On-line Users

[James R Gordon]

I need to make the membership aware of a situation that has just arisen. In November our subscription to Invision was $75 a month, In late November - because Invision noticed our daily users over a 48 hour period had exceeded 200 - our subscription was increased to $130 per month. Today I have been informed that our users have further exceeded to 343 during a 48 hour period and our subscription has been increased to $335 per month beginning in January 2000.

I have emailed Invision to query this figure - I cannot understand how in two consecutive months our on-line users can increase to that extent and our subscription go from $75 to $335 per month.. So far I have heard nothing from Invision - which is strange and suggests to me they believe this figure of daily users is right/

$353 per month is over $4000 a year. Due to the generosity of the membership this year we have sufficient funds till around October 2000.

I do not feel the generosity of the present membership can sustain making donations of over $4000 each year. I therefore have to announce that this site will probably come to an end in late 2000.

James

 

[Ron Bulman]

Have we upset someone to incur over a 4X increase out of nowhere?

[Cory Santos]

Perhaps if people do not log out of their account each time it increases the time.   Once logged in many computers remember the site so that you do not have to log in each time.

[James R Gordon]

No we have not. The last time we had over 343 users on-line over a 48 hour period we were actually under attack and Invision sorted the issue. I am wondering whether there are users are genuine - and may include visitors either to the JFK forum or to the other forums on the site. If it is that - legitimate visitors - then we may not be able to sustain this.

I am shocked at the $335 subscription. However if these visitors continue to increase then $335 need not be the end of the matter.

[Stephanie Goldberg]

I see six users at the present moment.  I would definitely ask them to check their math and show their work.

[James R Gordon]

I agree Stephanie. This is why I am wondering whether what Invision are counting is not just the JFK forum but the entire Education Forum. I am not sure we can control that and - it may be the $353 per month may not be an end of the matter.

[Ron Bulman]

Strange, for such a surge in users, with no increase in posts by them.

[James R Gordon]

If you click on "All Users" at the bottom of the page. At present i see 4 pages of on-line users. If we cannot deal with that we will close.

[Kirk Gallaway]

James, I'm not clear. So when we did that fund drive a while back. That was only for the JFK forum?

So if we come in and out to the forum, does each time count as a "user".  Or this is the total number of different names who log in?

[Bob Ness]

I suspect sock puppets have been here and have for some time. I wouldn't allow membership to this forum without following the forum rules, including bio information. Several newer posters have no available bio information.

[Stephanie Goldberg]

I have no idea how Invision does their viewer counts these days, but I know that they sometimes used to count 'guests' as active viewers.  At that point, it all had to do with whether or not a forum was public - as in anyone could view the threads - or private - as in topics/threads could only be viewed by registered users.  Back then it was easy to create a spike in forum traffic by posting a forum page address on public media somewhere.  That almost always guaranteed a rise in views from all kind of bot accounts.  It's also possible that there is some kind of malicious bot traffic that is targeting this specific forum and driving up guest views, if indeed the guest views are what are driving Invision's numbers.

I would suspect that viewer traffic may include the entire board of topics of which this forum is only one piece.  I don't know who owns this overall board.   Is there any way to make inactive forums for those other topics invisible?  

Again, I'd ask Invision for a better accounting to explain the drastic jump in cost.  That is a reasonable expectation.

Edited December 6, 2019 by Stephanie Goldberg
Edited because I hit post before I finished my thought.

[David Andrews]

Should we all start signing out when not reading/posting, perhaps for a scheduled test period?

[Cliff Varnell]

So we need 17 people to kick in 20 bucks a month?

We need 16 more.

When the time comes, cough it up y'all....

[James R Gordon]

2 hours ago, Stephanie Goldberg said:

I would suspect that viewer traffic may include the entire board of topics of which this forum is only one piece.  I don't know who owns this overall board.   Is there any way to make inactive forums for those other topics invisible?  

Again, I'd ask Invision for a better accounting to explain the drastic jump in cost.  That is a reasonable expectation.

I absolutely agree. We are being charged as the entire "Education Forum" and not the IFK Assassination Forum. It appears there is increased traffic on these other forums. These other forums are not moderated - though they once were. Therfore visitors need not be formalised members. On these forum guests are allowed. Looking at the pages of full listing the vast majority are guests and many who only appear for a few seconds. I believe any guest who may only appear for a few seconds - and are not on the JFK assassination forum - are listed as a User.

I do not believe we can - nor should we donate to support all the forums on the EF. On the present usage of the EF we would need to raise $4000 per year. If that usage increases so will our subscription. I am fast coming to the opinion that this is an unsustainable situation. I cannot see a way that the membership of the JFK will be able to raise funds for the whole EF.  I feel that when the present sums are spent the EF may come to an end.

[Andrej Stancak]

One solution maybe to stay with Invision as a "JFK Educational Debate" or similar group and decouple from the rest of EF, the large EF would be closed in due time. Invision would setup the new Debate group and move all JFK-related threads and archives to the new interest group before closing down the existing EF. We would continue existing in the same format and under a viable funding regime. We cannot pay for unrelated topics after the fee has been raised so dramatically.