Lethbridge Reprobate Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Pics would be nice but they take mega bandwidth. > > RB
Nearly every other forum in the universe manages to support the increased bandwidth.
Either through small annual fees/donations. Or a one up fee for advanced features like more messages. Then maybe a little advertising.
What this forum really, really misses is the connection made by registered members through a Personal Messaging system. Basically site e-mail system. Every other forum I have participated in has such a system, and it really helps to bring people together. As long as that can be done while still allowing the anonymous to post, then that would be awesome.
MJ Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > The owner wants to maintain low bandwidth for > people that can not afford high speed access to > the internet.
It would make sense to have a site that is as bandwidth intensive as Facebook, Tumblir, Twitter, etc, etc. Those seem to work well globally, without the need to worry about bandwidth.
The 1990s are past now.
Default settings for anonymous posters, where pictures and stuff are disabled would be a simple way to minimize their bandwidth requirements. While a more modern forum, with typical interfaces would enable us to strengthen the connection and bonds between the majority of posters who have normal internet speeds.
Blackberry tried to tell the world what was best for them in regards mobile internet speeds. Look where it got them, as the others gleefully ignored BB's self-imposed limits.
There are people that have low bandwidth that do not use the sites you reference because of the high bandwidth. Also, those sights are more difficult to use for people that are blind and need to use braille monitor.
This site is vastly more accessible to those that are blind than those sites you listed.
This is not facebook or the others and I see no reason this site needs to conform and be like other sites. Might as well tell everyone to wear white shirts and black ties because that is what others wear.
If all you have is "those sites are...", then you have no valid argument for change.
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 04/15/2015 09:52PM by MJ.
> > If all you have is "those sites are...", then you > have no valid argument for change.
That had nothing to do with my argument. That was simply an observation about modern bandwidth usage. It doesn't seem to be limiting their growth. And I'd assume the owners would like to have a bigger site, with more users, with more influence in bringing people out of the church.
My point is that modern sites, with better internal communications between the users offer a far superior connection between the posters and the forum members. Making a far stronger forum.
It has bugger all with trying to be like FB, twitter, or the other social media sites.
At the end of the day, this isn't my site, so the owners can live in the 90's if they so choose. If I don't like it I can vote with my mouse. If I like it, I stay.
A) this site is not about growth, so talking about growth of the other sites is irrelevant.
B) this site is about accessibility, those sites are not. Those sites are NOT ACCESSIBLE TO MANY PEOPLE that can access this site. Those sites do not care about those that can't access their sites because those people would not make the sites much money.
Yes, you have an opinion, but unfortunately it is not based on the goals of this site, realities of technology and the fact that many people are not served well by the sites you mention in the name of profits.
Nobody is keeping you here, there are other sites that have all the bells and whistles for you.
MJ Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > > Nobody is keeping you here,
I think I noted that in my post. Maybe you didn't see it in the text. Perhaps if I could have posted a picture, which tells a 1000 word story much better, you would have noticed. ;o)
scotslander Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > MJ Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > > > Nobody is keeping you here, > > I think I noted that in my post. Maybe you didn't > see it in the text. Perhaps if I could have > posted a picture, which tells a 1000 word story > much better, you would have noticed. ;o)
Wow, what a non statement.
You are still here, so whatever you may have said about leaving seems to ring untrue.
What you "opinion" fails to take into account is that this site is not Facebook. Its goals are very different than that of Facebook. This site should and is designed to meet the needs the owner wants to address, not what facebook would address. I fail to see any point in arguing that this site should be like or base any design on the facebook model when this sight has different goals and objectives from facebook. This site should be designed based on the goals and objectives of the site, not on the design and capabilities of facebook.
If you want facebook, go to facebook.
Oh and sorry, there are many things that a picture can not describe as well as words.
Many movies that are based on books show how the written word is superior to telling stories over pictures.
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 04/15/2015 11:43PM by MJ.
Agreed. The trapshooting enthusiast site I'm also addicted to has a very nice PM feature that would be very much appreciated here at least by me. Everyone could have to option to opt in or out of the PM feature. Is this a possibility Eric?
Sometimes I'll have a very long post and I'll no idea which word is offensive. It turns into a process of elimination finding the word. Because it is not in bold nor is it a different color. It can be frustrating.
I think not having photos reduces impediments to the conversational flow. I'm happy with the links. But I don't know why some people will re-post an entire post just to make a comment.
Pics in posts, abused and turned off. No one here wants to see a close up of someones crotch, autopsy pics or crime scenes when they open a thread. I have been around so long I have seen all of the above and vid of someone pooing into a bottle. If you have a relevant PERSONAL pic you can send it to me and I can put it on the pic site for you. I am NOT paying to post cat pics, or FB crap. That is what FB is for.
Private Messaging, turned off. We have seen it be abused from BOTH sides many many times. Use email, that way we are not liable nor can we be accused of reading them. All y'all have email and it works just fine.
"It would make sense to have a site that is as bandwidth intensive as Facebook, Tumblir, Twitter, etc, etc. Those seem to work well globally, without the need to worry about bandwidth." This isn't FB, Tumbler or Twitter. Those are for entertainment - NOT RfMs reason for being. This is a support forum and the written word is what is of use. We don't have, nor would we want that kind of a budget. Any money we have goes to pay tech and for band. We have many people that don't have "normal" net speed for one reason or another so be happy you have something that works well for you. It also makes it much much easier to view on a phone.
"But I don't know why some people will re-post an entire post just to make a comment." Hell if I know Don. I have said it and edited more times than I can even think about. Once again folks, copy ONLY THE RELEVANT ITEM YOU ARE REPLYING TO.
And yes, since a specific troll has not been around in a while you can now use shit all you want but not AT others OR IN THE SUBLINE.
Is there a better method for detecting in a post if your word is banned. I keep checking to see if a word might be bold or in a different color or font to clue me in on whether the word is on the no-no list.
If there isn't any guidance I'll keep using process of elimination versus emailing the admins just to look up a word.
I am currently paying 5c per megabyte on my mobile phone plan while I am out and about. There is no way I am going to go to a site that has pictures.
Being able to express yourself only using words is a good thing. You have to rely on logic, reasoning and careful word selection, all of which lead to an interesting conversation.
Don't underestimate admin here. They know what works.
I like text only, and I remember the time when graphics were allowed. Too much abuse, some people ya give them an inch, they take a mile. It really is better this way. (I was even around when the this site used a type of string style, for responses!)
Plus some of us don't have access to (or be able to afford) high speed internet.