Jump to content

Crying Shame


mommy___

Recommended Posts

Guys

 

<p>

 

I think that it is a crying shame that this site (Brad's) is not more widely known or frequented. I find the responses on this site civil, polite and helpful, which is more than I can say for the Q&A on photo.net. After all the belly-aching and admonishments about equipment postings by the site administrators of photo.net's Q&A, I find that the lack of their support for this site makes them disingenuous and insincere. Of course, if everyone finds this site it will soon render their own site useless and then whom can they belly-ache to? Despite all their teeth gnashing, look what kind of questions have predominated on Q&A recently? The same equipment postings they so disdain!

 

<p>

 

How can we make this site more popular? Let's pitch in to advertise this site before we all catch another earful from Phil's merry men on Q&A. Sorry for my rant but I wish to say thank you to Brad for his valiant attempt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Mommy", I won't attempt to speak for Brad or the others who frequent

this site, but I'm not sure if this site really needs an ad campaign

started. Right now I think the best way to increase traffic is to

increase content. I'm sure there are many people who check here to

see if anything is happening and leave without posting because they

feel that the site is "dead" (Brad, to you have any access to

traffic info).<p>

As far as photo.net goes, I do share some of your concerns; however, I

don't blame them for not supporting this site. Discussions about

Photokina, vapor-ware, etc. don't do much to improve one's

photographic "vision". I don't know why they seem to be letting more

of the equipment posts slip through.<p>

--Jeff

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for the comment. To tell the truth though I have been pleased with the response to this site. Of course the introduction of the EOS3 had a lot to do with the success of late. Now that most of the available information on that is known, posts have currently died down a little. I expect it to pick back up when Pop Photo, etc have a full report though.

 

<p>

 

As far as people finding it and thinking it may be dead, those of you who have been following the site for a while will notice that I made some changes last week. The date and name of the person asking a question shows up in the subject line now. The date will hopefully keep people from thinking this site is dead. I also changed the way categories are displayed, so it looks more like the Q and A on photo.net.

 

<p>

 

My guess is that a lot of the recent equipment questions on photo.net lately are from beginners. They are either new to photography, new to the internet, or new to photo.net, and just don't know about this site since there is no link to it. As for it not getting any support, Bob has said that he would point rejected posters to it, at least from the Nature page. If I could get a link on Yahoo! things would probably pick up, but I think there is something in the address that causes it to be ignored by them. Maybe if several people submitted it to them they would notice it.

 

<p>

 

As for the question about site traffic, I'm not positive since I don't use the feature very often, but I think data is only recorded for actual post and email notifications.

 

<p>

 

Again, thanks for the support, but considering the fact that this is a site that just sort of has to be found I think it has done quite well. If it does better I will be happy, but I won't loose any sleep if it doesn't!

 

<p>

 

Brad

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...