Let's Make Robots!

Are we too many in here, should we start limiting acess?

Hi everyone :)

Are we too many in here, should we start limiting acess?

I have had the same thoughts before; at a point I felt like we where so many in here, that it was impossible to follow everything & everyone..

It sure is now.

Last time I did & said nothing, and it turned out to be the right solution; So many cool people dropped in, people I would never have known else. I am thankful I did not limit acess then.

However, are we shooting ourselves in the foot by growing uncontrolled? >There is like more than 2.000 people in here every day! More thatn 2.000 individual visitors.. I do not "know" everybody, is this cool?

Let me hear what you say :)

It would be easy to just shout down for new members for a while..

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

What is the real issue here? Is it that too many people are joining the site?  Is it that the front page is being littered with what many may consider to be inadequate posts? Is it that too many people are asking what some consider to be ill-informed questions? Or, do we not know what the real issue is?  Someone new to the site may want to join because they share a common interest but may not know how or where to begin.  Some may want to showcase what they are working on or to share ideas that others may find useful.  Whatever the reason, they should not be shut out or shunned.  Those that do not intend to contribute will eventually fall by the wayside and the issue with non-robotic posts taking up the frontpage will be replaced by what some, but not all, will consider useful posts.  This is all subjective as some may consider the nooby posts as an opportunity to help someone out.  Sometimes learning can be in the form of contributions.  I think we are chomping at the bit here and nothing will get solved unless we figure out what the real issue is.  As I read through many of the posts, I find Fritsl's original question as kind of vague  and very open to one's own interpretation.  As such, this has all branched into many subjective issues.

Is there really an issue with an ever-growing community of individuals who may or may not have something useful to contribute?  Are we gonna start witch hunting folks now who some may perceive as not contributing enough?

I say lets keep it open and those that lose interest will fall by the wayside.

Kick the very unactive users....or put some small :P ads on the site and create competions with the money as price!

Inactivity is not a problem, all that does is keep a few kilobytes of hard disk space occupied with user details.

And unless/until TheCowGod tells us otherwise, hosting is still within budget.

On a sidenote: Prognose says that in a year, we will be 10.000 in here every day! I am not sure Dans server can keep up with that, or the year after ;) But I / we are working on stuff. (While building robots and try to have a life :D)

side node noted.

I responded to the suggestion that inactive user IDs be culled. Hosting cost does not come into consideration here.

I agree with you that with growing membership (of the active kind) we will start to feel the strain of increasing bandwidth requirements. 

And I also agree that this was totally not the reason you started this debate.

I also totally stress that we are looking into it, working on loong lists of todos :P
What if someone made a quiz about the site that people had to go through in order to make an account? That way you could make them read important FAQs.

I agree. Bonus for the Z! This should be easy to implement and it will be easy to pass that test. It won't stop some lazy folks to post questions that are already answered, but it will sure make a difference. 

Yay, I feel helpful :D

That is the first truly new idea in this thread. And not even a bad one. Technical possibilities aside, I think it is really helpful to have new contributors read a minimum number of LMR values or rules. The FAQ would probably do fine. Or could be morphed to fit this particular cause.

Rik