Site Reference Forums

Gee.. nice to see your awake sunshine he he

I know SR aint exactly a money making racket but i figure one day Nic may just want to make some dosh outa it... even if its an arbitrary $10 a year. So why not make a highway before you put up the toll booths? The more people that find SR accurately helpful the more people will possibly pay to stick around.

Other than all that, i reckon it will make life easier for the people reviewing sites... it would be nice to not have your post about the graphics completely smothered out buy a page of code errors.

fair enough, i like your addition... only thing with that is if you take the code issues out of the equation we are left with nothing more than a front page blog. If no one tells em their coding sucks then they will stroll through their online life thinking they have succeeded when in the mean time they are just a bunch of wannabee web developers who really wont be taken seriously in community forums such as this. They need someone like TA to tell em what their coding really looks like or we may as well give up a future of websites that load or function at a decent capacity on an average internet connection.

Dramatic i know but im in a end of the world mood so why not

Last edited by Ryan_steyn (2007-11-14 08:42:18)

You know... I was recently playing with the numbers (for members) over at Sphinn in posts on my Blog HERE and HERE.

I makes me want to look at the bounce rates here for new members. Meaning, how many actually come back and participate in any sort of consistent basis AFTER they have a site review?  I bet the numbers would be telling...

You are talking about SR investing $$$ in new features for what? For folks to come by, get free advice and leave again?

If you owned site, would YOU put these 'new features' in? Or are one of you fine programmer types offering to do this for free?

Last edited by TheGypsy (2007-11-14 10:16:55)

I think the idea is a good one but have had an idea closer to Dave’s on the drawing board for some time – it’s aim is to provide more in depth ‘reviews’/analysis of the sites which will benefit the visitors but also will charge a fee which will benefit SR

Stitch wrote:

Making a great site is part of what makes visitors come back, and link to. You know.... 'sticky' value

Yes but it’s a balance- especially with a ‘free’ site like SR- at the end of the day we are still a business- and like any business, if we do not generate sufficient income we cease to exist.

So the trick is to balance value and free services, with revenue sources. Simply giving everything away doesn’t work. No matter how much value you can produce you still need a revenue model.

I’ve received many suggestions in my time here- ranging from mediocre to the great. Unfortunately I cannot implement them all. With limited time and resources I have to pick my ‘battles’ very carefully. I need to evaluate what will be best for our visitors, the site and the business.

One thing I always do though, without sounding too cheesy (or too much like a geek ), is appreciate the suggestions. I think its super cool that people take a keen interest in their community here.  On the other hand I take the time to consider each one,  but realistically - it’s just not possible (nor am I willing) to implement them all. I hope that doesn’t deter anyone from approaching me with ideas because I’m always ready to listen and give each fair consideration

MrStitch wrote:

Too late. BTW, when is the next D&D meeting? I've got big plans for this +10 Sword of Female Avoidance.

I don't care what you say- my mom says i'm cool

PS. it's next Thusday...be there- it's going to be wild this time

Come on Nic, we all know you're hiding up in a cave somewhere, with all your cash stuffed under a rock, in the back.

"Git off my property you varmint! NOW GIT!!"

Ok ok... getting a little off base here.

I think there is some validity to payment for site reviews - I get frustrated in speding 2030 mins reviewing a site then the person (some with 50+ posts being=d them don't come back...

So maybe a system of people asking specific people for a review, and a payment system built in that Nic gets a % of...

just a thought

It was a great step forward for the forum when previous owner, Mark, split the index into two sections, which I, using double meanings, call the top half and the bottom half.

Now, I recognize that a small number of our regular participants, very generous people indeed, give a heap of good help to people in the bottom half of the forum. I commend them for their generosity, skill and perseverance.

I don't go there anymore. Well, hardly anymore. Been used up and abused, too many times. Seems to me that about 80% of the visitors in the bottom half are users and half of what's left are just whizzing through, trying to pick up something of value on the way through.

I don't know why other regular forum participants avoid the bottom half, but I suspect that their reasons are rather like mine.

One problem with this set-up is that when I need a review of a new initiative, I know before I start that there's not much use in asking for a review on what has become "my forum." Now don't get on your high horse, anyone. That's not to take away from what CE, ER, AS, matt, Nic or any others give. In fact I frequently have private e-mails back and forth with some of those and interact in a more intimate climate with some, in a smaller forum.

But it does say that I cannot interact with "my forum" as a whole, over a site review request, whereas if I ask a question about some css problem I may be having, I can count on someone coming to my aid, often within the hour, sometimes within minutes.

So you'll understand that I think the bottom half stinks. And it gets up my nose when the nasty stuff from the bottom half spills up hill, into the top half. I'm not talking about the people; it's the stuff.

Oh, and I must add that Nic's recent new rules are great! One stop link droppers have been cut back and some people have been obliged to participate, at least, a little.

So, the way forward:

1)  Leave the bottom half to fend for itself.

2)  Allow members to set their price for a review. Market forces will determine the price.

I reckon a proper review must be worth somewhere between AU$20 and AU$40. A review from such as matte or CE might be worth the top dollar, and someone else might not get any takers at the lower suggested figure.

Now, in order to be sure of getting value for money, new people would have to look around for a while, huh?

3)  I've been working on my news site for a year or more. I've begun the public launch in the last couple of days. I have had good help on numerous specific questions and I've appreciated this. But I'd really like to be able to put my site up for review by "my forum" as a whole and have the people to whom I look up, review it.

Is it possible to build something into the review algorithm to allow requests from members with over 100 posts to go into the top half? Or is there some other way to separate the wheat from the straw?

In mobtex, we have a bloke whose a leader in cutting edge technology. It wasn't hard to detect his disappointment at some of the responses to his recent review request. But his peers don't go down to the bottom half and neither does mobtex, normally.

So TA's gone, matte is busy with other projects, ER and CE appear to be on holidays. But Zoobie will give you a review. Good on ya Zoobie! It's lucky we've got ya!

So there ya go! That's my two bob's worth for today!

And did anybody notice? That makes about 1000 posts. "How on Earth did he last?" they all ask.

Regards,
Laurie.

So Nic! Ya out there, Mate?

Seems to be just about settled, huh? Two votes for a fee for service system and none against. Unless, of course, you come in and veto it.

I'm willing to go back to site reviews. My price is AU$20 plus 10% GST plus your cut, if you want one. I really think the benefit to you will be the added, focused traffic to your site.

Price range to be set between AU$20 and AU$40 and work on the PayPal Tip Me buttons.

Of course, members would still be able to give free reviews if they wish to. New members wanting a free review would be obliged to give three free reviews before submitting their own. The free reviews would mostly be from other nubes who don't wish to pay. But serious nubes would pay for a professional review and may stick around the forum giving worthwhile input.

People could shop around the review forum and purchase the product they like. Laurie at AU$20 or matte at AU$40. It would be up to them to decide where they'd get the best value for money.

Yeah! I reckon there's room to knock this into shape.

Oh! Nic! I just now had a look at your home page, Site Reference Main. You have 14 html code warnings, but at least I can tell you you've got a doctype. Trouble is, Mate, it's the wrong one. That's a freebie.

Well now, something just occurred to me, Nic, and I've got to stick this right into you. When you had newly acquired the site, you had some ideas to increase membership, the most notable of which was a free give away that Mutilated's missus won. It was the missus, wasn't it? Anyway, this idea can't be any worse. Might even work!

Regards,
Laurie.