Growbig?

AT least that level, gogeek I'd say.

The easy option would be to just take over the bill for current hosting but thats not gonna happen lol.

feather wrote:
I had these discussions before, pre SZ when we were the sanctum forum, at forumotion, one of the free deals ofc as most of you know.

concerns were that a if a forum or site were built up on one of the free platforms, you dont really own or have access to the data.

You could (potentially) be shut down and thats the end of it, you lose it all. I know it seems unlikely, but i do think it is more possible, than if you have access to the data, and keep backup files somewhere other than their server.

Forumotion for example actually forbids pulling the data from their site, even though there are ways, and we considered doing exactly that and retaining all the first posts made there, moving them to here.....and probably would have if it werent for wanting to use kunena on this site, which made migrration difficult, since forumotion is phbb (in laymans, its completely different forum software, if it wasnt we might have tried to pull the posts and take them with us to here)

(Kunena is Joomlas native forum btw so it works well with it , and free, and we thought it looked better, so thats why we went with it)

Anyway just more stuff to consider.

This site is actually a Joomla platform...kunena is just the forum.

Its joomla 2.5

Thanks for that Novum.

It's important that any major decision has as much info on the table as possible imo.

One of the features of net life is its temporary nature. A glitch, hack, tantrum, bankruptcy or server crash can wipe out so much in a millisecond.
I'd hate to think how much crap I've typed onto sites which no longer exist. Ahh well that's for history to lament its loss.

Example ...
I was scanning through this thread earlier and there's a few dead sites in there already.

So again, something worth considering, how much are folks prepared to shell out to back up the data?

feather wrote:
with joomla you spend nothing extra to back up... via the use of akeeba backup a file is generated daily and can be accessed, and even downloaded once a day to your desktop or wherever.

mosts hosts will have backups of sites hosted on them also as part of the deal...some are more trustworthy than others in that they actually do this and not just say they do it.

even the free deals have backups, like forumotion for example. as ive said though, that data cant be gotten out and shifted elsewhere easily, it all stays on their gig in the forumotion free hosting example. there are ways to get it out but were basically talking using hack programs that also violate their TOS.

Maybe there are fre forum providers out there that let you take the data, i dont know. i know forumotion doesnt, i suspect many would be similar.

Before you guys/geeks get too techy....

The original idea was a solution to DG possibly being a pain about a handover, believe it or not I suspect he wants rid and wouldn't be obstructive. Anyway, what would be the benefit of changing this that and the other over just changing the named 'owner'? If we have to faf about shifting everything just to have a different person named as the owner I'd rather faf with DG handing it over. Unless of course there is a direct benefit to the forum to move, unless I'm missing summat you geeks haven't given much reason to up sticks.

May I humbly suggest someone gets in touch with DG?

I will.

Nov has already looked into it afaik.

oioioi wrote:
Not how I saw that at all. I raised the topic of free boards because of my reservations about 'owners' and their financial investments.
oioioi wrote:
We've been fortunate with DG.
Many an individual who had fronted his own cash and then was clearly less than enamoured with how things turned out would simply have pulled the plug or not paid the next years rent and the plug would have been pulled anyway.
In absolute fairness to the man, he didn't do either.

No-one foresaw that schism developing way back in the halcyon days when SZ was a struggling infant.
Now that we have that experience, I was merely asking that we anticipate down the line and attempt to minimise the risks, while also perhaps minimising the costs.

Again, I'll say this is not about any individual who may be interested or willing to shoulder these costs and title of owner.
There are three members who have shown an interest/willingness so far, to my knowledge. Gilly, Oi and Andy.
Psketti has yet to voice her opinion and I consider that to be hugely important.

So what is to be expected of the new owner?
To pay for everything, domain name, hosting, software, chatroom, etc regardless of whether enough contributions come in to cover costs?

I am also not asking that we write a manifesto or measure things against some ideological yardstick to check it's compliance level.
These a just fundamental housekeeping matters, nothing more.

Cheers for that.

To clarify I'd trust us lot more than I'd trust me. By that I mean 'owt can happen', death, fulfillment of anarcho-fascist desires etc. If there is a way to collectively take ownership obviously that'd be my preferred route, if me taking ownership in name alone would help I'd be willing, if me taking ownership in name alone would add fuel to certain fires I'd be less willing.

You do realise this whole thing is an argument against bosses and ownership. "But if nobody is in charge...?" etc.



feather flying the flag

oioioi wrote:
You guys seem to conveniently forget or ignore the fact that my profession was community work.
Community management works to a degree, then they employ or appoint someone to do it from there.
That experience is why you and I will never walk the same airy fairy path.
It does not follow that we therefore disagree on everything.

Oh hey, is this yours? You've dropped yer flag son, or did you intend to chuck it away?
We'll talk of Santa and Tooth Fairies another day,

Just to elaborate on this point, from my POV when putting my name forward; I would not be responsible for any of these things any more than I am now, I would take on the responsibility of reminding you lot when these responsibilities are due to be paid! If there is a shortfall and I am in a position to contribute I will, same as now. If the forum/community can't sustain itself I'm only as much responsible for that now as I would be if I were named owner.

That's a bit manifestoish innit?

feather wrote:


All the same are we?

oioioi wrote: Nope.

That's a LOT manifestoish.

andyh wrote:
Is there any feedback?

Thank you, once again, Novum, for giving lots of useful advice, and being the level-headed go-between. Many times I don't know how we'd cope without you around.

Gilly wrote:
Not as yet, bit early though.

Gilly wrote:
FYI's DG hasnt actually been around for more than 24 hrs on TZ, he hasnt logged on, hasnt seen the message yet. He has his busy times and he must just be busy right now.

@oi ... SZ is actually on a shared account with TZ, an account in DG's name. If DG wants rid, then SZ has to be hosted elsewhere, it can still be the same host, but not on DG's account if that makes sense. We cant just change/transfer the name of that account to new 'owner' because TZ is hosted under it also.

The same host or most new hosts you'd give the nod to would move/transfer the site as part of the deal anyway, so nothing would seem to change on the members end once it was all sorted out. But if it was put under a different host, sometimes there can be some technical glitches with the extra features (plug ins)... a new account under any new owners name with the same host we have now would probably make the transition totally trouble free.

I just want to echo Gillys thanks Novum.
You've been a brick mate.


and no that's not a typo!