The End of an Era

[SAEMike]

Well, here is my two cents. My donations to this site were small, so as for me, I do not feel like I've been let down, particularly but there are those that made regular donations and contributions.

These people were told over and over again that they were making donations to "Help keep DBSTalk ad free". It turns out, those donations and contributions actually came to help sell the site to a for profit website that will cover the site with ads. If I were one of those people I would feel as if I were lied to and really let down. I really feel bad for those people, and it can go without saying, I have made my last donation, and I would imagine that my posts will also soon come to an end when the new ownership of this FOR PROFIT WEBSITE closes down all of the non-DBS related topics.

I feel like I lost a favorite clubhouse. I know I'll be losing discussion with a lot of people I have grown to really enjoy. I will miss you all.

[Jacob S]

You know, when you mentioned making donations, that reminds me of when I made mine, and not to make anyone mad or anything because I have nothing against anyone, I just feel as if those that have donated have contributed at that time to the good of this site but that ended up being a profit for sale in the end and leading to a for profit site later on in which was not intended to begin with (or at least to our knowledge). What I just typed I did so before reading the second paragraph in the first post of this thread and I see that someone is thinking along the same lines as me. It just does not seem right. Could this be the next big thing, to have people donate towards a site to make it big then sell it to someone else?

This reminds me of DBSDish when it was around and we all know what happened after the transfer of ownership. It went by the wasteside. I hope for the users sake that this site will still become useful to many as it had in the past and that satelliteguys.us will remain the way it is today and the way it was yesterday, run by a hobbyist for the right intentions for the hobbyist.

It is understandable that one would want to sell the site to someone that can keep the site up without having to worry about donations and funding to keep the site up but agreements should be made and hopefully have been made to have partial control of this site still and to agree that certain parts of it remain unchanged such as the subjects of the forums.

[JohnGfun]

Very Well Stated Mike and Jacob.

[cdru]

You know, when you mentioned making donations, that reminds me of when I made mine, and not to make anyone mad or anything because I have nothing against anyone, I just feel as if those that have donated have contributed at that time to the good of this site but that ended up being a profit for sale in the end and leading to a for profit site later on in which was not intended to begin with (or at least to our knowledge).I think this is a very good point.

It reminds me of a situation a few years back with Escient (later Graceland) and the CDDB. For years, the community added CD track details into the CDDB ran by by Escient and in exchange, they got more or less free use of it back. People could use that database in their applications to retrieve details of a CD. Think for use in a automated ripping program. Then one day they decided to take "their" data and not share it unless you played by their rules, regardless of the fact that the community was the one that essentially did all the work. It was a huge slap in the face.

I think the situation here is similar. Yes Chris owned DBSTalk just like Escient/Graceland owned CDDB. However it was us, the forum members, that contributed to it both in the form of money and even more importantly in posts of knowledge (or lack of in some cases). We were the ones that gave the site value. Now it ends up that the value WE created wasn't really for US. It was to increase the value of the site to be sold* IMHO. I'm sad this has happened.

This has been the one forum that I have visited that had a potpourri-like forum where politics were allowed to be discussed and usually was done so in an open, friendly manner. DSLReports has it's Red & Blue forums but you only get one side of the debate as once you post in one room, you get read-only in the other. SatGuys isn't really politic topic friendly. Slashdot isn't quite the same type of site.

My DBS to Non-DBS forum ratio is probably quite low. A quick search shows that 7/8 of my posts are outside of the DBS or satellite related forums. If the non-DBS groups go, I'll likely go with them. I'll probably come back on occasion, but it won't be nearly as often.

*-call it what you like. Sold, merged, alligned. Mark has said (http://www.dbstalk.com/showpost.php?p=421723&postcount=15) it wasn't sold. David has said (http://www.dbstalk.com/showthread.php?p=421723&highlight=sold#post421723) that he bought the site but it doesn't matter if it was "$1 or $100,000 or if money even changed hands". I can't imagine that ownership was just handed over with no type of compenstation.

[Mark Lamutt]

Give it time, guys...you're all reacting as if everything has been decided and is set in stone. We haven't even started mixing the mortar yet...

[SAEMike]

As far as I know, it is set in stone that the site was sold, to a FOR PROFIT website without any prior warning or input from the people who have paid and contributed to the site for years.

[Tusk]

I think we should all take it easy on Chris. Sure donations were made to fund the operation of the site without ads, but I seriously doubt that every $$ of operational cost was paid by the readers. I'm sure that Chris has been deficit spending on this site for quite some time. (of course, if not the joke is on us).

I know changes aren't set in stone, but my guess based on David's post, is that the non-DBS forums will be removed, avatars will have to be your picture, banner ads will be splashed across the top of every page, and the hominess of the website will be gone forever. As the say, c'est la vie, things will always change.

Now let's wait and see.

[Richard King]

As far as I know, it is set in stone that the site was sold, to a FOR PROFIT website without any prior warning or input from the people who have paid and contributed to the site for years.First of all, I have no idea what financial arrangements were made on the transfer, if any, BUT, when a site begins to take too much away from the life of the person running it there are only a couple of options. The first option would be to shut it down and go away. The second option would be to turn it over (one way or another) to someone who has the time and energy to put into the site to make it click. Someone who is doing this to support himself IS going to do what is necessary to keep the site running and make improvements. I would like to see things remain as close to the same as possible, and hopefully they will. A couple of forums may go away because they are better covered at AVS. I think this is reasonable. Those that are not better covered over there, including our "off topic" forums hopefully will remain here.

[cdru]

Give it time, guys...you're all reacting as if everything has been decided and is set in stone. We haven't even started mixing the mortar yet...I'll give it time and see what happens. It's not like I've already packed my bags.

But when a builder builds a community so that all the houses look the same, when you see another house going up it doesn't take much to presume that the new house on the block is going to look just like the others. When TC and AVS both have essentially the same rules and policies, do you REALLY think that it's going to be any different here?

[bonscott87]

One would say that the off-topic forums on TC are the busiest and most posted to. Many people on TC don't even have a Tivo, they just like the community. The same can be said here, if you allow it to be built.

[RichW]

Let us not rush to judgement. I also have contributed to the site, but that is all water under the bridge because I got value back during those years. Plus the friendships formed here are priceless.

Whether I will continue to support the site under new ownership will depend upon how well or poorly the changes affect me. I was a supporter of DBSForums years ago, but when the new admin got too heavy-handed. I left and never looked back. That could happen here or not.

Let us just wait and see what happens here.

[Mark Lamutt]

Thank you, Rich. I think 6 months from now, most of you will look back at this time and realize that a lot of the near-hysteria was baseless, and we'll all have a good laugh at it. That's what I'm working for and towards.

[Nick]

Thank you, Rich. I think 6 months from now, most of you will look back at this time and realize that a lot of the near-hysteria was baseless, and we'll all have a good laugh at it. That's what I'm working for and towards.I just hope we can still hear each other when we have that good laugh. What we need is an emergency meeting place if the place burns to the ground.

[RichW]

Well, they say that hearing is the second thing to go in old age! :)

[Nick]

Well, they say that hearing is the second thing to go in old age! :)My hearing is fine, Rich. As for the other thing, I've attached a pic of the gf, and the happy, satisfied look on her face. Enjoy! :D

[Laverne]

Nick! You stole Danny R's girlfriend!! :sure: :grin:

How EVER will you keep her satisfied? :confused:

Oh, wait! :eek: PLEASE don't answer that. :nono2:

!rolling

[Richard King]

Nick.... I just don't know what to say, other than to just come right out and say it.... I am VERY disappointed in you that you didn't introduce me to your GF when I was in Brunswick last summer. How could you keep such beauty to yourself?

[Nick]

Beauty is in the eye of the beerholder. Notice the subtle smile of complete satisfaction on her face. Ooh, Baby! :D

[Richard King]

Ah, that Mona Lisa smile. :D

[Phil T]

She kind of looks like me. :D

<----------------

[Scott Greczkowski]

My hearing is fine, Rich. As for the other thing, I've attached a pic of the gf, and the happy, satisfied look on her face. Enjoy! :D

Nick you going for the younger women again? :lol:

[JM Anthony]

As far as I know, it is set in stone that the site was sold, to a FOR PROFIT website without any prior warning or input from the people who have paid and contributed to the site for years.
That's so, so lame. I'd bet a chunk of change that the donations Chris has received have no where covered his total out of pocket expenses since inception. Can't even begin to imagine how many hours he's invested in the site and I seriously doubt he did so believing he'd eventually sell it. I've made a couple of donations since discovering dbstalk and those donations were just that, donations. My assumption was that they helped cover current, not necessarily future operating expenses. They helped to keep the place ad free and I remember some investments in server hosting that kept site performance decent. Considering the dbs information I gained as well as the entertainment value and camaraderie of the site, money well spent.

I doubt Chis is going to get rich off of this deal and I doubt he'll just sell the rest of us down the drain. Right now, nothing about this site has changed. Until Chris and David share more about the future plans, I suggest we continue with business as usual.

John

[SAEMike]

Let me clarify some things in my post. I never once said that Chris didn't work hard on the site, nor did I say that I thought member contributions covered the entire cost of running the site. What I did say, and what I did mean is that many people made their donations thinking that it was to help keep the site ad free. Now the end result of those donations turns out to be to sell the site to a guy who is going to plaster the website with ads. If you disagree with me, go to AVS Forums or TivoCommunity and tell me if you can find any content between all of those ads. On AVS you have to scroll down to get to anything that is not an ad. DBSTalk as we know it, is dead. Both Chris and David have left very strong hints that the Potpourri forum and all of the other "off topic" forums will quickly be gone. If the history of AF and TC are any indication our avatars are gone, and this site will likely be overmoderated and the censorship that exists on those site will pollute this site as well.

[Mark Lamutt]

Mike, I think you've made your opinion very well known at this point. No need to continue any farther with it. Either you'll be right, or you'll be wrong, and only time will tell.

[music_beans]

Hey Mike, time to rain on your parade. :P

Even if DBST has been sold/merged/whatever to AVSForums, it doesn't mean that DBSTalk will be plastered with advertisements or that you will be required to use your personal head shot for your avatar. Your jumping to conclusions.

Also,
DBSTalk isn't dead!
I believe in Chris's vision that this merger will benefit DBSTalk in the long run.

I might as well stop typing before this erupts into a flame war. :)

[Jacob S]

There are different ways of looking at it just like everything else, good and bad, but we know that for the time that we have had on this site so far was supported by us and served its purpose for the time that we have been here. If it benefits the members of the site and gives Chris a reward finally for his creation then so be it, since it does not hurt the members. I wonder if we can still expect prizes to be given away as we had in the past. The moderators have also done a lot of work themselves on keeping this site going all this time.

[James Long]

Anyone can play guessing games and ignore the facts posted by Chris and David.

I'd rather that we gave David and the AVS ownership a warm welcome and not a half-baked roast. Let him know that we are adults that he can work with and not crybabies that need to be silenced by tighened rules.

And if you want to fixate on the $1+ Chris received for the site think about it as a refund for all the work and money that have come from him over the years building a playground for now unappreciative people.

JL

[Nick]

Your jumping to conclusions.:icon_dumm One last time... :rolleyes: It's you're, the contraction for 'You are', as in "You are (you're) jumping to conclusions." :hair:

:kickbutt: :engel10:

Adios, amigo. :hi:

fini

[Redster]

:icon_dumm One last time... :rolleyes: It's you're, the contraction for 'You are', as in "You are (you're) jumping to conclusions." :hair:

:kickbutt: :engel10:

Adios, amigo. :hi:

fini

But what if 'jumping' was intended to be a noun instead of an adverb. :D

[music_beans]

:p Boy, I need to go back to elementary school again! Thanks for correcting me again though.

[Nick]

It's (it is) the least I can do, and the last I will do.

No more Mr. Nice Helpful Spelling Guy. :wave:

:D

It's this new devil-inspired keybard. It is not my faulth!

[Bogy]

It's (it is) least I can do, and the last I will do.

No more Mr. Nice Helpful Spelling Guy. :wave:

:D
There should be a "the" between "it's" and "least" as in "It is the least I can do." Of course that is probably not true, because I am sure you could do less. :lol:

[Mark Lamutt]

You tell him, Bogy! :lol:

[bonscott87]

Now the end result of those donations turns out to be to sell the site to a guy who is going to plaster the website with ads. If you disagree with me, go to AVS Forums or TivoCommunity and tell me if you can find any content between all of those ads. On AVS you have to scroll down to get to anything that is not an ad.

What in the heck are you talking about? Have you actually been to either site? There are a few very small icons for ads at the very top of the page. And that's it. No banner ads all over. No popups and all that crud. It takes all of what...one flick of the scroll wheel to get past them? You really need to get dose of reality there bud.

Besides, with FireFox and the Adblock extention you don't see them at all anyway.

[Steve Mehs]

I was thinking the same thing. Most of the ads are 100 x 30, they’re at the very top of the site and it doesn't take much effort to scroll past them.

As a long time member of AVS and TiVo Community, I have never found the ads distracting

[markh]

If you're stuck with dialup those pages take a long time to load. 3-4 times as long as the pages here. It has seemed especially bad since they upgraded their site.

[SAEMike]

This window has two large banner ads (one flashing) slashed across the top of the page, as well as a huge box of random ads on the top of the page. When you first look at the page, there is NOTHING of substance for the website, just random ads. Then you scroll down and there are banner ads along the right side of the page. They are exactly like I said they were, covering the page and flashing and distracting the reader.

The ads on TC are not quite as bad, but they are certainly there. And the biggest problem with both of those pages is the aggressive "over-moderating" of the site. Posts are deleted and members are berated for daring to have an opinion.

I'm sure that same type of heavy handed pandering to advertisers will come to this place soon. There is no independant satellite information source on the web anymore.

[James Long]

I'm sure that same type of heavy handed pandering to advertisers will come to this place soon. There is no independant satellite information source on the web anymore.I'm sure Scott would disagree with you as he considers his advertising laden site to be 'independent'. (If you want a real eyeful of ads, go there as a logged out guest. Members don't see all the junk that Scott pushes on visitors.)

I've been a member of AVS since 10-14-03 ... the ads on the content pages are only at the top (not along the sides as they have on the homepage you took a shot of) and have never bothered me nor interfered with my use of the site.

I've been a member of SatGuys since 10-24-03 ... Everyone sees a large banner at the top of the screen along with four smaller 'gold sponsors'. Non-members also see a large block of advertising on the LEFT hand of the screen (scrolling content off to the right) on every page and ads inserted between the posts in the threads. And Scott has imbedded keyword ads in posts for his gold sponsors. AVS doesn't treat non-members or members that poorly.

Given the choice, I'd rather see AVS own DBSTalk than Scott. Not given the choice, I'd rather see AVS own DBSTalk than Scott. These forums don't pay for themselves and you can only ask members to donate so much before raising money seems to be a bigger push than talking about the topic (D B S). AVS has done a better job of taking in advertisers yet keeping the site clean for members and users. Pagedown and you are there at the content. no big deal.

AVS' rules are also a more family friendly than enforced on Scott's site. If you want to post personal attacks on members (and non-members), link to PG-13 and worse content and have a naked lady avitar Scott has the site for you! If you want to talk DBS you are at the right site here.

And for those who don't think you can stand using either DBSTalk or Scott's site in the future there are two options:
1) Get a life - it's only TV
2) Start your own site and see just how much a PITA it is to have users like you

JL

[bonscott87]

I also don't think SAEMike actually understands how expensive it is to run a forum like AVS with the traffic it has. You're talking tens of *thousands* of dollars a month, just for bandwidth. A few people donating $5 isn't going to pay for that, not even close.

And like I said, one scroll wheel flick and the ads are gone. Poof!

Oh well, can't please everyone...

[SAEMike]

I am going to repost this here so that everyone can see it. This is from a post I made in the Gold Fourm on the topic.


My favorite post from one of the "two" off topic areas of TC.

http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-v...ad.php?t=161919


Quote:
*** Political Posts On Site Not Allowed ***

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hello All...

Political posts on the site will now just be removed when made. Even though the topics is in the news or not, this is not the place for it. These posts are making for issues between members, mods, and the administration and I am going to go the same policy we have on AVS Forum, the main site. That being, we are allowing no chat on political topics.

We tried to allow limited chat in this area, but the posts almost always seems to need to be closed down. Thus if we are closing threads over and over, it shows it just can not be talked about without making for issues and as such, we just do not care to keep having people upset over and over as threads are closed. As mentioned, we did give a try for sometime.

Let me now mention what actions that will take place on such posts. All posts that are started from this point forward will just be removed and the person pointed to this post. If a person restarts it, it will again be removed and the account will be suspended for a a few days. If after that the member does it again, the account will be closed.

I am sorry it has had to come to this, but with the diverse crowed we have on this site...such topics are surely to make for issues and do. Please remember, controversial posts also such as religion, race, etc. may be removed without notice. If you are not happy by this choice...so be it and I am sorry. Please remember that other sites on the net do allow for such topics.

Thank you for your help and understanding in this matter.

Also be sure to note the "rules" of these so called "off topic forums" on TC. What a joke.

It's coming. Just a matter of time.

Just listen to the tone of this post. It shows perfectly the heavy handed type moderating they do on these sites. If you DARE MENTION POLITICS - YOU WILL BE WARNED. IF YOU DO IT TWICE - SUSPENDED. IF YOU DO IT THREE TIMES - YOU WILL BE REMOVED.

God forbid. I'm sure my acount here is short lived

[SAEMike]

I also don't think SAEMike actually understands how expensive it is to run a forum like AVS with the traffic it has. You're talking tens of *thousands* of dollars a month, just for bandwidth. A few people donating $5 isn't going to pay for that, not even close.

And like I said, one scroll wheel flick and the ads are gone. Poof!

Oh well, can't please everyone...

I don't mind advertising too much. It's not the advertising that bothers me as much as WHO now owns the site and the rules that will likely soon be in place.

[music_beans]

It's coming. Just a matter of time.

No, it isn't coming. You're being paranoid. I wish I don't have to resort to this, but looks like I got to.

DBSTalk isn't going to die or get taken over by advertisements. Listen to Chris why don't you. He believes that this merger will help DBSTalk, and I, and a whole bunch of other people here believe him as well.

But YOU, you are jumping to conclusions saying that DBSTalk is dead or that stricter rules will go in place, or that TC, Political, and OT posts will be eliminated. You're treating this news like its the end of the world. For god sake, listen to Chris PLEASE.

Im done. :)

[SAEMike]

Listen to Chris why don't you.

We hear all of your concerns about the non-DBS discussion forums like Potpourri, Computers and DVD's. These forums definitely serve a purpose to help foster a community feeling within the forums. Nothing wrong with that. However, they can also be a hindrance to growth. I've noticed over recent months that we have reached an impasse in the volume of new registrations per day, posts per day and the amount of visitors. One of the reasons for this impasse is because visitors come here and see more posts about George Bush than Dish Network so they move on.

Non-DBS related topics also cause problems with the staff. We probably spend more time moderating those forums than all of the satellite forums combined. There is also a certain stress level involved that, over time, can take it's toll. These problems take away from what should be our main objective which is gathering satellite information and news for you to read every day.

At this time I really don't know if the off-topic forums (like potpourri) will be staying. When a site starts getting large, forums like that become an even bigger problem and after a while it bogs down the entire site. A prime example is what happened during the last elections. We had so many complaints that we almost shut the entire potpourri forum down.
Now, about the forums themselves. Initial talks have revealed the following:

Some forums will go. Right now we are looking at the Buy, Sell, Trade area. It will probably be completely dropped due to legal implications.

We will also be looking hard at the DVD, Computer, Laughter and Potpourri forums. In order to remain focused and not duplicate forums at AVS, these forums are under review for either deletion or reorganization.

I have listened to Chris.

[bavaria72]

Well, allow me to bring this back this thread was suppose to be. I personally am very sad about this. I also realize the reality of economics. I only wish that perhaps other "options" had been investigated prior to this decision. It would be very, very naive of us to think things won't change. Oh well, I met some wonderful folks who I will keep in contact outside of this "assimilation". The folks I feel the most sorry for are the Moderators that have guided us thru this. Damn they gave their hearts an most of their souls to this silly thing we called DBSTalk. I know I made some damn good friends out of it and that what is what is all about. I"ll be "GD" if I go to the other group but I sure will miss this forum as it gets sucked in to AVS, Boring, very, very boring.....Good luck to AVS :sure:

[DBSPaul]

No more Mr. Nice Helpful Spelling Guy. :wave:

That could be one of the Bud "Real Men of Genius" ads..

Oh, wait. This is Nick we're talking about here. I never could figure him out.

[DBSPaul]

I also don't think SAEMike actually understands how expensive it is to run a forum like AVS with the traffic it has. You're talking tens of *thousands* of dollars a month, just for bandwidth. A few people donating $5 isn't going to pay for that, not even close.

As one who has researched such options, if you're paying >$10k for such bandwidth, you're being fleeced. Do the research.

The irony is that the ads themselves, being graphics intensive, *ADD* to the bandwidth requirements, along with server CPU requirements if they are rolling ads, etc. Go down the rat hole on that one.

And like I said, one scroll wheel flick and the ads are gone. Poof!

..except that your browser issues the HTTP get commands, the server responds, handshakes occur, at some point the ads come up and match the ad blocker, but the handshake must still occur, so there is still traffic (latency dependent) that occurs because of the ads. To those on high-speed with low latency connections, not a big issue. To those whose ISPs aren't nailed to the major backbones, it can add several seconds to the page loading time, even IF the ad isn't shown.

[Bob Haller]

I WISH Chris had asked before making this change.

No doubt soeone will create yet another site if the new one doesnt meet the needs of its members.....

Chris should of asked, a single banner add pays for dbsforums and sat guys, Chris could of done the same here.

Fact is he was asked and refused. Claude really wanted a add here as well.

[Bob Haller]

We could all vote with our feet.

The more I think about it when the site looks like the new owners I am gone.....

Sad but life is like that.

Let the new owners get a empty shell.

I wouldnt feel this way if chris had at least ASKED, espically the gold members....

[Nick]

Bob, you keep saying over and over you 'wish Chris had asked'. I presume you mean asked you. What possible tidbit of wisdom do you possess that would have had any effect on his decision? It's done. Let it go.

Based on my own observations of the content and quality of your overly-compulsive postings here over the years, you are probably the last person on anyone's list to contact for advice. IMO, one of the more serious problems you have is the tendency to repeat yourself ad infinitum. The content of your posts isn't all that great to begin with, but then you post the same thing over and over, as if you're afraid we didn't hear you the first, second or third times. For crissake, man, if you've already said it once, don't say it again and again.

You sound like an old woman.

[TNGTony]

Just listen to the tone of this post. It shows perfectly the heavy handed type moderating they do on these sites. If you DARE MENTION POLITICS - YOU WILL BE WARNED. IF YOU DO IT TWICE - SUSPENDED. IF YOU DO IT THREE TIMES - YOU WILL BE REMOVED.

God forbid. I'm sure my acount here is short lived

Ummmm..... tell me Mike, how would you write a post telling people what the rule is? It seems pretty straight forward to me. They take the time to explain why they have banned political posts. They ask people not to post political or overtly contraversial off topic posts and they tell you the consequences for ignoring their requests. Looks reasonable and well constructed to me. OHTER THAN CHANGING THE RULE TO SUIT YOU, how would you post the same info?

BTW, I personally like the open political forum. But I can live without it.

See ya
Tony

[bonscott87]

As one who has researched such options, if you're paying >$10k for such bandwidth, you're being fleeced. Do the research.


The bandwidth that AVS and TC pull down? Thousands.

Not to mention the cost of several dedicated or co-located servers.

You don't run forums like this on $10 a month hosted accounts.

But I digress and really, what does it matter. Don't like it, go somewhere else.

[Scott Greczkowski]

You sound like an old woman.

Hmm sounds like your type of woman Nick. :hurah:

[Mark Lamutt]

That's funny! :lol:

[DBSPaul]

The bandwidth that AVS and TC pull down? Thousands.

Not to mention the cost of several dedicated or co-located servers.

You started at "tens of thousands". Now you're down to "thousands". As I said, DO THE RESEARCH. Don't insult me with numbers you pull out of your collective a**.

As for dedicated, co-located servers .. duh! As I said, I've looked into doing things that take more bandwidth than AVS/TC, and that is part of the cost.

You don't run forums like this on $10 a month hosted accounts.

Again. Duh! You think I don't know that? When you get your PhD in anything other than underwater basketweaving, let me know.

[bonscott87]

You started at "tens of thousands". Now you're down to "thousands". As I said, DO THE RESEARCH. Don't insult me with numbers you pull out of your collective a**.

As for dedicated, co-located servers .. duh! As I said, I've looked into doing things that take more bandwidth than AVS/TC, and that is part of the cost.



Again. Duh! You think I don't know that? When you get your PhD in anything other than underwater basketweaving, let me know.

Nice, real nice. :nono:

I think you may be the first person I have ever added to my ignore list. Congrats, you should feel good about taking a simple point that running these sites costs a lot of money down to some off the wall level. Again, you da man. I suck arss and am stupid.

[DBSPaul]

Scott,

You and I are both supporters. You started with a semi-valid statement:

I also don't think SAEMike actually understands how expensive it is to run a forum like AVS with the traffic it has. You're talking tens of *thousands* of dollars a month, just for bandwidth. A few people donating $5 isn't going to pay for that, not even close.

And like I said, one scroll wheel flick and the ads are gone. Poof!

..and I agree, SAEMike likely has no clue how expensive it is to run a forum like AVS. However, your numbers were out by an order of magnitude and I wanted to make the point that ads actually create a downward spiral of increased bandwidth needs, further increasing fixed costs in terms of bandwidth charges and CPU needs, in addition to adding to page load latency. I think this achieved that:


As one who has researched such options, if you're paying >$10k for such bandwidth, you're being fleeced. Do the research.

The irony is that the ads themselves, being graphics intensive, *ADD* to the bandwidth requirements, along with server CPU requirements if they are rolling ads, etc. Go down the rat hole on that one.

I merely intended to clarify.

I can't help the fact that you can't take a little criticism for your posts. Your second one clearly showed that you were simply talking out of guesses:

The bandwidth that AVS and TC pull down? Thousands.

Not to mention the cost of several dedicated or co-located servers.

You don't run forums like this on $10 a month hosted accounts.

I never SAID you could run a forum on a $10/month hosted account, now did I?? But I wanted to reign in your numbers so people had a realistic assesment of what it does take. Now, before you go fly off again, think about this: if I know how much bandwidth AVSforums uses and what it takes to host something much bigger than that .. perhaps you could listen to the data? But instead, I get the flippant:

Don't like it, go somewhere else.

Same goes for you, Scott.

[bonscott87]

Ain't going to fly off again. It's just a forum.

[Chris Blount]

I think this thread has run it's course. Closing