Yeah, I know it's been done to death, but...

About This Message Board
1

Where are all of the old posts?

I’ve searched for things that I was proud to post to in the past (e.g. the original “Very Vaguely Creepy” thread) to no avail.

I’m paying for this service now, so I wouldn’t (and have never) complained before, but I’m afraid I have to now. Threads were promised to be archived, but they haven’t, and there is no indication as to when that will be done.

I thought that achiving all of the old posts would eliminate the abominable slowness of the SDMB, but so far, not only has that not been done, but the old threads seem to be gone with the wind when one searches for them.

What’s going on? Can we please get a status update?

Don’t get me wrong; I love this message board with all of my heart, but I’d really like to see some accountability for these mistakes.

Does any member of the administration have even a vague time frame as to when these things will be fixed?

2

What’s going on is that the SDMB is using an inadequate server to hold all of the archives, despite months of saying an upgrade is in the works. They are periodically dumping batches of older threads so that we can continue to have the lightning fast access we all enjoy. I started a thread about it 5 months ago and nothing has apparently changed in that time.

Expect an update after the next subscription drive. :stuck_out_tongue:
And of course, the board times out 3 times before I can post this. Classic.

3

So the board is still slow, we’re losing our old posts, nobody has any idea when an upgrade will occur, the achived posts are inaccessilbe, no member of the administration has yet to respond to this post, and we’re paying for that privilege.

Beautiful.

4

I feel shocked!

5

Maybe our expectations are unreasonable. Have you checked the prices on hard drives larger than 2GB lately? They’re outrageous! :eek:

6

[QUOTE=neutron star]
So the board is still slow, we’re losing our old posts, nobody has any idea when an upgrade will occur, the achived posts are inaccessilbe, no member of the administration has yet to respond to this post, and we’re paying for that privilege.

Beautiful.
[/QUOTE]

I’m sorry to say but the idea that threads/posts are sacrosanct and will be archived and available in perpetuity is not something that the Chicago Reader agreed to. If that idea has become the assumed policy that was a mistake and I’d like to correct that mistake and clarify the policy. Threads/posts can and will be deleted if deemed necessary with no guarantee they will ever be available in an archived format. That doesn’t mean threads/posts will be deleted or they won’t be available in an archived format but it is not a guarantee and therefore it should never be assumed.

As to the status of the new server I’m in the process of ordering one within the next two weeks. When will we be running on the new server? I don’t know and I’m not going to give a definitive or even approximate answer because I don’t have a definitive or approximate answer. When the new server is purchased it will then be built, the SDMB will be moved from it’s current hosting company to a co-location site in Chicago, the vBulletin software will possibly be upgraded to a newer version and I will attempt to resolve the underlying MySQL database issue that is limiting us to approximately 2.4 GBs worth of posts. That current limit is what necessitates the deletion of old posts. If we want to keep adding new posts to the database I have to get rid of something until I can resolve the underlying issue. I may and I’m going to reemphasize MAY do something to bring back the posts I started deleting around December of 2005 but once again there is no guarantee and probably only a 50/50 chance I MIGHT do it so please don’t assume it’s going to happen.

I’m sorry you’re dissatisfied with what you’re receiving and I’ll end by quoting what a subscriber is to receive:

What does a subscription get me?

* Posting privileges for one year.
* Post count (i.e., number of messages you've posted to date appears with your username)
* Ability to search the massive SDMB message database
* Ability to view member profiles
* Biographical info included with each post (optional)

Jerry

7

Thanks for the update, Jerry (and for using one of your rare posts in my thread).

I know there have never been (and never are) any promises when it comes to the SDMB, but I really hope we can bring back some of those great old threads that I love to look back on when I’m feeling nostalgic. I’m just now realizing that I’ve spent a full quarter of my entire life posting here, and it’s always interesting to look back at the person I used to be.

Good luck on setting up the new server.

8

So we’ve gone from

to a 50/50 chance it MIGHT happen.

You guys should communicate more. I mean that in the nicest possible way, just having come from a night at my job where a lack of communication between two critical departments resulted in frustrations, headaches, and could have resulted in a large monetary loss.

I don’t think if TubaDiva was under the impression that there was a 50/50 chance you MIGHT restore the old posts, she would have said we EXPECT to return them. Possibly “we might return them” or “there’s a chance we will return them” or “we will possibly return them.” Or perhaps she would have said expect. This is an assumption I’m making. And things may have changed in the months since that statement, I do not know.

It just seems to me that communication amongst yourselves about the plans for the board, and consistent communication to the membership would probably solve a lot of these types of problems.

9

[QUOTE=jdavis]
I’m sorry to say but the idea that threads/posts are sacrosanct and will be archived and available in perpetuity is not something that the Chicago Reader agreed to.
[/QUOTE]

That sounds great. So let’s go ahead and start deleting all threads older than 6 months. That would speed up the board real quick, and get rid of that pesky problem with zombie threads. Sounds like a win/win.

10

[QUOTE=XJETGIRLX]
That sounds great. So let’s go ahead and start deleting all threads older than 6 months. That would speed up the board real quick, and get rid of that pesky problem with zombie threads. Sounds like a win/win.
[/QUOTE]

Better yet, let’s just turn everything into chat rooms. If we want to save anything for we can log it ourselves. This place will run like greased lightning.

11

[QUOTE=jdavis]

* Ability to search the massive SDMB message database

[/QUOTE]

But doesn’t that then seem to suggest that old threads will be saved? It’s kind of hard to search the “massive SDMB message database” if you go ahead and delete the old threads.

12

It’s like charging for a salad bar but only putting lettuce in it.

Oh well, 7 years is a good run for a TV series. Why expect any different from this form of entertainment? Like Lazlo said, “Things are getting pretty weird around here.”

13

It doesn’t look like a conflict to me. Tubadiva said they expect to return the old messages in an archive (at some uncertain point) in the future. Jerry said that in the next two weeks he’s planning on moving the forum to a new server and possibly upgrade to a new version of the software. During that operation he may restore the old messages.

He’s not saying there’s a 50/50 chance of them ever being restored, he’s saying there’s a 50/50 chance they’ll be restored in the next two weeks.

14

[QUOTE=Santos L Halper]
He’s not saying there’s a 50/50 chance of them ever being restored, he’s saying there’s a 50/50 chance they’ll be restored in the next two weeks.
[/QUOTE]

That’s not how the post reads to me. He said that he’ll be ordering the server in the next two weeks, but has no idea when it will actually be up and running, and that:

Plus:

The only mention of any kind of time frame for anything is when he’s actually going to order the server.

15

I think you’re right about the stated time frame.

My main point was that Garfield was reading Jerry’s post as saying there was only a 50/50 chance that we’d ever get the old posts back, which I don’t think is correct.

So I’ll change my comment to:

He’s not saying there’s a 50/50 chance of them ever being restored, he’s saying there’s a 50/50 chance they’ll be restored during the period when he’s moving the forum to the new server. :slight_smile:

16

[QUOTE=NoClueBoy]
It’s like charging for a salad bar but only putting lettuce in it.

Oh well, 7 years is a good run for a TV series. Why expect any different from this form of entertainment? Like Lazlo said, “Things are getting pretty weird around here.”
[/QUOTE]
At 4,000 posts/yr. you may be part of the problem rather than part of the solution.

I know, I know–you’re a paying subscriber…etc.

*The above post is posted by me as a poster, not a moderator.

17

[QUOTE=samclem]
At 4,000 posts/yr. you may be part of the problem rather than part of the solution.

I know, I know–you’re a paying subscriber…etc.

*The above post is posted by me as a poster, not a moderator.
[/QUOTE]

So sue me.

18

[QUOTE=samclem]
At 4,000 posts/yr. you may be part of the problem rather than part of the solution.

I know, I know–you’re a paying subscriber…etc.

*The above post is posted by me as a poster, not a moderator.
[/QUOTE]

And as a poster, you are out of line here. Criticising a paying member in good standing for using their paid account to post?

Paying customers in good standing are a revenue stream to the Chicago Reader. They are a revenue stream via their subscriptions, by contributing to the SDMB attractiveness via productive posts, and by bringing other paying members here through personal interaction.

I would hope that the Reader would want an atmosphere which fosters a continued or even increased revenue stream. I know for a fact that NoClueBoy has not only helped keep paying customers here, he has brought paying customers to the SDMB.

NoClueBoy and people like him are part of the solution. The long term solution of having a viable community of paying members who maintain and even increase both the good name and the revenue stream of the Chicago Reader.

I stand behind the goal of a viable, thriving SDMB community, built on the principles of the Straight Dope by Cecil Adams, and a viable and thriving Chicago Reader business model resulting from a positive and thriving SDMB community which can somehow return to being the place to be on the net. Anyone that knows me knows that is true, and that’s why I’m posting this.

19

Burning the carriages to feed the boiler to make the engine run on time: as a management strategy, I suppose it has the virtue of novelty, but allow me to point out that the ability to search is touted as one of the benefits of paying for a membership: if there’s nothing left to search for - well, can you see where I’m heading with this?

20

[QUOTE=Una Persson]
And as a poster, you are out of line here. Criticising a paying member in good standing for using their paid account to post?

Paying customers in good standing are a revenue stream to the Chicago Reader. They are a revenue stream via their subscriptions, by contributing to the SDMB attractiveness via productive posts, and by bringing other paying members here through personal interaction.

I would hope that the Reader would want an atmosphere which fosters a continued or even increased revenue stream. I know for a fact that NoClueBoy has not only helped keep paying customers here, he has brought paying customers to the SDMB.

NoClueBoy and people like him are part of the solution. The long term solution of having a viable community of paying members who maintain and even increase both the good name and the revenue stream of the Chicago Reader.

I stand behind the goal of a viable, thriving SDMB community, built on the principles of the Straight Dope by Cecil Adams, and a viable and thriving Chicago Reader business model resulting from a positive and thriving SDMB community which can somehow return to being the place to be on the net. Anyone that knows me knows that is true, and that’s why I’m posting this.
[/QUOTE]

Hey! At least I didn’t say he was a transgendered prolific poster. :slight_smile:

Let me apologize to NoClueBoy for a seemingly hard-assed comment. I only meant it in the context of poor JDavis having to deal with a full-time+ job at the Chicago Reader and work on this board in his spare time. And, apparently, his only viable solution was to start deleting posts. Old ones. As needed to keep the African Queen chugging along. [Can’t you just envision Jerry hitting the server with a monkey wrench?]

So, this complaining thread, like many others, revolves around Jerry having to get rid of older posts. And let me state here and now, that I probably value those posts from the first year or two more than anyone on this board. I doubt anyone could need/use them more than I. So this sucks for me in a big way.

But, you does what you have to do to keep the old boat afloat. And that’s when I read NoClueBoy’s post. And noticed his post count. And his join date. Given the general topic of the thread, I may have read too much into his post.

Now that I"ve spent an hour, gone back and read hundreds of his posts to this board, I have no complaint specifically about him or his posts. He’s a good guy.

If I’m guilty of something, it’s reading another complaining thread, and focusing on an easy target who didn’t deserve it. Mea culpa.

Again, these observations of mine are done as a poster, not as a moderator. I used to have pretty strong feeling before I became a moderator. I got warned at least three times as a poster… You could search for it… :slight_smile: