THE FUTURE OF THIS FORUM - PLEASE READ

[steve simmons]

It is not my intention to do an online magazine. As to placing articles on the site this is a problem. If I post them free than why will people subscribe??? I could post them and make entry into the site dependant on either being a subscriber or having a password paid for by a subscription fee. There could be two areas for the site - or more accuratley two divisions. One free for discussion only and one subscriber/fee based.

I am going to send my web person the address for this page and ask him what would be involved in being a host.

steve simmons

[Graeme]

I too wonder about Mr Greenspun's motivation for closing the server on this forum while still maintaining the photo.net forum (I don't blame him - he can't go on absorbing a cost such as this indefinitely and has my thanks for doing so until now). If the reasons are purely financial, perhaps he will accept an offer of subscription fees (or ads in place of the articles at the bottom of the page) to keep the forum afloat.

My vote is to: 1) bribe Phil to keep the forum running on the current server. 2) find a new server to host the forum in the current format. 3) move to photo.net if 1) and 2) are not possible. 4) commit hari-kari en masse if the forum goes to yahoo ;-)

Regards, Graeme

[Sal Santamaura]

Tuan, I'm not up to speed on many of the software issues you describe, but can offer a simplistic explanation of what's good about this site in its current form. Someone brought up the "F Stops Here" bulletin board. The user interface there is rather hostile. It has no categories, no "recent answers" function, etc. A few (non-photographic) forums I visit don't even place all posts from a single thread together, forcing one to "go back" for each one. Despite occasional complaining about your LF forum's lack of a dedicated search function, OpenACS is extremely user friendly. I know that all the convenient tools we currently enjoy - - and hopefully the archives too - - would still be available under photo.net, and will not complain if you migrate us there. It just seemed worthy of a post to suggest the View Camera lashup. If that's not practical, so be it. I hope Phil has invited you to continue as moderator in a "separate photo.net LF forum" arrangement. Thanks one more time!

[Kevin Gibson]

Firt,

[tim atherton]

First YAHOOGROUPS - I'm not quite sure what the big deal is here? I am on several pro photo groups on Yahoo and never seem to have a problem - e mails come fine, no ads, archives search works well (in fact one or two groups that run on their own servers actually archive to Yahoo so they are searchable). I can access them via the web when I'm away. I've experienced none of the apparent woes...

Secondly, I've never especially like way the photo.net group is run, so I wouldn't be a fan of linking up more closely with that - I think this group would lose much of it's independence.

Thirdly, neither am I fan of being set up on the Viewfinder site. I seem to remember cases of people pulling stuff from their sites after heated discussion on the internet about some topic or other. Who's to say that wouldn't happen here in similar circumstances, with the plug being pulled on the list? (oh Steve, and as for articles on websites - no, I know of few that make money, but I note the likes of Photovision does... it's what led to me to subscribe to them!).

So I'm in favour of either an independent server, or Yahoogroups.

Tim A

Kevin

[David Bonamo]

Photo.net over yahoo...

[Ted Brownlee`]

Q:

I have been watching this forum, and occasionally contributing for about 4 years. It's been a unique & rich source of information about large format photography. I have been involved with the medium format forum at Photo.net for about the same time. It generally works ok, and far better than Yahoo. Aside from your ideal situation, my vote is to move to the Photo.net sit as a separate category.

~Ted

[Pete Caluori]

Greetings,

I agree with most of the previous posts; this is a valuable resource and should continue, unfortunately I don't see many options. Someone suggested a fee if that would help fund another option. Personally, I would rather see a site similar to Philip's for a fee rather than Photo.net. I would also rather see it go to Photo.net than go away completely.

Regards,

[Andre Noble]

Q or other who takes on resposibilty, seriously: Make promise to archive all people's email who contributed on this site. Take time to develop BETTER system. Send email when it's up and running.

Why does anyone think we should settle for moving backwards? We have something really good here, and technology is moving forward too. Responses to go to photonet/yahoo route seem pessimistic, and are baffling.

[joe a kras]

Q I just wish to thank you for providing such an informative and stimulating forum. I've been reading this for a year or so and never miss reading every thread every day. I don't know much about computers, hosting and the like but I do know I thoroughly enjoy this forum. I am always searching for more information and ideas about my choosen field and this forum provides the ideal begining for this quest. All I can add to this is that where ever you go we will follow.