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 : Silicon Investor - Welcome New SI Members! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Jon Tara who wrote (17545)	5/24/2003 7:51:39 AM
From: d:oug	Respond to of 32871

question/answer v. situation/solution v. problem/medicine . Responding to Message #17545 from Jon Tara: ... ... the operations and the software both have to be merged. ... merging systems that... is a nearly impossible task. ... pick one of the systems... put [other] to sleep ... you will not be able to retain the SI membership, because the style of management at iHub does not fit into the mindset of SI users. Why not just shut it down now, and offer iHub memberships to SI members? My guess is, you keep 10%. Probably not what you were bargaining for. But better than nothing.... [stop.] . Jon, . If Dunkin Donutes buys out Krispy Kreme, or Coke buy Pepsi or Nike sneakers buys its nearest competition then your . "... makes no sense from a business standpoint. You have twice the overhead. ... the operations [have] to be merged." . is a different situation and makes sense to keep each part seperate since each makes a different product "style," each in demand. . Now if Si and iHub share code such that all the nice functionality as search engines and reading posts are identical, then what can be the difference such that it makes no sense to combine into one all the members of each and lose lose as you state, 90% of one? . Upfront it the topic being discussed here, freedom of speech/posting. . If the current difference today in manner of board/thread creation remains in place, then i see no need to join the membership especially if each style satisfies enough folks. . iHub - one board per stock Si - unlimited . iHub - no banning members from posting (deletions possible) Si - Moderated totally by member creating the thread. . Now lets "what if" Matt & Bob decide as follows after the code transfer etc is completed in about 1/2 to one year when both iHub & Si have identical functionality like searching and reading, but the above differences of "speech" remains as is today. . 1. Any Si or iHub member can transfer membership to other. 2. New customers not knowing really the difference can join and have 2 weeks upfront with limited access to both iHub & Si and then decide which to join as permanent. . This approach might signal to Matt & Bob that a third "style" site might be market'able, aka 100% full freedom of speech aka Raging Bull :o) doug

To: Jon Tara who wrote (17545)	5/24/2003 9:36:06 AM
From: Catfish	Respond to of 32871

SI is still the premier message board service for stocks on the internet. And yes, I agree with the moderated thread concept especially regarding political discussion. It reduces the number of board fights, and focuses the discussion on the thread topic. Political discussions have a way of getting out of control very quickly, and belong in the coffee shop area only, not on the stock message boards. For the traders, we do not want this clutter on the stock boards. I only hope Bob and Matt will continue this service as it is being currently operated.

To: Jon Tara who wrote (17545)	5/24/2003 10:04:43 AM
From: SI Bob	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 32871

I'm sure that you know that it makes no sense from a business standpoint. You have twice the overhead. You know that the operations and the software both have to be merged. Overhead is low enough that doubling it is not a problem. As a software engineer, I know that merging systems that have grown organically and seperately is a nearly impossible task. Not always. For example, there aren't a lot of different approaches to message-board databases possible. Have 100 different programmers make message-board databases, and something along the lines of 90% of the design would be identical on all 100 systems. There are only so many "right" ways to do it. For example, do you have any doubt that every message board site out there has a message table and a user table and uses a join between the two to get the screen name of the author of a post? IMO, you will not be able to retain the SI membership, because the style of management at iHub does not fit into the mindset of SI users. When has it been said that the style of management at iHub will be applied here. It won't be. BTW, do you intend to make a general public announcement to SI users? Something along the line of a home-page announcement and link, and private message to all users? Nothing more needed than a cheery "Hi, we're the new management! We think we bought a great place, and we'd like to hear how we can make it better." Odd as it might sound, I'm too tied up with higher priorities, word is getting out well enough as it is, and I don't want to do anything yet like messing around with even a single line of the GSP that runs the place. I'll eventually have to, just to get advertising running again, and to make subscriptions possible again, but until them, I'm more focused on the database. Keep in mind that I don't know Unix or GSP (I'm slowly coming up to speed) and don't have a development environment. It's all production. However, I was noting yesterday that the webservers aren't even close to breaking a sweat (it wasn't until yesterday that I even knew how to check), so I'm going to take one of them out of the loop to use for development and let the site run on the other two. That should happen next week and then some minor changes to the GSP will happen, including, likely, a box on the homepage explaining what's happened. Don't you think your new users deserve that? Why hasn't it been done? Why did those of us who know have to find out by following rumors to the source? I don't know about "deserve". What I mean is I don't know what harm is being done to anyone by not already having done as you suggest. Did you suffer much when you found out by word of mouth? Word of mouth is pretty effective. It's just one of those things I'll have to get to when I can and in the priority order I've set. We obviously don't agree on what those priorities should be, but we don't have to.