Just wanted to give you an update on the dismal SDMB service situation. As many of you know, we upgraded to the newest version of the vBulletin message board software a few weeks ago. The upgrade proved unexpectedly buggy - one of our IT guys found 20,000+ error messages in his mailbox one morning. We were obliged to implement an automatic system reset every few minutes simply to keep the board running at a minimal level. We recently installed a new code release and it appears the worst of the problems have been resolved, although we continue to watch closely.
Even if the code were completely bug free, however, service would still be slow. Our company’s comm capacity is maxed out between 10AM-4PM Central weekdays. Most of the traffic is generated by the SDMB. The heavy usage is having an impact on our ability to do other work. The present situation is untenable and changes are in the offing. We will post additional information soon.
Fellow members. I think you have totally misread Ed’s message. Reading between the lines it is clear that Ed is explaining a problem that will be addressed in the near future. The problem is traffic, and the solution is reduction in traffic. The answer needs to e forthcoming on our part, or we will force the Reader to consider options that they would rather not consider.
Ed stated.
Note the “Our Company” in the message. His message reflects the problems the Chicago Reader is having due to the SDMB traffic on his system, during specific working hours.
Perhaps I can suggest a workaround that can resolve this problem, with no cost the parties in implementing or enforcing it.
During the hours of 10AM to 4PM, weekdays, we voluntarily refrain from accessing the board. We ask the mods and admins to evaluate the effectiveness of our efforts and post the results on a weekly basis. Once the Reader has had an opportunity to evaluate their comm. capacity for a period of time, the access policy can be adjusted and formalized,
Other ideas anyone?
A reduction of traffic? The recent “upgrade” has certainly reduced my traffic. From daily to once a week, and nobody answered my question, either. Not one response.
I don’t think a voluntary reduction is a viable idea. I don’t know how long you’ve been reading the board Zigarre, but a thousand ideas have been bounced around here about how the board might survive the Reader’s potential decision that life support must eventually become self-sustaining.
The two ideas that seemed to dominate previous discussions were a.) make the first XX number of posts free, and then require paid subscriptions to post (my least favored) or b.) offer a paid premium services level where one can register and post without paying, but things like search access would only be available to subscribers.
I suppose another possibility, if the board’s traffic is threatening the Reader’s ability to communicate during the business day, would be to just shut it down during those hours. Well, we have overlapping communities of posters here, and cutting out the board’s availability during its prime time seems about as sure a way to kill it as any other.
Actually, if it’s a comm problem, even limiting search functions won’t help; the basic problem is too many users consuming too much bandwidth. The only solution is to reduce the number of users. If the SDMB becomes a pay-per-post board, or a yearly subscription board, or somesuch, then several things will happen:
the number of users will immediately be reduced
the Chicago Reader will receive remuneration to offset the bandwidth costs involved (it is up to the CR if the fees they incur will be adequate to actually curtail the costs 100% or even pay for additional bandwidth - it’s their board, they should do with it as they please and charge as they feel appropriate)
the “tone” of the SDMB will change, probably for the better. At the very least, the amount of “static” in the forums will be significantly reduced. Typically, when a resource begins to cost something to the user, the user makes sure the resource is used more wisely.
It would be interesting to see which type of poster would scream the loudest about a subscription scheme - but my opinions on which way they would lean politically, and from which countries they would hail would best be left to GD or The Pit…
…personally, I would welcome a subscription method, due to items 1-3, above…
I’d be cool with a subscription fee, too, if it weren’t too high. What might be “too high”? Ask me when one’s proposed and I have to choose whether to (a) pay up cheerfully; (b) pay up grudgingly; or (c) storm off in a huff.
At least a subscription fee should be a great troll-reducer.
Any fee of course has to be high enough such that the overhead of fee collection, returns, faked/stolen CC’s, CC and Paypal charges, etc. and all related grief is covered. So there is a net profit. That seems a little hard to gauge as an outsider, and I think only the Reader Staff know their own situation well enough to say what it is. When I looked into it to help out a similar site that was considering a pay option, they ended up choosing $36 p.a., which was too high and cost them nearly all of their Members. Of 500 active Members, only 20 or so bought in. Switching to $20 p.a. made a huge difference - more than 250 people did that. But going down to $12 p.a. the next year only increased it to about 275. These things seem to follow some sort of odd curve, as there is a momentum involved and several human factors issues.
I’m not posting that to act like I know anything, but to sort of help explain that there are dynamics involved that are going to be hard for anyone to judge, and they (the Reader) will do the best they can.
(bolding mine) it will surely change, for better or for worse. there’s just no way to tell. IMHO fighting ignorance requires constant fresh faces to be…erm, fought. this has probably been discussed many times before, so let’s not hijack this update thread. suffice to say, i think this should be a last resort. my earlier post comes from remembering how the board really sped up when the search function failed for some reason or other sometime back.
I truly hope the board does not become a pay to post, because I simply could not do it. For one, my husband doesn’t really like the Dope anyway, and if I had to start paying for it… Second, we don’t make enough to where I could justify spending any amount of money on a board subscription.
As would I, for a around $3 per month, simply to help offset costs. Not necessarily for the reasons that DirkGntly mentioned, because those help make the SDMB what it is. I think I’d miss The Pit.
We’re talking amounts on the order of perhaps a few tens of dollars per year. Anyone could afford it, if they wished. A couple bucks a week is nothing. I blow more than that on junk food (which I could surely do without).
A few months ago, the Administration posted an appeal in the MPSIMS forum. They explained some of the problems they were having and asked us all to refrain from posting too much. They listed some specific examples such as no more posting parties and to not post as many game threads. While there was a reduction in such nonsense, there may still be too much of it.
I am not a Mod and I don’t pretend to be one. I do have some suggestions, as a member, which are not directed at any one person. Keep in mind that the problems that we are having are related to the message board is taking up too much of the Reader’s bandwidth and they do not make enough money off of this message board to make it worth it to them.
-Is your post per day average way above the norm? If so, you are most likely taking up more than your fair share of the resource.
-If you’re willing to pay a subscription fee, have you purchased any of the books, clothing, mugs, etc. available from the Reader? If you’d be willing to pay, say, $50 for a year’s subscription, buy $50 worth of Reader stuff.
-If you can’t afford the subscription price, or even if you can, did you ever click on the banner ads that were on the main page? You could have been doing this on a different browser window while a thread was loading. If you spent five minutes or so a day doing this, the Reader would get more revenue.
There’s a simple solution right there - shut the boards off from 10 AM to 4PM, and leave them running during the current down time of 3 AM to 4 AM. I find it very frustrating when I want to post in the middle of the night and they’re down.
Plus, we’ll all be more productive at work, no distractions from our enthralling jobs, our bosses will be happier with us …
What? Why are you looking at me like that? It’s just an idea…
Piper backs slowly out of the thread, whistling nervously.
