 | | Re: Brickshelf Status
|
|
Hi Kevin You certainly got your message through! As I've said (URL) elsewhere>, I'm not personally one of those people that clog up your badwidth, because I have way too little time surfing for lego, and because I upload most of my pictures to my (...) (17 years ago, 20-Jul-07, to lugnet.general, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Update news on BrickShelf.com
|
|
(...) You always were a man of great faith. (17 years ago, 20-Jul-07, to lugnet.general, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Update news on BrickShelf.com
|
|
(...) Whether or not I care that brickshelf is around or not has absolutely no bearing on whether it will actually be around or not. (...) LOL. Do you seriously think I should? (...) I'm not joining any campaigns. Just waiting for all the facts (...) (17 years ago, 20-Jul-07, to lugnet.general, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Update news on BrickShelf.com
|
|
(...) Tim: What is considered a valid file size/resolution for BS pics? I've always kinda wondered what I should resize to for BS. I usually upload at 1024x768, but sometimes 1600x1200 if I really want people to see fine detail. Is this too big? I (...) (17 years ago, 20-Jul-07, to lugnet.general, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Brickshelf Status
|
|
Kevin, it's really good to hear from you, but please don't shock us like that again. Some thoughts and suggestions: Remember you don't have to shoulder all the burden of running Brickshelf yourself - if it's becoming difficult then send out a call (...) (17 years ago, 20-Jul-07, to lugnet.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Update news on BrickShelf.com
|
|
(...) Perhaps the file size restriction could be on non-paying accounts, kind of "you get what you pay for" mentality. The value added feature for paying users could be a Flickr-like "view all sizes" option so pix could be seen at a higher (...) (17 years ago, 20-Jul-07, to lugnet.general, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Brickshelf Status
|
|
(...) I think people are somewhat more open to paying for Internet content than they used to be. While it's easy to shrug off requests for donations, $5/month is pretty nominal. (...) Will paying users be able to customize their accounts? I posted a (...) (17 years ago, 20-Jul-07, to lugnet.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Update news on BrickShelf.com
|
|
What does this mean? "Allister McLaren" <allistermclaren@opt...et.com.au> wrote in message news:JLGLzv.G44@lugnet.com... (...) (17 years ago, 20-Jul-07, to lugnet.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Update news on BrickShelf.com
|
|
(...) Tim, I have to disagree with a blanket restriction regarding filesize restrictions for images. While a 256K limit is fine for single MOCs (like your dazzling creations), it can be inadequate for other things like train displays and larger MOCs (...) (17 years ago, 20-Jul-07, to lugnet.general, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Update news on BrickShelf.com
|
|
(...) Assuming you care whether brickshelf is around or not, do you have another solution that Kevin can take under consideration? Now's your chance. (17 years ago, 20-Jul-07, to lugnet.general, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Update news on BrickShelf.com
|
|
(...) I guess my greatest concern is that not enough members actually pony up the cash. We could easily end up back at square one six months from now. Brickshelf has accepted donations in the past with limited success. What's to say that this (...) (17 years ago, 20-Jul-07, to lugnet.general, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Update news on BrickShelf.com
|
|
(...) I think cutting off free access would be kinda harsh. But I could definitely see restricted access -- limited resolution on files, etc. Steve (17 years ago, 20-Jul-07, to lugnet.general, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Update news on BrickShelf.com
|
|
(...) I'm kind of worried about that myself. If generating revenue was a problem, I'm not sure how this will help given that users can still opt for a free, non-premium account. If the freeloading userbase was the problem, why not implement a (...) (17 years ago, 20-Jul-07, to lugnet.general, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Brickshelf Status
|
|
Kevin, Our LUG (The Hungarian LUG) was still in the process of collecting signatures for a Thank You note we wanted to send to zou to express our appreciation for running BrickShelf. This is how we worded it: "Dear Kevin, Thank You for running (...) (17 years ago, 20-Jul-07, to lugnet.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Brickshelf Status
|
|
Cool beans Kevin! I while I enjoy things for free I also don't mind paying my share to keep resources like Brickshelf up and running. jt (17 years ago, 20-Jul-07, to lugnet.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Brickshelf Status
|
|
Thanks for posting and your concern! God Bless, Nathan (17 years ago, 20-Jul-07, to lugnet.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Update news on BrickShelf.com
|
|
(...) I can't help but wonder what the reaction to $5/month "featured" accounts would have been had it been made a week ago. We may have all learned something of the value of Brickshelf to the community over the last six days. Cheers Richie Dulin (17 years ago, 20-Jul-07, to lugnet.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Update news on BrickShelf.com
|
|
(...) I think the value of the continued existence of Brickshelf is pretty high. Sure, there are cheaper options. There always will be. But there will never be another Brickshelf. So by all means hang on to your money, Al. I happen to think that (...) (17 years ago, 20-Jul-07, to lugnet.general, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Update news on BrickShelf.com
|
|
(...) I tend to agree with Tim. Limit free users to X amount of space. Disallow .bmp files. Maybe add some new functionalities for featured account holders. I'll be one of them. JOHN (17 years ago, 20-Jul-07, to lugnet.general, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Update news on BrickShelf.com
|
|
(...) Good for you. I hope you get your money's worth. Pardon me for holding on to my money until I see what these 'advanced features' actually are, and how they compare to the other, significantly cheaper, options. (...) LMAO. If you think the (...) (17 years ago, 20-Jul-07, to lugnet.general)
|
