Ways To Improve Going Forward: Your thoughts on the matter.

About This Message Board
261

Not really. Misandry is still given a pass, as is discrimination against men. But, like racism, that’s for another thread.

Anyway, I’ve not noticed anyone mention the elephant. Another way of encouraging new members would be to crack down on all the idiotic Trump threads. Do you really think all those paranoid delusions and fantasies are attractive to visitors? Do you really think a board where it’s okay to wish death on the president is attractive to visitors? Just leave the the threads based on fact. I’ve posted on this before - three threads in ATMB - and been dismissed, but I urge the Mods to have a rethink. The prime rule of the Dope is ‘Don’t be a jerk’ but when Trump is even part of the issue that goes out of the window.

262

I haven’t noticed anyone wishing death on Trump, but maybe I just haven’t seen those posts. Certainly any posts wishing death on anyone should be stomped on.

What “paranoid delusions” are you talking about?

263

I don’t understand who said much of what is in your nested, multi-quote quotebox.

264

I would accept ads, even when logged in as a member, as long as they were clean and safe - maybe a two-tier system?)

265

Guests get crappy malware-ridden ads and members get clean and safe ones?

Just kidding, of course – you mean that you could pay $x to be a member and still get clean and safe ads or $x+y to get the ad-free experience, I assume.

I think step one is to clean up the ads and make them more, uh, dignified and safer. Then, I’d be happy to turn off ad block here and would consider joining.

The NY Times has a little box on the bottom asking people to consider turning off ad blockers – the SDMB could include that, but only after upgrading their ad providers.

266

You’re right.

My apologies. I goofed up the coding.

The first quoting is of ECG.

The secondary quoting is by me.

The thirdary quoting is of ECG.

Except for the very last thirdary and following secondary quoting. Those two are both ECG.

267

While I have no objection to avatars, I think it should be mentioned that they’re going to cost the site more to serve than just text, so I’d really suggest charging extra for them or something since I doubt that that really are a significant factor in whether people do or don’t join the site. The cost vs. benefit is probably not going to work the right direction.

268

As much as I hate Pledge Week on PBS, that might work here. Make the need for money very visible for a couple weeks at the beginning of each year. Wikipedia does something like that with a big drop-down request for donations from time to time.

Alternatively, seek a patron or a group of patrons. Preferably someone who doesn’t need his or her name plastered all over the place. You might even be able to recruit a few posters here to belly up to the bar. But, as others have noted, it would be important to understand what the depth of the financial issue is.

Or, try some type of premium service. I doubt if this will be be enough to fill the gap, but I think that’s how many web sites keep from going under. Maybe a forum or two that you have to pay extra for. Or a tired service for the existing forums.

And make it super easy to pay. I remember that my Charter Membership expired years ago because when I tried to renew it, there were problems and I finally just gave up. Maybe suggestion #1 will shame folks like me into getting on board again. Which leads me to my last suggestion, tongue in cheek: Pay to Pun. :wink: Between running coach and me, that could solve the problem right there!

269

I’ve done my bit to improve the boards, I left! :smiley:

But seriously, I do have a couple of points, some of which relate to why I left. These are all about the messageboard side - I’ll leave the moichendizing and Patreon suggestions to others :

1.) The Ads. It’s been mentioned a dozen times here, but the SDMB’s ad partner serves up viruses and malware like burgers at a McDonald’s. I wouldn’t mind whitelisting the site if I could trust the ads, but right now, I can’t.

2.) The moderation. I think the few moderators I viewed as hopeless are gone now, but even the good ones that are left are working from a set of rules that seem wildly varying according to mood, phase of the moon, what have you. I would suggest fewer, clearer rules. Don’t Be a Jerk is still a fine guiding principle, but maybe ease off the ‘Here are the twenty circumstances under which you are not allowed to say ‘fuck’’ stuff.

3.) The interface - It’s not bad, exactly. It looks like dozens of other sites on the internet. Which raises the question, “why come here?” It’s probably due for a spruce up or overhaul.

4.) The mission statement - This one’s tricky. The board’s diversity of topics is a good thing, but it also leads to the problem of “jack of all trades, master of none”. If I want to discuss comic books, or RPGs, or classic movies - I have other dedicated forums that will give me more viewpoints, more information. General Questions is sort of the central forum here, and everything else is just a bunch of us nerds chatting with each other, and General Questions is, in some ways, mooted by Google’s existence. Still, there could be a ‘market’ there.

So my idea would be to subdivide the forums. General Questions would be a container, under which there would be subforums about different topics. Science, Technology, History, Law, etc. Make it a place where a random schlub from the internet can come and talk to whatever experts we have on hand. And make it clear to the board users that they need to be on their best behavior there, because that’s where you get people in the door.

The other forums could be placed into containers as well - About This Messageboard and Comments on Cecil’s Columns could be a unit of some kind, and the rest could be categorized, or not. The model I’m suggesting is in use by RPGNet’s forums, which I still frequent. They have 2/3rds the membership of this site, but over three times the active members. It may be worth looking at them to see how they do that.

270

A board run by repressive thought police. Why can’t anyone see the brilliance in that idea? There could even be a new forum for writing sonnets, songs and love letters to the Dear Leader. This brand new trend of people saying nasty things about politicians must be stomped into the ground at once.

People will come in droves to this new utopia.

271

Something copying the Reddit Gold feature might also be effective, and would be available all year round.

272

I believe it’s against the rules to wish death on anyone, but the rest of this makes as much sense as this does. Which is to say, not much sense at all. It might be advisable at times to consolidate redundant threads, but eliminating a whole class of threads is going to drive more people away than it will attract. I certainly don’t want the mods making what amounts to political decisions.

273

Default avatar is a piece of fresh meat.
:smiley:

274

I don’t ever see those. Are they in Great Debates? Anyway, they have zero impact on me, and I’m dubious they are driving many posters away.

But it does get to the question of “whom does the board want to attract”? This place does feel very liberal. Do you want it to stay that way? Do you want to be friendlier to conservatives?

275

No, stop charging for every little extra thing. Not because I don’t want to pay for everything, but we’re trying to get more members. THAT is not going the way to go about it.

We already have a members vs. guests attitude – think that’s going to improve it? :dubious: That’s one of the things I really hate about this board - the elitist attitude.

276

Cecil always liked you best!
:dubious:

277

There are quite a few posters here whose absence from those boards improves the experience for the reader. Yes, on a percentage basis it’s a small number, but the turd doesn’t have to occupy a large portion of the punch bowl to spoil the party.

278

I’m not a member (yet). When I joined, There was no explanation of any benefits of membership, and then I forgot all about it.

The reason I GOT an ad-blocker was this site. Those flashing ads made it impossible to focus (literally) on the contents and gave me a headache. And such ads cheapen the site. It’s like Harvard putting up electronic billboards advertising “As seen on TV!” products.

I suggest using more ads–Yes, I said “more.” Bear with me–but making them far less obnoxious and more content-specific. Require whitelisting to get the content. Then make a perk of membership an ad-free SDMB experience, along with, if we go that route, a modest discount (10%) on SDMB merch.

But the ads MUST be improved first; otherwise, few people will stick around long enough to become members.

And again, marketing, marketing, marketing. Do we even know how many people VIEW the SDMB but don’t join?

279

I wonder who selects the advertiser. Perhaps an accountant picked the least expensive one.

280

I worked for an Internet search company from 1999-2001. At the time, one of the big Internet sites was About.com, which had a variety of subsites about things like travel, geography, exercise, etc. As I remember the way the company was set up was that outside people were each assigned a subsite. They were then responsible for maintaining their subsite, by writing articles themselves or by getting others to write articles. Again, as I remember, the gimmick was that the person in charge of that subsite shared in the revenue from it. So the person was incentivized to make the best, most popular page. Would something like that work here?