I do not understand why people assume that there was an issue with the volunteers.
I didn't read it as an issues with volunteers, more as a lack of funding.
I agree with Faith. I note the following,
"It's hard to keep a volunteer effort that asks so much of their volunteers going over the long course."
Asks so much? Who the heck is this guy? He obviously knows nothing, unless by "so much" he means the asking price for two new servers, which was a bit high, IMO. But that did not deter those who still wished to contribute by volunteering their valuable
time helping others. The facts are, it is hard to keep a volunteer effort going when the venue
for doing the volunteer work has a better chance of being off-line
than on, and when on, running at a sick snail's pace
- for the better part of the last two years!
For someone intent on helping someone, it was nerve wracking typing a technical procedure knowing my submit may never take. Thank God for canned text and Fass Forum Post Editor
. Things would be TOTALLY different had someone in-the-know broke silence - not talking fuels rampant rumors and speculation - that was a bad decision. I would have accepted something like "We apologize for the performance issues and lack of information. Current contractual negotiation agreements prohibit disclosures at this time.
" I would not have liked it, but I would have accepted it - I understand NDAs.
For me personally, I was reluctant to start helping someone because I feared leaving them in the lurch at a critical point. As I moved on to other sites, besides finding CC staff, I found many posters that tried CC, but moved on too when they could not connect, or no one had answered their questions because the site was down, again, and again.
In spite of my views of the management decisions of the last two years, especially for not answering the call to split the forums (by far
, IMO, the greater loss) from *IRT so both would not fail, I am not forgetting that badguys
affected the devastating DDoS attack in February 2007, from which CC never recovered. Let's not forget their most lethal weapon was, and still is, compromised computers - computers owned by thieves (pirated and
infected software users) and naive or careless users who fail at "practicing safe computing" - they do not keep their systems patched, updated, scanned and blocked, then visit a hacked site, or (by chance or willfully) a site badguys wallow in (illegal porn, P2P, gambling, etc.).
And while I was typing the above, once again, Corrine comes in and says it best,
Let the pundits think what they will. We know the truth.
those who benefit have no incentive to pay anything.
Incentive to some may seem like "pressure to donate" to others - not the reason folks seek out free help. The ancient concept of "forums" remains the same today, a venue for the "free" exchange of information (although I do appreciate, but would not cherish the view from the one that has to pay the bills). Those who benefit do spread the word to their friends, and many stick around to help someone else. That's the community side - a good thing as it brings in fresh ideas to ponder from different angles, and new problems to challenge our skills. Sites that pressure or require fees for full access do not have the same feel.