Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

SI - Site Forums : Questions and Answers with SI Admin (s) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: John Busby who wrote (424)	6/30/2000 9:10:00 PM
From: Gary E	Respond to of 4895

Your kidding ? right ? It is still hosed....and thats being kind.... <<<<<a database upgrade designed to greatly increase the performance, scalability and reliability>>>>> Hope you fix it.... Hal

To: John Busby who wrote (424)	6/30/2000 9:13:05 PM
From: Don Pueblo	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 4895

Well I least I got a thank you this time! Better than getting suspended! John, it might have been wiser to do this so-called upgrade over the weekend instead of between two big days in the market. Does anyone at SI actually watch the stock market? Nothing personal but you guys are starting to sound like eBay with the milk and cookies gimmick. I'm serious. Anybody that watches the market could have told you it was a bad time to screw up the site. Anyway, thanks for the thanks.

To: John Busby who wrote (424)	6/30/2000 9:21:26 PM
From: c.horn	Respond to of 4895

John.. Do you have any other marketable skills? Subject 36088

To: John Busby who wrote (424)	6/30/2000 9:24:53 PM
From: Don Pueblo	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 4895

John, one more thing. Last night, SI put my username on the Internet because somebody got the username code confused with the the code that puts an alias up on the site. I saw a few that had names, probably actual names of members. Not cool, dood. Waaaay not cool. The professional thing to do would be to hold off on the "site performance issues" deal and just send a message to the members notifying them that their usernames had been compromised, and that should they so desire, they could contact someone at SI to change their username. And you should have people ready to handle it when a member contacts you for that. That would be the right thing to do, I think. Just thinking out loud here.

To: John Busby who wrote (424)	6/30/2000 9:27:58 PM
From: Don Pueblo	Respond to of 4895

John, you know how Brad wrote some code for people that backspaced on their browsers and tried to resubmit a message? Like on a private message, if you backspaced and tried to resend it, you would get a page that said "your private message has already been sent". You might want to check that part out again.

To: John Busby who wrote (424)	6/30/2000 9:28:03 PM
From: Don Pueblo	Respond to of 4895

John, you know how Brad wrote some code for people that backspaced on their browsers and tried to resubmit a message? Like on a private message, if you backspaced and tried to resend it, you would get a page that said "your private message has already been sent". You might want to check that part out again.

To: John Busby who wrote (424)	6/30/2000 9:32:36 PM
From: daffodil	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 4895

And, although SI's problems have now supposedly been fixed, I am at this moment in a loop on this thread. When I click "Next 10" I get the previous 10. Then when I click "Next 10," I get the previous 10, which is, of course, the "Next 10". And so on......I'm like Charley on the MTA here <g>..... Oooops. Wait a minute! This reminds me of something...... SI, are you sure you haven't let TLC fool with your code? <g> }=>------->>>>

To: John Busby who wrote (424)	6/30/2000 9:44:43 PM
From: wlcnyc	Respond to of 4895

John, I totally agree with all that TLC has said about timing, etc. but I have one further comment/question. Since the "issues", as you call them, were first reported early Thursday MORNING, it makes me wonder if an attempt was made to rollout on Wednesday night/Thursday morning. Then because the issues disappeared later yesterday, there must have been a "rollback" to get it all back to normal. If this is true, why the %$#@ would the rollout be done last night without QA to ensure that the issues were elminated!? 'Tis a puzzlement. Bill