-2005, 03:27 PM
My 2 Cents

Your best recourse it choose a plan and keep to it.

Moving cost escalation should be the 2nd choice after streamlining the content delivery. Once that is done you'll be able to factor in future growth or a leveling out to a plateu that will make solictation easier.

I'd close down parts of the site one by one to see what parts are the drag. Including PM boxes and the such. First thing I'd is shut down the Picture Forum, then HOF, then the non baseball piece by piece.

Choose a day/week that you are going to have last post forum shut down... post it in that thread and then make a sticky. That way anyone who does chat there can move the chat to the backup EZ Board for the duration.

But go slow about it to make sure you guys don't have to pay mor ethan youor the users can keep up with.

BTW if you are that low on usage for the month I'd figure out what should go pretty quick.

RBA
04-18-2005, 03:27 PM
We can eliminate the "new rules" threads like this. They seem to use a lot of bandwidth. ;)

pedro
04-18-2005, 03:29 PM
OK, this is what we will do.

I am going to close Guest access to the site shortly and see if that helps us with the bots, etc, that troll the site.

I will leave up the "last post" threads.

I am also going to ask for more feedback in the HoF forum and I hope everyone participates who can.

Thanks,
GIK


GIK, I think BOTS might really be an issue. I know that sometimes I come here in the middle of the night when almost no one is logged in, and the site is still very slow.

KronoRed
04-18-2005, 03:29 PM
Krono's avatar (with his post count) alone is probably 1/4 of our bandwidth :) :)
I know you think that's funny..but it's not

RosieRed
04-18-2005, 03:30 PM
OK, this is what we will do.

I am going to close Guest access to the site shortly and see if that helps us with the bots, etc, that troll the site.

I will leave up the "last post" threads.

I am also going to ask for more feedback in the HoF forum and I hope everyone participates who can.

Thanks,
GIK

Thank you for reconsidering.

Roy Tucker
04-18-2005, 03:30 PM
I am just a big advocate of establishing a solid methodology in regards to testing these types of situations. You have to establish a firm baseline to mesure from, i.e. avg daily bandwidth used since opening day. Make a change (I would recommend eliminating guest access). Monitor the avg. daily bandwidth used over a couple of days. Compare it to the baseline and decide it the change made enough/any impact. Repeat.
I'd recommend this approach as well. Be sure of what changes have effected what results.

And if it does turn out that the last poster threads are consuming an inordinate amount of resources, then so be it.

But a decision affecting the posters of these threads does hit home at a percentage of you core members of this site and so anything done in this area should be well-reasoned.

Puffy
04-18-2005, 03:33 PM
How about closing the Hall of Fame forum. The fantasy one two. The fantasy one can be part of the non-bb chatter, and the hall of fame can just go (I don't think many really use it anyhow).

TeamCasey
04-18-2005, 03:35 PM
Make sure people are clear if you go about WOY's and Roy's testing route. Just let them know you're testing different areas.

I can't endure anymore of the drama of the past few days. :)

Red Leader
04-18-2005, 03:36 PM
How about closing the Hall of Fame forum. The fantasy one two. The fantasy one can be part of the non-bb chatter, and the hall of fame can just go (I don't think many really use it anyhow).

I agree. The HOF forum could be a great thing if it was redone and used properly. As it is now, its pretty awful. Now that fantasy leagues are underway, there's not too much demand for the fantasy forum. Those threads about fantasy could be put in non-bb easily.

pedro
04-18-2005, 03:37 PM
How about closing the Hall of Fame forum. The fantasy one two. The fantasy one can be part of the non-bb chatter, and the hall of fame can just go (I don't think many really use it anyhow).


I don't think they really get much trafiic.

It's the traffic within a forum, not the existance of a forum that causes bandwidth drain. Although I think the pictures forum should go, b/c hosted images suck resources.

KronoRed
04-18-2005, 03:38 PM
How about closing the Hall of Fame forum. The fantasy one two. The fantasy one can be part of the non-bb chatter, and the hall of fame can just go (I don't think many really use it anyhow).
Trouble with that is, those forums are nearly always dead..the HOF forum only picks up when bad stuff happens.

TeamCasey
04-18-2005, 03:40 PM
If you can't make money with cookies and Creek and TC in swimsuits soaping up cars then you can't make money.

:laugh: You should at least pair two people up who can tolerate one another. The ladies of Sarasota calendar might be a better moneymaker.

REDREAD
04-18-2005, 03:49 PM
I'm not sure if the HOF ever has more than 2 people at a time viewing it.. (Other than when there's an event like this week).

Likewise, the picture forum is a nice feature and hardly ever viewed.. I can't see any real savings coming from it.

pedro
04-18-2005, 03:51 PM
Likewise, the picture forum is a nice feature and hardly ever viewed.. I can't see any real savings coming from it.

yeah but when people do view it, it sucks big time bandwidth.

WVRed
04-18-2005, 06:05 PM
This is speaking as a person who has been here since the cincy.com days and created the "Greatest Thread Ever"(and judging by the responses, that title could be well warranted:))

This last weekend on Redszone has been nothing short of disgusting. Im not speaking about Boss and GIKs decision, as I think they have done an excellent job in trying to run this site, but more about the divisions that exist on this website.

Im not even going to compare this website to the old cincinnati.com board(or ESPN or MLB for that matter, its not even close). However, we have tried to run a board where the Subscribers pay to keep this site running for those who either do not have the monetary ability, yet enjoy the benefits, or those who have the money, but dont want to invest.

Redszone has a great history that I would like to see continue, but this weekend has really tested that. Especially when you have the "free-loaders(or as pedro so eloquently put it in the last to post thread, the "inmates")" and the "elitists" butting heads.

As a non-subscriber, when I saw that my posting was going to be limited, it didnt bother me in the least, since I am lucky to average five posts a day here. I dont follow the game threads or last to post threads, even though I did follow the political threads to an extent(which ill touch on later). However, I couldnt help but laugh when people who were lucky to have 200 posts or less were the ones who complained loudest. I could understand if there were people who had 2000 or more posts here, but 200?

Regarding the "Last to Post thread" I thought it would be something that might garner interest for a little while, but I never thought it would turn into the colossal 50,000 post that it has become. It became a great place to discuss events throughout the day, but it also became a place where a lot of the posters(including mods) could trash other members in secret(since there were so many pages). It is also these same members who are wanting to keep these threads alive.

GIK, I know this has been pressing, and I would really hate to be in your shoes right now dealing with all of this "elitist"-"freeloader" crap, and I have no clue how you are dealing with it. If this were me, I know I would be holding the phone just ready to pull the plug on this site and end the childishness.

This website has been in an overall gradual decline since the political threads reached epic lows. In a way, the garbage from the Non Baseball Chatter has crept onto the baseball side(as we knew it would when the season started) in the form of Rich Aurilia Sucks!!! and gO rEDz!!!.

I posted on the posting limit thread that the best route to go was a pay-site, and the more I have read, the more I think it is in the best interest. If this website wants to make any real progress, control the bandwidth issues, and eliminate any of the squabbles between the subscribers and non-subscribers, this is unfortunately the way to go.

Sorry for the rant guys, but if this website is going to thrive, some major changes are going to be needed, whether it be by the subscribers, non subscribers, mods, admins, or whatever. Something has to be done. :(

remdog
04-18-2005, 06:13 PM
It could be looked at like this:

1. You're having bandwidth problems.
2. The site costs money.
3. A dedicated server, which would help with bandwidth, costs even more money.
4. Subscribers PAY money to support this site. (Or "donate," whatever.)
5. The last post thread is chock-full of subscribers. It alone is the reason MANY subscribers come to board as often as they do, myself included.
6. Now the subscribers, who support this site financially, are having something they value taken away from them.

Baseball forum or not, I wouldn't be around a quarter as much as I am if it weren't for the last thread. So ... if it's gone, I'll certainly have a lot less to say around here. And guess what? That'll help with bandwidth too, as you'll have one less person perusing the board!

GIK, I don't know if you've ever been in the last person thread enough to understand it. It's like you're closing my favorite bar.

Rosie:

Eliminate the 'last thread' (and such other ilk) and maybe you don't need extra bandwidth. Therefore, you don't need a dedicated server. Therefore you don't need subscribers, therefore the board can do just fine, etc. etc., etc......

"Baseball forum or not, I wouldn't be around a quarter as much as I am if it weren't for the last thread." Well, since this is a forum to talk baseball, if you don't want to talk baseball perhaps this is not the place to be. You and your friends that post things like "Hi", and "Post 10,000!" might just want to go off and start your own 'Last Thread' website. Duel it out to see who gets post 10,000, 100,000 or even 1,000,000. At any rate, that wasn't why this site came to be.

" Now the subscribers, who support this site financially, are having something they value taken away from them."

Actually Rosie, people that wanted to talk Reds baseball supported this site just fine without being 'subscribers' before things like the last thread got out of hand. Consider this simply a return to the mission statement of the board.

Rem

pedro
04-18-2005, 06:17 PM
Rosie:

Eliminate the 'last thread' (and such other ilk) and maybe you don't need extra bandwidth. Therefore, you don't need a dedicated server. Therefore you don't need subscribers, therefore the board can do just fine, etc. etc., etc......

"Baseball forum or not, I wouldn't be around a quarter as much as I am if it weren't for the last thread." Well, since this is a forum to talk baseball, if you don't want to talk baseball perhaps this is not the place to be. You and your friends that post things like "Hi", and "Post 10,000!" might just want to go off and start your own 'Last Thread' website. Duel it out to see who gets post 10,000, 100,000 or even 1,000,000. At any rate, that wasn't why this site came to be.

" Now the subscribers, who support this site financially, are having something they value taken away from them."

Actually Rosie, people that wanted to talk Reds baseball supported this site just fine without being 'subscribers' before things like the last thread got out of hand. Consider this simply a return to the mission statement of the board.

Rem


At any given time there are 10 more people viewing the baseball side than non baseball. It is much more likely that the bandwidth issues are due to the number of members on the site than the "be the last person thread".

RosieRed
04-18-2005, 06:25 PM
Rosie:

Eliminate the 'last thread' (and such other ilk) and maybe you don't need extra bandwidth. Therefore, you don't need a dedicated server. Therefore you don't need subscribers, therefore the board can do just fine, etc. etc., etc......

"Baseball forum or not, I wouldn't be around a quarter as much as I am if it weren't for the last thread." Well, since this is a forum to talk baseball, if you don't want to talk baseball perhaps this is not the place to be. You and your friends that post things like "Hi", and "Post 10,000!" might just want to go off and start your own 'Last Thread' website. Duel it out to see who gets post 10,000, 100,000 or even 1,000,000. At any rate, that wasn't why this site came to be.

" Now the subscribers, who support this site financially, are having something they value taken away from them."

Actually Rosie, people that wanted to talk Reds baseball supported this site just fine without being 'subscribers' before things like the last thread got out of hand. Consider this simply a return to the mission statement of the board.

Rem

Sigh. I do not even know what to say to this.

So I'll leave it at this, lest I say something I'll really regret: I KNOW that the "last thread" is not why this site came to be. But it is the reason quite a few subscribers still come here.

And don't worry, if posts like this keep popping up, and people keep jumping on the "those subscribers are bad" wagon, we'll be gone soon enough anyway.

pedro
04-18-2005, 06:28 PM
Rosie:

Eliminate the 'last thread' (and such other ilk) and maybe you don't need extra bandwidth. Therefore, you don't need a dedicated server. Therefore you don't need subscribers, therefore the board can do just fine, etc. etc., etc......


Rem

you know. the site costs money to run. period. so it's always going to need subscribers. unless you're suggesting that boss/gik just foot the bill.

Red Leader
04-18-2005, 06:32 PM
Sigh. I do not even know what to say to this.

So I'll leave it at this, lest I say something I'll really regret: I KNOW that the "last thread" is not why this site came to be. But it is the reason quite a few subscribers still come here.

And don't worry, if posts like this keep popping up, and people keep jumping on the "those subscribers are bad" wagon, we'll be gone soon enough anyway.


...and when people realize that "the thread" is not the reason for the bandwidth issues, all of those new member, non subscibers can have a real fun time footing the bill for this site without the help of people like us who have been helping keep this board operational the past few years.

You're welcome. :rolleyes:

remdog
04-18-2005, 06:42 PM
Pedro & Red Leader:

The people that came here to discuss baseball had no problem supporting the board when it was used to discuss baseball. It didn't need 'subscribers' until ancilary issues were added.

And, BTW, I've probably spent more in time money and merchandise to keep this board afloot than any of the new regimine 'subscribers'.

So, no Puffy, it doesn't always need subscribers.

Rem

Red Leader
04-18-2005, 06:49 PM
Pedro & Red Leader:

The people that came here to discuss baseball had no problem supporting the board when it was used to discuss baseball. It didn't need 'subscribers' until ancilary issues were added.

And, BTW, I've probably spent more in time money and merchandise to keep this board afloot than any of the new regimine 'subscribers'.

So, no Puffy, it doesn't always need subscribers.

Rem


The problem that I see is that the board has grown exponentially the last couple years. If you take away the nonbb side, the HOF forum, the picture and fantasy forums, and all of the subscribers, and all you had left was the bb side with members only, you'd still have bandwidth issues because of the sheer number of posters that have joined this site and the guests that view this board now. This place isn't what it used to be, even when I joined in December of '01. It is much, much larger. I may be wrong, but I don't think you can run this board without subscribers any longer because of the number of members....

Puffy
04-18-2005, 06:50 PM
So, no Puffy, it doesn't always need subscribers.

Rem

Ummm, why are you bringing me into your conversation?

Boss-Hog
04-18-2005, 07:03 PM
Rosie, I want to say that your voice is one of the ones I truly respect on this board. Even if I don't agree with you, I almost always understand why you feel like you do. However, on this one, I have to back what rem says. If the combination of allowing guest (non-registered member) access AND/OR the huge, huge threads in the non-baseball forum are contributing to the bandwidth problems we're clearly having, eliminating them is the easiest thing to do that is consistent with the site's mission statement, and would theoretically remove the need for a dedicated server. I am far from positive that taking these two measures will appreciably decrease the bandwidth but I do think it's worth a trial period. If it doesn't help matters, that completely confirms that we need to move to a dedicated server and those threads (and guest access) could presumably stay. I realize that friendships have been formed from this board and that makes me very happy to know. However, as rem said, this site is primary a baseball site and that will always remain the core of what we're about. If a good deal of visitors are only coming here to participate in the non-baseball forum threads, that lets me know that we're doing an even worse job with the baseball forum than I imagined.

Boss



Rosie:

Eliminate the 'last thread' (and such other ilk) and maybe you don't need extra bandwidth. Therefore, you don't need a dedicated server. Therefore you don't need subscribers, therefore the board can do just fine, etc. etc., etc......

"Baseball forum or not, I wouldn't be around a quarter as much as I am if it weren't for the last thread." Well, since this is a forum to talk baseball, if you don't want to talk baseball perhaps this is not the place to be. You and your friends that post things like "Hi", and "Post 10,000!" might just want to go off and start your own 'Last Thread' website. Duel it out to see who gets post 10,000, 100,000 or even 1,000,000. At any rate, that wasn't why this site came to be.

" Now the subscribers, who support this site financially, are having something they value taken away from them."

Actually Rosie, people that wanted to talk Reds baseball supported this site just fine without being 'subscribers' before things like the last thread got out of hand. Consider this simply a return to the mission statement of the board.

Rem

RosieRed
04-18-2005, 07:05 PM
Pedro & Red Leader:

The people that came here to discuss baseball had no problem supporting the board when it was used to discuss baseball. It didn't need 'subscribers' until ancilary issues were added.

And, BTW, I've probably spent more in time money and merchandise to keep this board afloot than any of the new regimine 'subscribers'.

So, no Puffy, it doesn't always need subscribers.

Rem

Do you suggest taking it back to that? Only a baseball forum, get rid of everything else?

Raisor
04-18-2005, 07:07 PM
Do you suggest taking it back to that? Only a baseball forum, get rid of everything else?

If that happens, then the baseball side will look like the MLB.com/Reds site. Three non-baseball threads for every one baseball thread.

WVRed
04-18-2005, 07:08 PM
If that happens, then the baseball side will look like the MLB.com/Reds site. Three non-baseball threads for every one baseball thread.

Difference is, we would have mods to enforce it. MLB.com doesnt.

Im not saying we should do away with political threads to an entirety, but if a say 9/11 happened again, I would want a thread to discuss it.

RosieRed
04-18-2005, 07:13 PM
Rosie, I want to say that your voice is one of the ones I truly respect on this board. Even if I don't agree with you, I almost always understand why you feel like you do. However, on this one, I have to back what rem says. If the combination of allowing guest (non-registered member) access AND/OR the huge, huge threads in the non-baseball forum are contributing to the bandwidth problems we're clearly having, eliminating them is the easiest thing to do that is consistent with the site's mission statement, and would theoretically remove the need for a dedicated server. I am far from positive that taking these two measures will appreciably decrease the bandwidth but I do think it's worth a trial period. If it doesn't help matters, that completely confirms that we need to move to a dedicated server and those threads (and guest access) could presumably stay. I realize that friendships have been formed from this board and that makes me very happy to know. However, as rem said, this site is primary a baseball site and that will always remain the core of what we're about. If a good deal of visitors are only coming here to participate in the non-baseball forum threads, that lets me know that we're doing an even worse job with the baseball forum than I imagined.

Boss

I appreciate the sentiments Boss, that's very nice of you to say.

And I do understand what you are saying. Really, I do. I get it. I know it's a baseball forum, I know that's the purpose, etc. If you need to make changes, make changes -- it's your site, and I'll live with whatever you and GIK decide.

I was just trying to explain how I felt about this lastest decision, and how the decision could be interpreted.

In the Last Person thread, GIK asked if we really value that thread more than the baseball forum. Maybe you should check out the responses; they're all within the last couple pages.

Reds4Life
04-18-2005, 07:20 PM
I understand both sides of the argument, but personally I’d axe the “Last Person” threads. I don’t see them contributing much to the content of this board, and frankly it looks like they are being used for nothing more than to pad post counts.

At this point tough decisions have to be made, and Redszone doesn’t have resources to be wasting.

Red Leader
04-18-2005, 07:21 PM
If the combination of allowing guest (non-registered member) access AND/OR the huge, huge threads in the non-baseball forum are contributing to the bandwidth problems we're clearly having, eliminating them is the easiest thing to do that is consistent with the site's mission statement, and would theoretically remove the need for a dedicated server. I am far from positive that taking these two measures will appreciably decrease the bandwidth but I do think it's worth a trial period. If it doesn't help matters, that completely confirms that we need to move to a dedicated server and those threads (and guest access) could presumably stay. I realize that friendships have been formed from this board and that makes me very happy to know. However, as rem said, this site is primary a baseball site and that will always remain the core of what we're about. If a good deal of visitors are only coming here to participate in the non-baseball forum threads, that lets me know that we're doing an even worse job with the baseball forum than I imagined.

Boss


Boss,
I have great respect for you. You do an incredible job staying on top of all of the issues concerning this board, and I am forever grateful to you for that.

Having said that, many of us "subscribers" have told you point blank in one thread or another that we don't visit the bb side very much anymore and mainly come here for the "last person" thread, where we feel that sense of "community" that used to exist on the entire board. That "community" doesn't exist on the entire board anymore, the site has gotten too big for that to exist, which is why many of us fled from the bb side . So where do those of us go who don't wish to deal with that stuff? Can't talk baseball in the HOF forum... Now we might not be able to discuss things in the "last person" thread. The answer, there isn't one. We need to figure out how we can make this place feel more like a community now, even though the site is much, much larger in terms of members. There shouldn't be "non subscribers vs subscribers", "people who post in the last person thread vs people who don't," " people who were here when the board originated vs those who joined later". All of that stuff groups people into seperate categories and allows for the "we want this, but don't want those guys to have that" crap we're hearing today. We need to find out how to group everyone into "reds fans" again. If that means making this board a pay-only site, fine. But it should mean that everyone that logs into redszone should be able to go where ever they want on the board and feel comfortable discussing whatever they want. Until we can do that, this board is going to have mucho problems that we've only begun to realize.

Boss-Hog
04-18-2005, 07:52 PM
Boss,
I have great respect for you. You do an incredible job staying on top of all of the issues concerning this board, and I am forever grateful to you for that.

Having said that, many of us "subscribers" have told you point blank in one thread or another that we don't visit the bb side very much anymore and mainly come here for the "last person" thread, where we feel that sense of "community" that used to exist on the entire board. That "community" doesn't exist on the entire board anymore, the site has gotten too big for that to exist, which is why many of us fled from the bb side . So where do those of us go who don't wish to deal with that stuff? Can't talk baseball in the HOF forum... Now we might not be able to discuss things in the "last person" thread. The answer, there isn't one. We need to figure out how we can make this place feel more like a community now, even though the site is much, much larger in terms of members. There shouldn't be "non subscribers vs subscribers", "people who post in the last person thread vs people who don't," " people who were here when the board originated vs those who joined later". All of that stuff groups people into seperate categories and allows for the "we want this, but don't want those guys to have that" crap we're hearing today. We need to find out how to group everyone into "reds fans" again. If that means making this board a pay-only site, fine. But it should mean that everyone that logs into redszone should be able to go where ever they want on the board and feel comfortable discussing whatever they want. Until we can do that, this board is going to have mucho problems that we've only begun to realize.
Point taken and I agree with a lot of what you've said. That's the task GIK and I are faced with, in a nutshell, outside of the server-related issues. Thanks for your kind words...I respect your opinion, as I do nearly everyone's on here.

WVRedsFan
04-19-2005, 01:32 AM
Rosie, I want to say that your voice is one of the ones I truly respect on this board. Even if I don't agree with you, I almost always understand why you feel like you do. However, on this one, I have to back what rem says. If the combination of allowing guest (non-registered member) access AND/OR the huge, huge threads in the non-baseball forum are contributing to the bandwidth problems we're clearly having, eliminating them is the easiest thing to do that is consistent with the site's mission statement, and would theoretically remove the need for a dedicated server. I am far from positive that taking these two measures will appreciably decrease the bandwidth but I do think it's worth a trial period. If it doesn't help matters, that completely confirms that we need to move to a dedicated server and those threads (and guest access) could presumably stay. I realize that friendships have been formed from this board and that makes me very happy to know. However, as rem said, this site is primary a baseball site and that will always remain the core of what we're about. If a good deal of visitors are only coming here to participate in the non-baseball forum threads, that lets me know that we're doing an even worse job with the baseball forum than I imagined.

Boss

Boss:

You and GIK do a tremendous job here and you have much more patience than I have. I guess that's why you are in charge. The tremendous influx of folks visiting and posting here makes it an almost unmanagable situation and I know something has to be done. I understand.

My only comment is that the baseball side of the forum has deteriorated due to the large influx of new "members." That's OK because public forums tend to go that way, especially if they're popular. I come here first for Reds news mainly because it's the most reliable place to find Reds news. I can always get a viewpoint that I cannot find on ESPN or any of the other numerous "name" sites. Lately, with the recent events in my life (my business partner of 20 years in a coma with terminal cancer and one of my businesses failing due to the poor economy and my obligations at my main job due to the sickness mentioned earlier), I don't get here often. But, when I have I've been shocked.

Tonight, I opened up the game thread at about 11:30 (when I got home from work--it's been like that for months), and I didn't recognize any of the names. There was no Creek, no RFS62, no Stormy. No one I knew and the conversation was pretty bad. I've been in a bad mood (as you can imagine) for some time and I posted a simple question or two a couple of days ago. I receive some of the snottiest and short replies from people who were "members" and I'd never seen before. I accepted that my absence was probably the reason and I moved on. But, I see it day after day.

The "Last Thread" thread was probably silly and not important, but I enjoyed reading what was going on in folks' lives, but it's not a necessity--more an enjoyable convenience. There was a friendly thread with folks who liked each other (most of the time) with no finger pointing or crassness, The exact opposite of what the baseball board has become.

So, what am I trying to say? I guess if this thing is to survive, and it must, we have to take a long, hard look at subscribers and their worth over the non-subscribers. Not that we close the board to them, but we make the rules to fit the subscribers. If it means a dedicated server, I don't think you'll have any problem raising the money. If your main intent is to have an open forum regardless of the problems it causes, then continue as it is. And hope when Griffey is traded the thing doesn't crash :-).

I don't choose to call those who do not subscribe "freeloaders," because they are not. I'm glad I have until October or whatever before I re-up agains because money is tight right now, but please try hard to limit postings for non-subscribers or something before the subs are hit hard.

I'm not a good example of a businessman, but I value my clients and their feelings far and above my non-clients. Think about that and do what you've always done--make the right decision. Thanks for reading this far too long post (see, I ate up some bandwith and didn't even know it).

GAC
04-20-2005, 10:03 AM
I think until some of you are on their end of things (in their shoes)..... trying to troubleshoot/find a resolution to the problems we have been experiencing with bandwidth (a server/software perspective), then you should be ashamed of your conduct. I'm personally embarassed by what I am reading.

Does anyone understand English at all? They are working diligently to try and solve this bandwidth problem, and a few other issues (bots, etc), and keep Redszone's viability functioning during this new baseball season. It's not something that is simply "1-2-3, A-B-C" and it's fixed.

The main purpose/intent of this site is BASEBALL!

Cut these guys some slack you software experts, unless you think you can step up to the plate, solve these issues, and do better? Quit throwing stones at the very guys who are just as perplexed, and expending alot of their free time trying to resolve this. And if they have possibly made a couple mistakes over the last week in trying to do what is best for the site as a whole....again, cut them some slack. They also are human. ;)

If it came down to a choice, temporarily, until they can either fix these problems or find a dedicated host/server, then I'd gladly make the non-baseball side the "sacrificial lamb" over being able to read/post the really important struff on the baseball side.

If I had to make a choice temporarily over "Be The Last Person To Post" thread and talking baseball, I think I know where my vote would be cast.

TeamCasey
04-20-2005, 11:02 AM
http://www.redszone.com/forums/showthread.php?t=33657&page=1

I think you'll find that people are trying to help.

Allegro
04-20-2005, 11:17 AM
I rarely post, but I am reading this thread and I find it really hard to believe people are saying the things they are saying. The guys who run this board are really doing the best they can to run a top-notch baseball forum and not lose their shirts in the process. I subscribe (and will re-up next month) because I enjoy the baseball dialogue. I see the last-post threads and the like, and don't get it, but to each his own. From what I gather, they are temporarily closing these threads to see if they can solve the band-width problem. Deal with it. If I was them, I would not put up with the crap they do. From the looks of things, I would not be surprised to see this whole site implode soon. That would be a damn shame.