[tomd]

What is going on with the forums lately?  Some threads have as few as 3 replies per page and at most only 5.  It takes forever to click through so many pages to follow a thread.  Is this something that can be changed in user preferences?  Is there a reason why the number of replies per page isn't something more reasonable (10)?

[Matthew]

100% of threads have 5 posts per page, if you're logged in as a member.

If you're a guest, then 100% of threads have 3 posts per page.

Guests are even less "accountable" than a completely anonymous user with an anonymous e-mail address. A guest could be anything from a banned user, a bot, a hacker, or a computer program.

In other words, a Guest is TOO low on the food chain, so I can't give them the same priority as a member.

After all, becoming a member isn't very difficult, nor does it take away ANY of your privacy! You can use any e-mail address ("horselover@gmail.com") and any username that doesn't give away *anything* about you ("gumby115"). What's the problem with that?

Members can choose to give away as much, or as little, information about themselves as they like.

If someone can explain to me why they can't just be a member, then I'll reconsider my restrictions on Guest users.

But I had to reduce the "Guest" user experience, because there are so many of them (and I have no clue how legit any of them are). And my site was using too much of the server's resources a while ago.

Again, I didn't feel very bad about putting more restrictions on Guest, since it's SO EASY to just become a member.

Anyhow, it takes more processing power to put together a page of 5 posts than a page with 3. And it takes even more to put up a page with 10 posts.

I suppose I could do some kind of subscription service -- pay something per month and get more "extras". But I gather that a lot of CathInfo members don't have a lot of cash. So I'm keeping things cheap for all.

[tomd]

That makes sense.  I appreciate your reply.

What are the specs of your server?  What kind of internet connection is connected to the server?

[Matthew]

That makes sense.  I appreciate your reply.

What are the specs of your server?  What kind of internet connection is connected to the server?

I'm on a shared hosting account. That is to say, a webhosting account that doesn't cost much. (See: I'm trying to keep things cheap)

The server is plenty powerful, and the pipe to the Internet is wide and vast. But I'm not allowed to take the whole server's resources, since I'm not paying the $150 a month for a dedicated server. Nor do I plan to change that anytime soon.

[Iuvenalis]

I'm on a shared hosting account. That is to say, a webhosting account that doesn't cost much. (See: I'm trying to keep things cheap)

The server is plenty powerful, and the pipe to the Internet is wide and vast. But I'm not allowed to take the whole server's resources, since I'm not paying the $150 a month for a dedicated server. Nor do I plan to change that anytime soon.

So, what's with FE then? I mean, it seems like it takes a small fortune to run. Between paid memberships and soliciting donations periodically, they're now doing email appeals.

I know they do have more users and more traffic(right?), but so much more that a dedicated server won't handle it? (I seem to remember mention of shared hosting over there as well, so, even cheaper...

I remember about 4-5 years ago catholic.com sent out an appeal to "beef up their security" after (iirc) a ddos attack. It was insane, like a request for 200,000.00. I remember thinking they were getting ripped off by some "consultant" and my Godfather knows one of the staff members quite well, and I offered my services for free if I could speak to Jimmy Akin about where this outrageous number came from (I worked for the largest commercial firewall vendor at the time and I had seen the New York Stock Exchange spend less)

Anyway, Akin was completely uninterested in having a phone conversation or another pair of eyes on this to vet this proposal. So I came to the conclusion that he did not care because it wasn't his money and, ultimately, their mass email appeal would obtain the desired funds since their circulation is so massive, so why fiddle with numbers? The person selling him the gear might even be a pal he  wants to enrich.

I made up my mind never to give a nickel to such an organization that spent without accepting a free sanity check from a security consultant at the largest security company in the world and published author. Further, before that one who had worked on DoD networks and audited and secured those as well as for 3 Fortune 100 companies. This is not horn-tooting. It's just a fact as much as my dentist has probably filled 50 thousand cavities or whatever, it establishes you know what you're talking about.


FE is a different story of course. I don't think for a second Vox is enriching herself of of that site (quite the opposite actually, I would guess it has taken money out of her pocket, quite a lot). But I cannot help but wonder what the constant and massive costs are about, or if their infrastructure is seriously overbuilt.

[AlligatorDicax]

So, what's with FE then? I mean, it seems like it takes a small fortune to run. Between paid memberships and soliciting donations periodically, they're now doing email appeals.  I know they do have more users and more traffic(right?), but so much more that a dedicated server won't handle it?  (I seem to remember mention of shared hosting over there as well, so, even cheaper[)]

In a longish visit to her site last month, I read a description of her Web resources as including a "dedicated server".

FE is a different story of course. I don't think for a second Vox is enriching herself of[f] of that site (quite the opposite actually, I would guess it has taken money out of her pocket, quite a lot).  But I cannot help but wonder what the constant and massive costs are about, or if their infrastructure is seriously overbuilt.

I can readily understand a scenario in which Vox would've made continual financial sacrifices to keep FE running.  Altho' I have no privileged information, I have read her lengthy rambling personal page "about*.*" (one describing her underbuilt kitchen) at the site's 'docuмent root'.  It seems plausible--if not likely--that expenses which might logically follow from various aspects of her, um, unenviable personal situation are now catching up with her.

(Perhaps the FE page I alluded to is guarded by a 'robots nofollow', but I won't post a URL here to facilitate Web-spiders' leaps to it.)