Ways to help Poly on the cost side

TCO · October 19, 2003, 20:58

We've done a lot of chatting about how to generate more revenue for Poly. But revenue is just part of the equation for profit. Cost is the other variable. What could we do to reduce costs that would not impact revenue. I'll try to be real and not troll.

My first guess would be look for wasteful use of bandwidth. For instance the D and D rating system (hp and fp and all that) goes on in the background and contributes nothing to the user experience. Axe it and you get those costs back. What else?

mrmitchell · October 19, 2003, 21:27

Possibly offering a "Bare bones" forum style that doesn't include all the things like "Show a printable version | Email this page to someone" etc. Just member names, posts, and quick reply. Because, man, I've NEVER used more than 2/3 of the links on this page right now.

Spiffor · October 19, 2003, 21:30

The many graphics and text bbits that are hardly used by anyone:
- "Show a printable version" "Email this page to someone" are links I suppose of being nearly never used.

- The "rate thread" feature is fairly useless and takes up a few bytes too, everytime you read a page. Rating should only be used in forums where there are actual things to rate: stories, files...

- the smiley legend that is appearing everytime one posts a reply. A simple link towards the smiley legend would eat up much less bandwidth, and it'll be used about as often IMHO.

Jaguar · October 19, 2003, 22:46

Amen to Spiffor on the smiley legend. I know all the ones on that are on the reply screen by heart.

Dauphin · October 19, 2003, 22:57

Isn't the bandwidth cost more fixed than variable? Bandwidth saving measures are already in place to curb downloading during peak times.

I guess what I am asking is, is cost based on total aggregate download, or is it based on how long a bandwidth limit is exceeded plus a flatrate charge?

mrmitchell · October 19, 2003, 23:01

For example: The "Forum Rules" that says You may post new threads, Contact Us link, the links to the sections, the "new thread" button in thread pages, the "Last thread" "Next thread" links, "Rate this thread", "top of page", "All times are gmt-6, The time now is xx:xx", I've never used any of those. They are all little things but when a thread is viewed 200 times that's little things * 200. That for every thread gets excessive kinda

JohnT · October 20, 2003, 08:38

Quote:

Originally posted by Spiffor
The many graphics and text bbits that are hardly used by anyone:
- "Show a printable version" "Email this page to someone" are links I suppose of being nearly never used.

Actually, I use the "Show Printable Version" all the time.

Hueij · October 20, 2003, 12:46

Maybe we should change to branching threads?

Maniac · October 20, 2003, 13:26

Or remove the Off-Topic forum?

Brundlefly · October 20, 2003, 14:29

Quote:

Originally posted by Maniac
Or remove the Off-Topic forum?

Well, not the whole forum but just keep spam to a minimum..

germanos · October 20, 2003, 16:38

@ Feephi

GhengisFarb™ · October 20, 2003, 17:59

Quote:

Originally posted by Maniac
Or remove the Off-Topic forum?

That could work.

TCO · October 20, 2003, 18:24

Quote:

Originally posted by Big Crunch
Isn't the bandwidth cost more fixed than variable? Bandwidth saving measures are already in place to curb downloading during peak times.

I guess what I am asking is, is cost based on total aggregate download, or is it based on how long a bandwidth limit is exceeded plus a flatrate charge?

In the end, everything is variable. Look at all the server moves.

But your post brings up an interesting point. Perhaps the contract structure could be optimized.

Spiffor · October 20, 2003, 18:28

@ Feephi too ! How can you imagine the Off-Topic without Spam ?

TCO · October 20, 2003, 19:58

The thing is you have to limit bandwith without limiting revenue. If you are getting payed per pageview, spam is actually BETTER than longposts.

DarkCloud · October 20, 2003, 22:35

You can turn off the smilies legend in lite style... and avatars- to save bandwith (that's what I do

)

Dis · October 21, 2003, 00:29

branching threads

Brundlefly · October 21, 2003, 10:41

Quote:

Originally posted by Spiffor

@ Feephi too ! How can you imagine the Off-Topic without Spam ?

Easy! Make me OT moderator...

Jack_D · October 21, 2003, 11:09

I think perhaps a overhall in the layout of the forumm without the need for large boxed posts, perhaps using the thread listing instead. The smiley characters are great for the kiddies, but not really warranted, plus you could really use 8-) if you were that desperate to include it in your post..

Keep up the great site though..

MarkG · October 21, 2003, 12:27

many thanks for the thoughts guys but bandwidth usage is not currently an issue

MikeH · October 21, 2003, 12:37

If it's not an issue, how come we get the "Server busy" message so often?

Dis · October 21, 2003, 12:56

well then we have plenty of bandwith to go to branching threads

MarkG · October 21, 2003, 13:03

these messages refer to cpu load not bandwidth

alva · October 21, 2003, 13:40

OK Mark, but please, and I do beg you , Let us contribute!! really!!
I really don't care, give me your bank account, and I'll send you a couple of €,I trust you I think

.
Please, make this a prority

You two have been stalling long enough

VetLegion · October 21, 2003, 15:18

When I go to Amerika, thanks to Apolyton, and I get rich, I'll send money back to Apolyton to repay!

TCO · October 21, 2003, 23:16

Quote:

Originally posted by MarkG
these messages refer to cpu load not bandwidth

I am looking for ways to help Poly with cost. CPU or bandwidth is irrelevant. And I am trying to think long term. Not 20 minutes ahead.

Kuciwalker · October 21, 2003, 23:36

TCO, shut up and stop being rude to the admins

DanQ · October 22, 2003, 00:27

Quote:

Originally posted by Big Crunch

[I]is cost based on total aggregate download, or is it based on how long a bandwidth limit is exceeded plus a flatrate charge?

To add to what Markos has already said: with the service contract Apolyton has with its hosting provider, EV1Servers.net (formerly RackShack), we have an allotted block of bandwidth per month. If and when that is exceeded there is an additional charge per GB used.

For the record, Apolyton has never exceeded its bandwidth allotment.

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

TCO · October 22, 2003, 19:28

Quote:

Originally posted by DanQ

To add to what Markos has already said: with the service contract Apolyton has with its hosting provider, EV1Servers.net (formerly RackShack), we have an allotted block of bandwidth per month. If and when that is exceeded there is an additional charge per GB used.

For the record, Apolyton has never exceeded its bandwidth allotment.

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

Right, but I bet they write those contracts with different "limits" like a cell-phone plan.

TCO · October 22, 2003, 19:29

Quote:

Originally posted by skywalker
TCO, shut up and stop being rude to the admins

I have special permission from Mark to troll. It's a vet privilege.