# jheryn how much time left....?



## unknown (Jul 29, 2005)

how many months or weeks or days before FA is up and running again?


----------



## SorcererLance (Jul 29, 2005)

everyone's saying August 1st, might as well wait and see


----------



## C?lian (Jul 29, 2005)

SorcererLance said:
			
		

> everyone's saying August 1st, might as well wait and see



Whoah, that soon ?

Sounds unlikely :<


----------



## Pico (Jul 29, 2005)

August 1 is the date Arcturus gave as the day he would completely cut FA off from his server.  I highly doubt FA will be up again by then, considering the admins are apparently trying to recode the whole site, not to mention the fact that they still need to buy all the server parts and put it together, etc.


----------



## uncia2000 (Jul 29, 2005)

afaik that was the cut-off date for getting everything backed up, no?

Getting back on-line will take longer, I'm sure, especially if it's the big-bang solution (buy a server outright and co-locate) rather than pay a higher monthly fee for a leased server.

Suspect AF has the same funding issues as well just now.
(Unless they've got a mystery donor... in which case I'd've loved to have seen them over here a few months ago to help stop the funding problem coming to a head so badly (as well as other issues)).


----------



## uncia2000 (Jul 29, 2005)

*shakes head*. OK, I give up!
That's twice in a row I've been a minute or two too slow.

thx, Pico!


----------



## Pico (Jul 29, 2005)

>*shakes head*. OK, I give up!
>That's twice in a row I've been a minute or two too slow.
>
>thx, Pico! 

haha :*)  But you did make a very valid point regarding the donations.  I would be surprised to see an increase in donations at this point in time, since donations were fairly small when the site was actually up and running.  I'm not sure that many people will feel eager to donate now when the site is down and there is a possibility that it may not last long once it's up, or even get back up at all.


----------



## uncia2000 (Jul 29, 2005)

> haha :*) 

*rolls eyes*
I get where I'm going eventually... Never said I was a cheetah!

> Pico wrote:
> But you did make a very valid point regarding the donations.  I would be
> surprised to see an increase in donations at this point in time, since
> donations were fairly small when the site was actually up and running.

~$200-250 a month last time Arc updated the list, IIRC.
Don't know whether they were all direct debited over to him. (?)

Yeah, one reason I was really unhappy about "having to" buy a bigger
server, etc., for FA when the funding wasn't there and no-one was really
making an effort to tackle the issue.
(And then to find that looping script/whatever was no doubt a major
contributor to the CPU problems in the first place).

> I'm not sure that many people will feel eager to donate now when the
> site is down and there is a possibility that it may not last long once it's
> up, or even get back up at all.

Agreed. AF benefits in terms of being a "fresh start" (appearance thereof,
anyhow), but with similar funding issues- albeit a hosting plan still in place,
I presume.

Alternatively, a large number of people who hadn't donated previously to
FA might *now* be willing to do so knowing that lack of funding was one of
the factors which caused things to stress and fall apart as they did.

Optimist?


----------



## Myr (Jul 29, 2005)

I don't think the revival of FA is going to solve the problems with the site or the funding problems. Jheryn doesn't seem to be looking at the site from a business-oriented view and thus will have to keep putting out personal money or begging for donations. Arc is taking AF in a more business-like direction from what I've read over subscriptions, budget, and organization/attitudes. It makes me sad I don't have more ability in the coding and server arena instead of just graphics and interface.  Give me a couple of capable people, decent hardware, and one year and then the site would be self-sufficent at a minimum.


----------



## unknown (Jul 29, 2005)

woah! like too much info at a time! now my head hurts


----------



## unknown (Jul 29, 2005)

this was a question i was asking only jheryn


----------



## Alkora (Jul 29, 2005)

atm, i do not know...we need to get something we are going to be able to stay on...

if we just go and put it up somewhere...it may not be good enough to run FA and we may run into big problems...That happened when FA first started...


----------



## unknown (Jul 29, 2005)

Jheryn said:
			
		

> atm, i do not know...we need to get something we are going to be able to stay on...
> 
> if we just go and put it up somewhere...it may not be good enough to run FA and we may run into big problems...That happened when FA first started...


i didnt know that. and what does atm mean?


----------



## Dragoneer (Jul 29, 2005)

> and what does atm mean?

I believe what he means that when FA comes back up, it needs to be solid, on a powerful system and have room to grow so it doesn't get overloaded. If FA were to be put up right now, at the moment... it would work, but it would also be choking on hardware limitations.


----------



## unknown (Jul 29, 2005)

i hate to double post but do you have a log or sumthin for when FA had the big problem you sead ealier? im curious


----------



## unknown (Jul 29, 2005)

Preyfar said:
			
		

> > and what does atm mean?
> 
> I believe what he means that when FA comes back up, it needs to be solid, on a powerful system and have room to grow so it doesn't get overloaded. If FA were to be put up right now, at the moment... it would work, but it would also be choking on hardware limitations.


really? i didnt know.


----------



## uncia2000 (Jul 30, 2005)

> AuroranDragon wrote:
> I don't think the revival of FA is going to solve the problems with the site
> or the funding problems.

I can understand why you say that, but if people presume that to be true it might become a self-fulfilling prophesy.

Proving this wrong would be nice...

> AuroranDragon wrote:
> Jheryn doesn't seem to be looking at the site from a business-oriented
> view and thus will have to keep putting out personal money or begging
> for donations. Arc is taking AF in a more business-like direction from
> what I've read over subscriptions, budget, and organization/attitudes.

I haven't read much on the financial side over on their fora, despite pushing, aside from that subscription thread started by <Mortain>.

They seem to be keeping their "ideas" secret, thus far. (Sound familiar?).
Hopefully not for much longer...

> AuroranDragon wrote:
> It makes me sad I don't have more ability in the coding and server
> arena instead of just graphics and interface.  Give me a couple of
> capable people, decent hardware, and one year and then the site would
> be self-sufficent at a minimum.



Good thoughts, but there's always a sting in the tail.
Any small site can become self-sufficient (just a handful of dollars from the owner will suffice).
It's what you have to do when 10,000 users and as many out-and-out leechers turn up on your doorstep looking for CPU and bandwidth.

Predicting and managing that growth ain't fun. (Had this discussion with Jheryn back in January before FA was even FA...).


----------



## Myr (Jul 30, 2005)

---------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by uncia2000
I haven't read much on the financial side over on their fora, despite pushing, aside from that subscription thread started by <Mortain>.

They seem to be keeping their "ideas" secret, thus far. (Sound familiar?).
Hopefully not for much longer...
---------------------------------------------------------------

Yes, it's quite secretive. I can't even get a friend who's involved in the admin team to talk about it which is frustrating since at first I wanted to help and now just want to be kept in the know. From the way responses were sent to me I got the typical shun a larger corporation would do (you know, you get the feeling they don't give a damn about you). That instantly put AF in a negative light and so does one of their other admins (the FA hacker? Smart, but bad PR). True, you don't just hand stuff out to friends unless they're qualified, but all I wanted was information and it's not like I have know enough people well enough to go spreading it around. I've been admin of a large message board for a few years now and I couldn't even imagine the chaos if a responded to a member like that. It makes things un-personable.

It would appear they're thinking things through and approaching them from many angles, but they turn themselves into a "higher power" which really gets annoying. Looking out for the site's best interest and limiting user input is good, but not telling interested people what's going on is bad. To a certain degree you have to look at all the ideas and things proposed, but then pick the best and go with a vision. Hype is always good too, but the people behind AF seem stuck in their ways and stubborn about what's going on. It's rather annoying. FA seems to be the complete opposite right now...in a state of confusion. Of course, I'm not on the inside here either so these are merely observations as a normal user.


---------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by uncia2000
Good thoughts, but there's always a sting in the tail.
Any small site can become self-sufficient (just a handful of dollars from the owner will suffice).
It's what you have to do when 10,000 users and as many out-and-out leechers turn up on your doorstep looking for CPU and bandwidth.

Predicting and managing that growth ain't fun. (Had this discussion with Jheryn back in January before FA was even FA...).
---------------------------------------------------------------

For FA I don't even consider prediction as part of the game. Everyone knows what DA is and how huge and successful its gotten (although it's too big now). Similar sites should expect the same massive growth and plan accordingly by putting services and features in place that will allow competition with what the other sites provide and generate revenue. It takes time, consistency, and planning, but ultimately something like FA has already been done before so the foundation is set..

As for the leechers that should have been planned for in advance under "worst case scenerio." I'm from the school of thought that you always plan for the worst. If I walk into work I don't plan to be selling a 27 inch tv to a customer. I plan for the 50 inch Plasma tv sale even though it's extremely rare. Better to solve a problem and/or be ready before it happens or adjust the system so that only subscribed paying members can leech a bit or find another approach. There are things that happen that can't be planned for, but you do what you can especially when there are example similar sites to look at.

The biggest problem with FA is that it was rather static. You can change the appearance of things, but you can't cover up a lack of secure new features or news. Granted, I've never run a site as big as FA and clearly the parties involved with FA have limited experience too the first time around. Part of the reason why DA is so successful is they keep adding stuff, even if I personally don't agree with it (cell phone downloading).




Ultimately,  whatever site I chose to allow to host my artwork on will be determined  by design and the way the administration approaches users. Everyone is looking rather bad right now.


----------



## unknown (Jul 31, 2005)

ow my head....can anyone here make a post thats brief?


----------



## Varka (Jul 31, 2005)

In regards to the 'big bang' server spend... it's not neccassary at *all*!

You really should look at 'server clustering'. Livejournal do it - they buy a bunch of cheapo servers, and configure them into a cluster, so they're all working together and splitting the load evenly. They've already been through all this 

Go take a look at www.danga.com - all the tools we need are there. If you rent, say, 3 cheapo servers in different locations (eg, 1 in the UK, one in the US, and one someplace else... canada?) then you can set them up to split the load evenly. Hence, you can spend $300-$400 on a server, buy three instead, and get perhaps 5x the performance of a single, high-spec one..

Or just buy one, roll with it, and get another as funds (and needs) permit.

 8) 

My two cents.

And yes, I'm willing to help get this baby operational if you feel you want me on board  (I hope I'm not letting myself in for too much, hehe)

Thanks, 

Varka.


----------



## MistressLeathurkatt (Aug 3, 2005)

*Secretiveness...*

You know what?  Secretiveness about look and layout is actually not what's happening as they are asking for input and oppinions on different ideas.  Nor are they being secretive about what's going on in general.  They aren't having flame war issues so they don't feel the need to disable guest posting for one...  And for the secretiveness, they are trying to get things going and setting up stuff properly so they can have it all up and running for the users without the system bugs FA was having issues with.  That's why they aren't responding as much as some would want and why there are actually designated people to answer questions.  If you actually read through the posts you would see that.  So what if Arc wants to keep certain things a surprise, he wants to give the users a sense of "discovery" when the new site opens.  Telling everyone about every little detail takes away from the experience of seeing a new site for the first time.  Thus the "sense of discovery" surprise aspect on some things.  There are different threads for different things on AF, you only have to read through them to find what you want to know really.


----------



## Myr (Aug 3, 2005)

*Re: Secretiveness...*



			
				MistressLeathurkatt said:
			
		

> Secretiveness about look and layout is actually not what's happening as they are asking for input and oppinions on different ideas.  Nor are they being secretive about what's going on in general.  [...] So what if Arc wants to keep certain things a surprise, he wants to give the users a sense of "discovery" when the new site opens.



Uh...secret = surprise. First you say they're not being secretive, then you say they are being secretive. :? I've seen threads were people offer ideas, but have never seen an admin chime in on them and indicate any usage. It seems such threads are to keep the community busy while the site is worked on. They already have something planned. I've even contacted an admin that I was good friends with to offer help with what I can do, but got the "we have too many people and don't want to tell what we're doing" response.

Unfortunately, it seems FA is going to go back to the same dull look it had before.

And as for why guest posting is allowed on AF and not here just take a look around or else you would have had to be here one or two weeks ago. All the guest posting was anti-FA. Even on AF the vast majority of it is anti-FA. They have a whole multi-page thread dedicated to it.




This entire fiasco is becomming a big waste of time. Every art site right now appears to suck for one reason or another.


----------



## Dragoneer (Aug 3, 2005)

*Re: Secretiveness...*

> Unfortunately, it seems FA is going to go back to the same dull look it had
> before.

How sure of that are you?


----------



## Myr (Aug 3, 2005)

*Re: Secretiveness...*



			
				Preyfar said:
			
		

> > Unfortunately, it seems FA is going to go back to the same dull look it had
> > before.
> 
> How sure of that are you?



Honestly, now that I think about it I have no idea where I got that from and why I threw that in there. I haven't chatted with any people working on FA; only someone working with AF. My bad.


----------



## furry69 (Aug 3, 2005)

*Old FA wasn't all that bad, really*

If you think about it, if were any flashier, it would be hell on dial up modems and detract attention from the art.  I think the style it had did exactly what it was supposed to do, turn your attention on the art (and "pron") and not so much the site itself.

Now as the function goes, the navigation could be improved, but overall I think it was pretty good.
javascript:emoticon('')
Smile


----------



## Arcturus (Aug 3, 2005)

*Re: Secretiveness...*

(I hope people don't mind me posting here, but..)



			
				AuroranDragon said:
			
		

> I've even contacted an admin that I was good friends with to offer help with what I can do, but got the "we have too many people and don't want to tell what we're doing" response.



We're keeping things under wraps over there for a good reason. One, so it is a surprise. And two, so no-one can go, "OMG FA STOLE UR IDEA ARC", if we both happen to come up with a new feature that's identical. Neither I, nor I hope Jheryn, wants that sort of drama to happen.

And I am very glad that even though you are friends with one of the AF/?? coders, that they haven't spilt any beans. It means my trust was not misplaced.


----------



## Myr (Aug 3, 2005)

*Re: Secretiveness...*

[This message was left blank]


----------



## uncia2000 (Aug 3, 2005)

*Re: Secretiveness...*

> Arc wrote:
> We're keeping things under wraps over there for a good reason.
> One, so it is a surprise.



> And two, so no-one can go, "OMG FA STOLE UR IDEA ARC", if we both
> happen to come up with a new feature that's identical. Neither I, nor I
> hope Jheryn, wants that sort of drama to happen.

Know what you mean from a re-launch perspective, Arc, although I doubt FA2/(AF/??) will be launching simultaneously.

For the time being, having the details hidden might even prove to be a positive incentive to the coding teams to provide their communities with a feature-rich, bug-free platform...
Nothing wrong with "friendly" competition on such a basis, no?

Longer-term, I'd still sincerely hope to see everyone implement all community-building features to "best benefit", rather than have any one group feel obliged to make an issue of any idea "they" had first. (Even if another site had it years ago).
Besides, even the simplest ideas can be implemented in a good, bad or indifferent manner.

</02 kitty cents>

> And I am very glad that even though you are friends with one of the
> AF/?? coders, that they haven't spilt any beans. It means my trust was
> not misplaced.

No chance of the AF/?? code being made available on an open source license, then?


----------



## MistressLeathurkatt (Aug 3, 2005)

*Re: Secretiveness...*



			
				Arcturus said:
			
		

> (I hope people don't mind me posting here, but..)
> 
> 
> 
> ...



There is a big difference in being secretive and keeping good surprises on the hush hush.  Being secretive is most often harmful to others in some way, shape, or form.  While keeping a surprise is most often under positive/good intent.  Arc and his team was being accused of keeping secrets out of vindictiveness.  This, as you see in his post here, is not the case.  He's keeping things quiet to avoid yet more drama and to surprise users with good cool stuff on the new site.  I mean, would you want to know what all your presents are before your birthday even comes around?  Or know what all your christmas presents are before you get to unwrap them?  No, certainly not, and this is no different.  Just be patient and all will unfold in due time...


----------



## Arshes Nei (Aug 4, 2005)

I just wanted to note, yes AF allows guest posting. While there are users that are going to be rude there are many users that would like to simply be able to have the option of their account imported. 

Also, there have been some non trollish posts and actual feedback from users that don't want to register an account.

Will people argue about the AF/FA fiasco, sure, but stifling their speech instead of letting it die out naturally does create bad will.

No one person is perfect, whether you like me or not, or whoever you chose to dislike, no one is taking away your right to speak. Although difficult you have to take in harsh criticizm and not always view it as trolling.


Take Care.


----------



## Dragoneer (Aug 4, 2005)

> Will people argue about the AF/FA fiasco, sure, but stifling their speech
> instead of letting it die out naturally does create bad will.

We're not stifling speech. People are free to register and speak their mind. All we're just making sure people don't feel the need to slander or attack others under the guise of anonymity.

Too many people were posting bitter, hate-inspired comments under the veil that nobody could see their name. We fixed that. Again, nobody's speech is being stifled here.


----------



## Arshes Nei (Aug 4, 2005)

I can't quote you because you disabled BBcode instead of modding the image code tag to not work.

I'm referring specifically why AF is allowing guest posts. This is not an adversarial "We're better than you situation" rather an explanation why AF hasn't disabled guest posting.


----------



## Dragoneer (Aug 4, 2005)

> This is not an adversarial "We're better than you situation" rather an
> explanation why AF hasn't disabled guest posting.

Acknowledged.


----------



## unknown (Aug 4, 2005)

i like it when posts are this brief


----------



## MistressLeathurkatt (Aug 4, 2005)

Hmmm...  Do all seals have such painfully short attention spans that only single word posts are understandable for them?
**winks at the seal**  Just Kidding...
**grins**  Mmmm...  Soft...  Fuzzy...  Mhurrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr...


----------



## unknown (Aug 4, 2005)

MistressLeathurkatt said:
			
		

> Hmmm...  Do all seals have such painfully short attention spans that only single word posts are understandable for them?
> **winks at the seal**  Just Kidding...
> **grins**  Mmmm...  Soft...  Fuzzy...  Mhurrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr...


nope. its just that if anything is over 5 senentences my head hurts.


----------

