Column #221; By DanQ

DanQ · July 26, 2003, 22:43

The two-hundred-and-twenty-first edition of "The Column" is now online. Written by DanQ, it is entitled `Alive at Five: 1,826 Days and Counting...`. Apolyton's social, technical and financial health is discussed along with the traditional number crunching excercise. It is also posted as apart of the "5 Years" special site feature.

Comments on this piece are welcome in this thread and/or via email in communicating directly to the author.

-------------
Dan; Apolyton CS

Panag · July 26, 2003, 22:54

hi ,

who-aah

thanks Dan

good story also :supercool: > smilie has yet to be invented

have a nice day

mrmitchell · July 26, 2003, 23:13

Quote:

Good golly, Miss Molly.

dork

Quote:

I can assure you that through advertising and affiliation revenues, the operating expenses for Apolyton are more than being covered at this point on an ongoing basis.

I fart in the naysayers general direction

Quote:

A subscription service of a different sort has been discussed in the past and may indeed come to fruition sometime in the next twelve months, or not. We are not ready to state either way at this point.

Earlier in the article you say you aren't, now you say you don't know? Are you that indesicive?

Say it ain't so, Dan! Keep Apolyton free...it's not like you need the money or anything, if the rest of the article can be taken to be 100% true as well. (That '99% uptime' comment is a bit dubious

)

Quote:

we're not going anywhere. Keep On Civin'!

Frozzy · July 27, 2003, 00:27

Dan: As hard as it is to put a site like Apolyton in a nutshell for 12 months, you've done pretty bloody well

DrSpike · July 27, 2003, 06:17

Nice column Dan.

DrSpike · July 27, 2003, 06:20

Quote:

Originally posted by mrmitchell

Earlier in the article you say you aren't, now you say you don't know? Are you that indesicive?

Say it ain't so, Dan! Keep Apolyton free...it's not like you need the money or anything, if the rest of the article can be taken to be 100% true as well

It's quite clear what was said, and there was no contradiction.

Quote:

Originally posted in Dan's column

While not fan sites necessarily, other websites -- in the gaming industry and otherwise -- have begun and/or continue, as the case may be, to charge their visitor base for partial or in some cases full access to their content. This is even where the basis of the site is non-for-profit. On behalf of the Apolyton administration, we are reaffirming our commitment that we will not follow this example. We need not to and, more importantly, we choose not to. A subscription service of a different sort has been discussed in the past and may indeed come to fruition sometime in the next twelve months, or not. We are not ready to state either way at this point. However, as previously stated this service would entitle subscribers to additional benefits that while convenient would not result in non-subscribers losing access to site content.

If things do change, access to content for non-subscribers is still guaranteed.

Rasbelin · July 27, 2003, 07:22

Quote:

Originally posted by mrmitchell

Keep Apolyton free...it's not like you need the money or anything, if the rest of the article can be taken to be 100% true as well.

They do need the cash if they want to expand, which they quite clearly have to with all the downtime and slow page loading times.

Skanky Burns · July 27, 2003, 07:54

Quote:

but I am boasted by several positive points.

From the context, that word should probably be "boosted". Minor point though.

Quote:

In the browser wars, Internet Explorer soundly crushed the competition with an 86.1% penetration rate.

Just remember, Opera identifies itself as IE by default. My Opera browser is doing this as we speak.

Quote:

While not fan sites necessarily, other websites -- in the gaming industry and otherwise -- have begun and/or continue, as the case may be, to charge their visitor base for partial or in some cases full access to their content. This is even where the basis of the site is non-for-profit. On behalf of the Apolyton administration, we are reaffirming our commitment that we will not follow this example. We need not to and, more importantly, we choose not to. A subscription service of a different sort has been discussed in the past and may indeed come to fruition sometime in the next twelve months, or not.

, either way.

I am glad to hear that Apolyton is in the green financially though.

Unspeakable Horror · July 27, 2003, 11:06

On the http://apolyton.net/misc/ the link to this thead is broken

"Comments on this piece are welcome in this forum thread = http://apolyton.net/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=#?"

Nice Column

DanQ · July 27, 2003, 12:00

Quote:

Originally posted by Carlos113
On the http://apolyton.net/misc/ the link to this thead is broken

"Comments on this piece are welcome in this forum thread = http://apolyton.net/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=#?"

Opps -- appreciate the heads-up. I've corrected this.

---------
Dan; Apolyton CS

P.S. Thank you to everyone for the kind comments on the piece to date.

mrmitchell · July 27, 2003, 12:20

Quote:

If things do change, access to content for non-subscribers is still guaranteed.

But what is content? Is it forums? Is it news and downloads? I'm sure Dan and Markos wouldn't be cruel enough to make the forums subscribe-content, considering a lot of the posters are broke college kids...well, the whole idea just seems icky. :vomit:

EDIT: Oh, and I think I might've forgotten to say it (maybe all the dancing in the first post did it), but a great column by a great guy.

DarkCloud · July 27, 2003, 13:33

good writing

---
Mr Mitchell- what he meant was that (at least I think) was that

subscribers
a: get a larger PM storage limit (they can store 300 while nonsubscribers can store 100)
b: They can upload more files (subscribers can load 10 MB, non can only load 1 MB)
c: They get 'glowing' usernames

and/or perhaps custom titles (although c is sort of a guess, he did mention username things)

as far as I can tell-
1- avatars won't be subscription
2- flags won't be subscription

but that's just what I get from it.
--
Good article dan

I really liked the statistics

Panag · July 27, 2003, 14:01

Quote:

Originally posted by DarkCloud
good writing

---
Mr Mitchell- what he meant was that (at least I think) was that

subscribers
a: get a larger PM storage limit (they can store 300 while nonsubscribers can store 100)
b: They can upload more files (subscribers can load 10 MB, non can only load 1 MB)
c: They get 'glowing' usernames

and/or perhaps custom titles (although c is sort of a guess, he did mention username things)

as far as I can tell-
1- avatars won't be subscription
2- flags won't be subscription

but that's just what I get from it.
--
Good article dan

I really liked the statistics

hi ,

150 pm's is more then what one needs , .......

we dont need all that extra space , ....

have a nice day

Gatekeeper · July 27, 2003, 14:05

Quote:

Originally posted by Asuka
They do need the cash if they want to expand, which they quite clearly have to with all the downtime and slow page loading times.

Hmm. Dan's article stated that, financially, 'Poly was doing better now than it was a year ago, and that the net income, as it were, was being stashed away in a rainy day fund. Whether it's enough to fund an expansion is an open question, but the fact remains that 'Poly is apparently doing OK financially as a free site.

Gatekeeper

mrmitchell · July 27, 2003, 14:32

Quote:

a: get a larger PM storage limit (they can store 300 while nonsubscribers can store 100)
b: They can upload more files (subscribers can load 10 MB, non can only load 1 MB)
c: They get 'glowing' usernames and/or perhaps custom titles (although c is sort of a guess, he did mention username things)

PMs and Uploads are understandable. The whole idea still seems icky though. It's a bunch of unknowns and slippery slopes...however, I'm sure Dan and Markos will do the right thing.

Locutus · July 27, 2003, 15:43

Quote:

Originally posted by panag
hi ,

150 pm's is more then what one needs , .......

we dont need all that extra space , ....

have a nice day

Very funny, panag...

Oh, wait, you mean per week?

Panag · July 27, 2003, 15:45

Quote:

Originally posted by Locutus

Very funny, panag...

Oh, wait, you mean per week?

hi ,

you can use the download button , .......

and when are you going to finish your interview with Solver , ......

have a nice day

TCO · July 27, 2003, 18:35

You forgot to discuss our branching thread plans.

Az · July 27, 2003, 19:04

Branching threads must die!

Great coloumn, Dan.

How about we allow larger avatars for a payment? it would allow us to see avatars, at all, if you know what I mean.

Oerdin · July 28, 2003, 01:23

Don't let the nay sayers get you down Dan. Your writting style is A.O.K.

mrmitchell · July 28, 2003, 02:20

Quote:

Don't let the nay sayers get you down Dan. Your writting style is A.O.K.

I hadn't meant that. Dan's writing style is actually refreshing compared to a lot of posters here--for example, every one of five posts in the OT is a heroic epic on [insert mundane issue here] and one of every three posts is "OMGWTF OMG U SCUK". (Well, not every one in three.

)

Frozzy · July 28, 2003, 03:18

You put up the ration in the OTF

FrustratedPoet · July 28, 2003, 05:00

Very nice column Dan.

TCO · July 28, 2003, 21:26

Dan, your writing is getting better, but don't let it up. It was awful to start with and needs to keep moving towards Strunk and Whiteness.

Rasbelin · July 29, 2003, 03:37

Quote:

Originally posted by Azazel

Whether it's enough to fund an expansion is an open question, but the fact remains that 'Poly is apparently doing OK financially as a free site.

And no one seems to be interested why. Blindness. Well, now we have pop-up ads which we didn't have previously and there's a greater number of banner ads being displayed. So of course by cluttering the site with ads you can increase your ad revenues, but yet that doesn't mean they could afford something like a database or mirror server, which would anyway be good as ACS is not a speedy site to load as it is.

Quote:

Originally posted by Azazel

How about we allow larger avatars for a payment? it would allow us to see avatars, at all, if you know what I mean.

I second that, brother.

And neither do I need extra PM space or more uploading space as I don't use those features. Things like no ads, custom titles, maybe a small badge (can be turned on and off) and a larger avatar would be nice.

Lawrence of Arabia · July 29, 2003, 11:19

great story dan.

Immortal Wombat · July 29, 2003, 14:39

large avatars suck. In fact, keep subscribers at 80*80, and make non-subscribers only 65*65

Spiffor · August 3, 2003, 11:08

DanQ:
To give feedback about the subscription / donation idea, I would gladly pay a subscription or donate money to 'Poly once it is possible, but only if there is a reciever in the EU as well as in North America.
Indeed, the problem for us broke Europeans is that transactions to the US can have hefty costs (conversion costs, taxes etc.) while they are non existent while staying in the EU. These transaction costs have prevented me to donate to American sites I enjoyed, or to buy Apolyton ware (there is no way I buy the mug for 15€ and then pay 20-30€ extra in various costs).

If these subscriptions become real, would it be possible for Markos to use an account in Europe, as well as the expectable North American account ? Thanks

PLATO · August 3, 2003, 12:13

Quote:

I will take a moment here to note that the suggestion of implementing a donations system has been broached on several occasions in the past year and before. Undoubtedly the point will be raised again. As has been said in response to previous instances of the suggestion, and will be reiterated here, we are not comfortable with this premise and as such are not supportive of exploring this avenue at the time being.

Don't want free money? I'm confused. You need money for expansion, you want us to buy from partner companies, but we can't just send you a check? Why is this? This is truly a great site and will likely only get better. If those of us who enjoy its features want to help it get better then we can't do it with direct support, but must do it indirectly through partner companies?

This just doesn't make any sense to me. Maybe there is something I just don't get.

DanQ · August 4, 2003, 20:15

Quote:

Originally posted by PLATO1003

Don't want free money? I'm confused. You need money for expansion, you want us to buy from partner companies, but we can't just send you a check? Why is this? This is truly a great site and will likely only get better. If those of us who enjoy its features want to help it get better then we can't do it with direct support, but must do it indirectly through partner companies?

This just doesn't make any sense to me. Maybe there is something I just don't get.

Fair comment.

It is our hope that if and when we are able to get an optional subscriptional service in place, which would provide non-content related perks for those who subscribe, that this will be more or less a direct way of supporting this site financially; there will, of course, be a nominal percentage charged by whatever outfit we select to handle such electronic payments. Given the direct perks that would be received by any subscriber, this would not be a donation but rather a payment for services rendered.

We are not a registered or a non-registered charity and, as such, do not feel comfortable involving ourselves in donation situations. Nonetheless, we are extremely appreciative of such expressions of financial support for this site such as yours.

-----------
Dan; Apolyton CS