kingster996
|
| posted on 23/4/14 at 06:06 PM |
|
|
Humble pie scoffed - won't 'appen again guv honest 
I used to be indecisive, but now I'm not so sure
|
|
|
|
|
ChrisW
|
| posted on 23/4/14 at 08:24 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by kingster996
Humble pie scoffed - won't 'appen again guv honest
Don't worry, you're not the only one. Quite the opposite in fact! 
Chris
My gaff my rules
|
|
|
kingster996
|
| posted on 23/4/14 at 08:34 PM |
|
|
So.... Can I be verified now 
Chris
I used to be indecisive, but now I'm not so sure
|
|
|
ChrisW
|
| posted on 23/4/14 at 08:39 PM |
|
|
Hopefully the verification system will be back online in the next 24 hours. It will be mandatory for all new signups.
Those that are currently active members and not verified will be given a grace period, probably 14 days I guess.
Note that if you make a donation you are automatically verified due to Paypal passing your details over.
Chris
My gaff my rules
|
|
|
unijacko67
|
| posted on 23/4/14 at 08:43 PM |
|
|
It really does go without saying that every genuine member and regular user of this site massively appriciates the site and the work you do to keep it
going Chris.
"A big thanks Chris" from me.
http://www.kittenkitcar.co.uk
|
|
|
prawnabie
|
| posted on 23/4/14 at 08:59 PM |
|
|
I chuckle reading these posts, every so often someone will throw their dummy out and have a rant about the admin, then when they make an appearance
all the arse kissers come out of the woodwork!
I prefer the kitchen posts!
|
|
|
kingster996
|
| posted on 23/4/14 at 10:04 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by ChrisW
Hopefully the verification system will be back online in the next 24 hours. It will be mandatory for all new signups.
Those that are currently active members and not verified will be given a grace period, probably 14 days I guess.
Note that if you make a donation you are automatically verified due to Paypal passing your details over.
Chris
hmm, I donated some time back but still says unverified?
I used to be indecisive, but now I'm not so sure
|
|
|
ChrisW
|
| posted on 23/4/14 at 10:24 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by kingster996
quote:
Originally posted by ChrisW
Hopefully the verification system will be back online in the next 24 hours. It will be mandatory for all new signups.
Those that are currently active members and not verified will be given a grace period, probably 14 days I guess.
Note that if you make a donation you are automatically verified due to Paypal passing your details over.
Chris
hmm, I donated some time back but still says unverified?
That shouldn't be the case, but maybe the code to do it is broken. 
Anyway, you can now verify here: http://locostbuilders.co.uk/account_verify.php
Chris
My gaff my rules
|
|
|
nick205
|
| posted on 23/4/14 at 10:53 PM |
|
|
Appreciated as always Chris.
Spooky - anyone else get the donation reminder pop up this morning?
£10 donation duly made 
[Edited on 24/4/14 by nick205]
|
|
|
David Jenkins
|
| posted on 24/4/14 at 08:09 AM |
|
|
I got it as well - and I've donated! I still consider it to be value for money.
I do sometimes grumble at some minor features that don't work properly - but then I remember the fact that Chris runs this largely on goodwill,
so I shut up and be grateful.
Note: I hope that reminder will now go away following my payment...
|
|
|
Irony
|
| posted on 24/4/14 at 09:02 AM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by prawnabie
I chuckle reading these posts, every so often someone will throw their dummy out and have a rant about the admin, then when they make an appearance
all the arse kissers come out of the woodwork!
I prefer the kitchen posts!
As far as I am aware this website is run by one man for no profit in his own time. If a few people want to thank him for his good work then let them.
If this website was subscription only and Chris made his living by just running Locostbuilders then good luck to him.
|
|
|
sdh2903
|
| posted on 24/4/14 at 09:13 AM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by prawnabie
I chuckle reading these posts, every so often someone will throw their dummy out and have a rant about the admin, then when they make an appearance
all the arse kissers come out of the woodwork!
I prefer the kitchen posts!
I think everyone is grateful for the site and the effort Chris puts in, however there has been a growing feeling lately that Chris maybe needs a
couple of Lieutenants to clear up the shite on a daily basis when he is busy. These requests for discussion have been largely ignored and not even
openly discussed. I haven't reached the levels of throwing the dummy as you put it but have made my feelings known and mainly deleted. But at
the end of the day it's Chris's site and I'm grateful he hasn't pulled the plug as I would never have got my car on the road
without this site.
Re-donated, thanks for the reminder.
|
|
|
big_wasa
|
| posted on 24/4/14 at 09:53 AM |
|
|
Bunged a tenner in the pot.
As above, if I could now get rid of the reminder ?
Cheers
[Edited on 24/4/14 by big_wasa]
|
|
|
loggyboy
|
| posted on 24/4/14 at 10:03 AM |
|
|
I stuck a tenner in, time does in need fly, 3 years since my last donation!
The banner remained so I clicked the 'opt out' option and its gone now... hope theres no black mark against me name now!
Mistral Motorsport
|
|
|
DW100
|
| posted on 24/4/14 at 11:16 AM |
|
|
Verified my account by text this morning, Very easy
|
|
|
David Jenkins
|
| posted on 24/4/14 at 11:34 AM |
|
|
I also clicked on the 'not now' button to get rid of the banner - I hope Chris isn't making a secret blacklist for future action...
|
|
|
ashg
|
| posted on 24/4/14 at 02:55 PM |
|
|
Donated but the banner didn't go away. Chris Is it automated to disappear on payment or is that something manual you do?
I wonder how many would be prepared to pay a rolling £1 a month or £10 a year?
Anything With Tits or Wheels Will cost you MONEY!!
Haynes Roadster (Finished)
Exocet (Finished & Sold)
New Project (Started)
|
|
|
leon51274
|
| posted on 24/4/14 at 03:24 PM |
|
|
£10 in the pot from me!
|
|
|
kingster996
|
| posted on 24/4/14 at 04:24 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by ashg
I wonder how many would be prepared to pay a rolling £1 a month or £10 a year?
£10 a year is fine by me
[Edited on 24/4/14 by kingster996]
I used to be indecisive, but now I'm not so sure
|
|
|
Slimy38
|
| posted on 24/4/14 at 05:48 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by kingster996
quote:
Originally posted by ashg
I wonder how many would be prepared to pay a rolling £1 a month or £10 a year?
£10 a year is fine by me
[Edited on 24/4/14 by kingster996]
Same here, to be honest I'd not realised it had been so long since I donated. I pay the same for my Yahoo mail, and to be honest I get much less
value from that.
|
|
|
ReMan
|
| posted on 24/4/14 at 07:12 PM |
|
|
paid up for another year
www.plusnine.co.uk
|
|
|
ceebmoj
|
| posted on 24/4/14 at 07:22 PM |
|
|
Donation made, but the banner is still there. I don't want to disable the banner manually, because I don't mind donating annually and a
reminder will make sure I do.
I would like to add I agree that A couple of other additional mods would be good as well.
|
|
|
ChrisW
|
| posted on 24/4/14 at 11:36 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by ashg
Donated but the banner didn't go away. Chris Is it automated to disappear on payment or is that something manual you do?
It should go away automatically, but a few people have reported that it doesn't so I guess the code doesn't work properly. I will
investigate over the next couple of days. For not just hit 'not now' - I'll write a quick script to erase that preference from
those that have donated when I figure out why the banner isn't disappearing.
quote:
Originally posted by sdh2903
These requests for discussion have been largely ignored and not even openly discussed. I haven't reached the levels of throwing the dummy as you
put it but have made my feelings known and mainly deleted.
I can assure you that very little gets deleted and I certainly don't think any discussion regarding mods has gone that way UNLESS they were
comments made on an otherwise spam thread which there has been a lot of. I'm not going to mess around adding posts to make the discussion that
follows make sense - if the first post is spam and everything else is just moaning about it the whole thread gets junked.
My opinion on mods is that I don't really want to go down that road unless I really can't avoid it, and this comes down to one simple
reason: impartiality. I take great pride in this site being completely impartial, and I get it in the neck regularly with people wanting posts
removed, "someone said something I don't like", "if you don't delete this I'll sue you" rubbish. I
can't remember and exact number, but I bet if I could I could count on one hand the number of genuine, on-subject threads removed over the last
12+ years of running this site. Anyone that threatens to sue me over I tell to bring it on, and not one has taken up the challenge yet. I take a lot
of stick for this sometimes, and often I'm not popular for it, but I stand by the site's impartiality, feel it is one of it's
greatest assets, and in the long run, once the dust has settled on any rows, I truly believe the membership as a whole is intelligent enough to
respect why I stick to my guns.
If I did take on a new mod I would have to trust them 100% that they would not be swayed by messages they will inevitably receive or the feeling of
contempt they will get when they don't give in to the peer pressure and first of all not give in and delete or edit just to get people off their
backs, but also not decide to give up on the job due to the aggravation. Trust me, if I can feel like throwing in the towel even after all these
years of effort I'm sure others will!
I must also point out that the forum software currently has no 'soft delete' function. When a thread gets deleted, that's it. If I
did have moderators I would have no idea what they had deleted, edited, etc and that's another reason that I need 100% trust in them as it will
be me that has to clear up the mess, with no evidence of what actually happened, if a bad decision is made. Yes I could code that feature in, but
surely my time is better spent on other things, an example of which follows.
As I see it, the main issue that people are calling for mods for is the spam posts that appear, and it is correct that due to the forum software being
old it is not as well protected against spam bots as more modern packages. However this spam problem has only happened since the phone verification
system stopped working. For those that were not around in those days it was put in place to stop the trolling that was going on a few years ago where
people would sign up stupid usernames and wind up arguments. When my server was stolen by my previous employer I had backups of everything except the
code that did the verification, hence when I got the site back online I had to do it without this feature. In the year that has passed since then the
spam problem has steadily got worse. However I suspect I have now fixed this with the new, re-vamped phone verification system which, assuming it
works, makes 95% of the reason for having mods go away.
On the subject of the forum software, I regularly read people criticising me for not updating it. Unfortunately they don't understand what has
gone on over the last 13 years. I have made so many modifications to the code and database over the years, so many that I can't even remember
half of them, that an upgrade would a massive undertaking. Things like the photo gallery, Sphinx search and the integration with Paypal, to give just
three examples, would all need to be re-coded again from scratch. It's simply not feasible; I would be better off time-wise my own forum engine
from scratch, which I would really like to do, but time simply doesn't permit at the moment.
I will be watching the situation over the next few weeks, and if the spam issue doesn't dramatically improve I have another idea up my sleeve to
combat the problem. This would allow users to tag posts as spam, with the tag weighted by factors like how long both the author and the person
reporting has been a member of the site, how many posts they have made, what 'spam' rating their other posts have received, etc. So for
example it might take two well established people to report a newbie for spamming and have their thread automatically hidden, but it would take 100
newbies with say 10-100 posts and >30 days membership to automatically hide a well established member's post who has not had a previous post
reported. I've not figured it all out yet, and I'm hoping I won't have to, but this is a route I would far rather go down as it
means the community moderates itself and there can be nobody exercising overall power (apart from myself of course, but I strongly suspect that over
the years I have demonstrated that I don't play games like that)
So there we have it. I didn't intend this to go on so long, but at least I've finally got around to putting out a statement about why
I'm resisting taking on help. I do hope that you, as members, can understand my reasoning and agree that the site is better off overall if we
keep to the existing structure, put protection from spam in place as far as possible, and if it turns out that any further moderation is required that
I come up with a way of crowd sourcing this rather than electing individuals.
Cheers, Chris
[Edited on 24/4/2014 by ChrisW]
My gaff my rules
|
|
|
sdh2903
|
| posted on 24/4/14 at 11:51 PM |
|
|
Cheers for the reply Chris. The growing suggestions for mods were largely down to the growing kitchen tossers so if you've managed to eradicate
them then great. From our perspective, we are aware that you run the site in your spare time and were suggesting moderators to ease the load so to
speak. From your reply I can now see the added complexities and why you don't want to go down that route.
Steve
|
|
|
nick205
|
| posted on 25/4/14 at 09:38 AM |
|
|
Well presented Chris and a valuable insight into the mechanics and operation of the LCB forum.
I can see why you want to avoid involving moderators on the site. The weighted user self-moderating approach sounds interesting although the
weighting itself needs careful consideration.
|
|
|
