Subject:
|
Re: Is Brickshelf slow for anyone else lately?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.general, lugnet.dear-lego
|
Date:
|
Wed, 27 Nov 2002 23:55:44 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
2419 times
|
| |
|
|
Alfred Speredelozzi wrote:
>
> You are right, Jon. People need to realize that "free" is relative anyway.
> Sure, Kevin did a great deed in setting up the site and helping to build the
> community. However, it is part of a community, and it looses most of its
> value if the community abandons it.
>
> IMHO Lego fan website owners need to learn to get out of the mentality of "I
> provide this wonderful service, and so you should simply appreciate me." I
> have seen that quite a bit, in the last year, and it is discouraging. Most
> of us will simply move on to some other venue.
>
> Of course, I know what Kevin needs: money. I feel fairly convinced he
> doesn't have the money to keep up the bandwidth he used to have (I have no
> inside knowledge of that fact, however). But lacking that, paying a little
> attention to what his community wants (less aggregious moderation, more
> explanations for how he is running his site) would be a good thing.
>
> TLG should buy Brickshelf, and give it the bandwidth it needs. They
> probably don't want to touch it because it comes with a hornets nest of
> intellectual property problems. However, it is that kind of overly
> conservative legalistic thinking that keeps the official Lego sites in such
> a poor condition that they are in. Take a chance Lego. Spend some money on
> Brickshelf. It could go along way towards keeping the adult Lego frenzy
> alive. (Which, if you ask me, just makes more kids drool over Lego.)
NOOOOO.
You don't want TLC to buy BrickShelf. Why? You think there is moderation
now? You think it's painfully slow now?
On the other hand, TLC could (and does) support BrickShelf.
Kevin could do some investigation of costs though, and come to us with a
couple proposals for how to fund increased bandwidth.
It would also be nice if Kevin would do something to streamline
moderation. One thing which would help would be a clear description of
what is acceptable. It would also be nifty if people could earn trust
points, and if you earn enough, your stuff becomes auto-moderated, until
you cause a complaint. Or he could come up with a good system to allow
additional moderators (though stuff seems to get moderated pretty
quickly). One thing I would like to see is the ability of a folder
display to be possible even if the content was unmoderated (perhaps with
a big bold "unmoderated content" label). The recent activity would not
show such folders, and would set a flag so you couldn't drill down into
them (or perhaps you set a flag in the URL to be able to see an
unmoderated folder, or perhaps members can get a preference setting so
if they are logged on, they see unmoderated folders [this way people who
don't want to see offensive content, or want to allow their children to
browse without being able to see offensive content would be protected,
the rest of us could see what we want ]). A problem with all of this is
if Kevin is uncomfortable with offensive content appearing on a page
with BrickShelf's logo and all (a direct link still lets one host an
offensive picture on BrickShelf, but minimizes any apparent acceptance
of that picture by BrickShelf).
Frank
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
Message is in Reply To:
42 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
