Site direction and future plans

[seanb]

Following on from the recent thread deletions and discussions regarding the

future of the site, I think it would be useful for the site management to

provide some answers regarding the future direction of the site. Various hints

have been made in threads, but it would be useful to have these brought together

in one place (which hopefully will not be deleted - if necessary, by locking the

thread if the software allows it)

</P><P>

The questions I have are as follows:

<ul>

<li>Many members, myself included, have joined Photo.net based on the way the

community has operated in the last few years. The current direction, while it

may be in line with the original site goals, seems opposed to this. Will the

opinions of the current membership count for anything in the new direction of

the site?

<li>Do you feel that it is valid or fair to take a community site and change its

direction by edict when it has evolved into its current incarnation?

<li>Certain forums, such as the Leica forum, have always been allowed more

freedom than the rest of the site - will this continue, or will they be brought

into line?

<li>How do you feel about the W/NW threads and will this kind of informal

sharing be allowed to continue?

<li>Is there a definitive position regarding paid membership, and how do you

intend to deal with members whose memberships do not expire for several years?

</ul>

I appreciate that the site is a commercial venture, and that it is also yours to

do with what you will. However, when I signed up to Photo.net I did so in good

faith expecting the site to continue along broadly similar lines.

</P><P>

I think I'm not alone in feeling like someone who has signed up for a movie

channel on satellite, only to discover that the owners now want to stop showing

movies and turn it into a home shopping channel (and yes, I am aware that this

is a hyperbolic analogy, but hopefully it illustrates my point).

</P>

[DEGREEFOTO]

I share in Mr Buckley concerns and would also like his questions answered in an honest and concise manner. Like many I have joined this site in good faith for a period longer than a year's sub in the hope to learn and share knowledge in a mutual manner about a mutual subject....which is the art..industry...profession that we mainly discuss here in its various forms.

 

I have, however, over the past few weeks seen the improvements in some ways that the site has now undertaken only to read the concerns...wrongly or rightly based that members air in the forums. For better or for the worse, time may be the only option the majority of the membership may have to see what direction management may take and its...hopefully positive outcome for the majority. If I have anything that I don't wholy support is that the time limit for a guest should me policed in a more stringent manner...as I feel it only fair to those of us that have paid in good faith.

 

Artur

[Spearhead]

A few years ago, right after re-subscribing to Aperture Magazine, they changed their format and content in a way I didn't particularly like. I had a choice of letting my subscription expire, complaining, or doing nothing. I did nothing, after a couple of issues found that I could get something out of the magazine. I still don't like it as much in the new format, but I have continued subscribing.

[garry edwards]

Sean,

 

I think I may know more about the future plans than you do.

 

The reason for this is that I've looked at the home page, seen the job adverts, read the job specs, seen the member survey and completed it.

 

This site is undergoing changes right now and it's clear that more changes will follow. Why don't we all let the owners get on with it, give them some space and THEN comment?

[EricM]

<i> <blockquote> Certain forums, such as the Leica forum, have always been allowed more freedom than the rest of the site - will this continue, or will they be brought into line? </blockquote></i> <p> Sean, like what for instance? The Leica Forum was an entity of its own once and then merged with PN. Perhaps instead of your suggestion of restricting the freedom of another forum you do not participate in, I make the suggestion of liberating the others?<p>

 

I agree with Gary. Lets chill out and then decide aftewards if it's a place worty of support.

[working camera]

Yes the Leica forum is full of anarchistic hippies just lapping up all that freedom.

 

and to echo the posts immediately above... give site admin a go to get things organised.

 

Then Panic! if you like.

 

Things are on the move... just chill and see how things pan out.

 

C.

[philg]

Sean: I don't know what the direction of the site was for the last six years. Can you point me to a document that explains what you and your fellows were trying to achieve?

 

Will the opinions of the membership count? We do look at the reader survey results carefully. One of the programmers under the old regime had gone so far as to remove the survey tool page scripts from the file system and dropped the (small and harmless) tables from the RDBMS so that we lost the results of old reader surveys. Our reinstallation of the module demonstrates as least some interest in reader opinion (you can't always get it from the forums because loudmouths tend to dominate discussion forums and you don't get an accurate read).

 

The Leica forum? I haven't look at too much over there, but I was disappointed by many of the threads that I saw. If a person searched in Google and landed on one of those threads, they would not leave the site saying "I got a good answer to my question".

 

W/NW threads? Sure, why not?

 

Paid membership? Thanks for signing up! We would love to serve you. I think I answered this in another thread.

[sprouty]

<I>"The Leica forum...If a person searched in Google and landed on one of those threads, they would not leave the site saying "I got a good answer to my question"."</I>

<P>

They would if they wanted to know what bag to carry their camera in...

[EricM]

<i> <blockquote> "The Leica forum...If a person searched in Google and landed on one of those threads, they would not leave the site saying "I got a good answer to my question"."

</blockquote></i> <p>I just posted a similar response in the leica forum under Tony's admin thread. Clarify for me please Philip, is The Leica Forum, or all forums, now for the betterment of strangers out there googling for anwers? Is it your wish to turn this place into a cut and dry data base of knowledge hopefully gained without the chitter chatter of contributors that are familiar with one another?

[seanb]

First of all, thank you for responding.

</P><P>

<I>I don't know what the direction of the site was for the last six years. Can you point me to a document that explains what you and your fellows were trying to achieve?</I>

</P><P>

There is obviously no document as such - the culture of the site has gradually evolved into what it is today, and the only way to absorb that culture is to spend time here. It is no doubt some way removed from the original purpose of the site, but for many of us you and your original aims were a historical curiosity - a name that appears on old threads from time to time.

</P><P>

...<I>they would not leave the site saying "I got a good answer to my question".</I>

<P>

I don't own a Leica, but I enjoy reading many of the threads there for entertainment. However, if the sole purpose of the site is now to be a learning tool, fair enough, the Leica forum is an anomaly.

</P><P>

(Eric ~: just to clarify - I was not advocating that the Leica forum be brought into line - I enjoy reading it. I was just wondering what the policy would be towards it as it was the best example of a forum not strictly devoted to learning. Clearly from Phil's response, liberating the other forums is not an option!)

</P>

<P>

Finally the survey. The questions presuppose answers that support the way you want to run the site. For example "What do you hope to accomplish at photo.net?". The options are to learn, get shopping advice and share/critique photos. Where's the option to discuss photography with fellow enthusiasts? Not to learn, but to share ideas. Where does the philosophy of photography forum fit into these options?

</P>

<P>

As others have said, though, maybe the best thing to do is wait and see.

[seanb]

One other idea: many sites with technical forums do allow at least one totally offtopic forum for general chat amongst the members. Maybe this is an option for Photo.net if the specific forums become more focussed on their technical remit?

[philg]

A chat room, eh? What if we renamed "General (Not Archived)" to "Casual Conversations"?

[seanb]

<I>A chat room, eh? What if we renamed "General (Not Archived)" to "Casual Conversations"?</I>

</P>

<P>Sure, why not? The UK magazine Amateur Photographer has a forum on <a href="http://www.amateurphotographer.co.uk/forums/ubbthreads.php/Cat/0">their site</A> called "The Lounge" which is for general chat, as well as forums for various technical categories, and it works quite well.

[think27]

I like the Lounge! I made some other suggestions in another thread but I think "The Lounge" works!

[sprouty]

Well lounge might be fine for the general public, but since I own a Leica I will only post if you have a "VIP" lounge.

[shawngibson]

Philip - I think the original aim of the General/unarchived forum was for boobs like me to occasionally ask dumb questions (like, does Canada Customs care if you write 'handle with care, and please ignore any noises from the box' on your purchase?...hehe) knowing that can be done without clogging up the server...I think the potential for that is still very valid, and even though a chat/some such area is neat, I would guess you'll end up with a lot more posts that shouldn't be archived ending up in the permanent fora.

 

Anyways...just my 2 cents.

 

Shawn