High Sierra Topix

Oh no, here we go again. This feels just like the discussion we had when “the fishing hole” went private. While I admit that was a slightly different situation, this thread will end up covering some of the same ground. I think that this all boils down to what do we all want this site to be? I have actually been very surprised at lack of commercialization. The “incompleteness” of the site also had me scratching my head and wondering when I first came here. It seemed like just a shell of a site with a great forums section (and great people), but the main page had mostly dead links. Even some of the sponsor links were dead. It really had me wondering who was paying for all this. Now, I don’t even think about any of it, I just participate.

I think that it is important to keep this site as open as possible. Most people (including me), start as lurkers. It’s a try it before you buy it type of thing. But the time comes when you want to know something specific that can’t be found by lurking. Then is the time that you join. As is the case in much of life, you need to build a reputation before you are trusted. You do that by posting.

There is real value in leading the lurkers here by keeping this site very open. Why is it valuable to lead people here to “steal” all that we have contributed? Because many of these people are just beginning in their enjoyment of these mountains that we cherish so much. This is our opportunity to get some of the ethics that we have to rub off on them. The more things are closed off, the less new traffic will be led to this site. We will miss the opportunity to educate, inform and yes, learn from these people.

Mike M. wrote: And to Eric: your reaction to my post -- "Good lord!" and the "sky is falling" comment -- strikes me as inappropriate and out of line. If you don't want feedback, just tell us. My posts regarding log-in problems a month or two ago were reasonable and respectful. If the site has a problem, you want us to report it, right? So why be so defensive??

Wow. Mike, sorry guy, but if you're really going to point the finger at me for being "defensive", and for coming across as "out of line", perhaps you should go back and re-read your own posts, which in my opinion were not as respectful as you would like to think they were. But in any case, I had hoped the inclusion of the emoticons in my own post would convey the fact that I was jokingly ribbing you. Apparently not, so my apologies.

Of course I want feedback, and others who have been here for a lot longer than you have will probably tell you that I constantly encourage it and usually do what I can to please the masses (time, money and technical ability aside). But if this is the way you go about selling your advise to an Admin of a free (and MUCH smaller than the examples you gave) site, then I'm afraid I'm not buying.

sirlight wrote:The “incompleteness” of the site also had me scratching my head and wondering when I first came here. It seemed like just a shell of a site with a great forums section (and great people), but the main page had mostly dead links. Even some of the sponsor links were dead. It really had me wondering who was paying for all this. Now, I don’t even think about any of it, I just participate.

Yep, it's incomplete. Unfortunately, I just don't have the time I used to to spend on keeping up on it. Aside from about $20/year (before taxes) I get from a few Amazon commissions here and there, the cost of the site comes out of my own pocket.

I am removing the login requirement on the Backpacking/Hiking/Camping forum. The requirement will remain on the Fishing Hole forum as it was before.

TIFWIW, during the 4 days the setting was in affect 16 new members registered, one of which posted to a thread. In the 4 days prior, only 6 new members registered, one of which posted to a thread. A similar trend was seen when the setting was applied to the Fishing Hole.

ERIC wrote:Aside from about $20/year (before taxes) I get from a few Amazon commissions here and there, the cost of the site comes out of my own pocket.

Let's keep the site as non-commercial as possible. I am sure most here will agree. Still, I personally have no problem dropping by here and clicking a sponsor link. If I am going to rei.com to buy something anyway, I would rather that purchase help support maintenance of this site. The links need to be valid for this.

sirlight wrote:Let's keep the site as non-commercial as possible. I am sure most here will agree. Still, I personally have no problem dropping by here and clicking a sponsor link. If I am going to rei.com to buy something anyway, I would rather that purchase help support maintenance of this site. The links need to be valid for this.

Keeping it as non-commercial as possible has always been the goal. But you're right about needing to take care of the invalid links. Some wont return, such as REI which (I believe) has since done away with its commission program. I think the only ads/commission programs I'll keep are Amazon, MyTopo and CafePress.

Eric, thanks for listening and for making the change back to a more open Hiking/Backpacking forum. Obviously, I prefer it.

Just to explain myself, I misinterpreted your initial reply to my thread -- it sounded to me like you were flashing the proverbial finger my way and didn't really care to hear my "meddling" input. I guess I'll have to take a class on how to read smilies!

The sky is falling today in Portland -- it is raining again.

Mike

TIFWIW, during the 4 days the setting was in affect 16 new members registered, one of which posted to a thread. In the 4 days prior, only 6 new members registered, one of which posted to a thread. A similar trend was seen when the setting was applied to the Fishing Hole.

Hardly surprising, since the only way users would have been able to view links was by registering. Tracking overall hits before and after the change would be a more meaningful measure. (No, I'm not suggesting a test!! Let's leave it the way it is, please!)

Mike

Mike M. wrote:

Hardly surprising, since the only way users would have been able to view links was by registering. Tracking overall hits before and after the change would be a more meaningful measure. (No, I'm not suggesting a test!! Let's leave it the way it is, please!)

Mike

I already ran those numbers, just didn't post:

4 Days Prior to the change
Ave Visits/Day: 645.25
Ave Hits/Day: 22,807.00
Ave Hits/Visit: 35.35

4 Days Following the change
Ave Visits/Day: 678.50
Ave Hits/Day: 23,671.50
Ave Hits/Visit: 34.89

Mike M. wrote:Eric, thanks for listening and for making the change back to a more open Hiking/Backpacking forum. Obviously, I prefer it.

Just to explain myself, I misinterpreted your initial reply to my thread -- it sounded to me like you were flashing the proverbial finger my way and didn't really care to hear my "meddling" input. I guess I'll have to take a class on how to read smilies!

The sky is falling today in Portland -- it is raining again.

Mike

We'll let it be water under the bridge.