Member Sites  ::  JOIN  ::  Forum  ::  Info  ::  Next Ring  
The Stage - Welcome to the place where you can post for the world to share.    

  Forums     Login   Signup



The Stage

Manager: webring
This is an open discussion forum for users to discuss WebRing features, wishes, thoughts, etc. QUESTIONS about and PROBLEMS with the System should be posted in detail using the support forums in Help. Negative, derogatory or personal comments will be deleted. Sadly, due to spamming and anonymous trashing of other users we have had to restrict posting to signed in members.
 

Sponsored Links

A few permanent posts to illustrate the feature
Re (3403): Nav bar NEXT goes to hub page.
  Thanks. Knocking the cookie security down from medium to low in the interne

Re (3401): Nav bar NEXT goes to hub page.
  Two possible reasons: 1. you're site is not asctive in the ring currently

can't upload logos?
  Is there a problem with logo uploading? When is the best time to upload?
read...

Forum Posts - Start a new discussion! Posts 1 - 6 of 6
All Threads |   All Posts   ]

The Good, The Bad, and the Ugly... - 10/22/2006
The GOOD: The number of "members*" climbed over 2000 last week. The number of Level 1 memberships climbed by 29, and the Level 2 memberships climbed by 23.

The BAD: The number of members managing rings dropped by 19. The number of rings that were deleted appears to continue to rise substantially (based on forum posts). Members can no longer pull up the stats for the user "deleted" so no definitive data is available.

The Ugly: The total number of Rings (both actual and active) have hit their lowest numbers since 2001. Since deleted rings appear to automatically get restored the next day, that would not appear to factor into the drop.

*Did the growth in the number of members reflect people creating additional accounts to circumvent the "free" membership limits?

I am sure WebRing is watching these numbers, and hope that these numbers are in-line with their expectations. My impression is that since the bulk of members may not have yet seen an impact from the system changes, these numbers will be affected dramatically when that occurs.

Lets hope for the best.

---yardville




Replied - 10/23/2006
The number of Level 1 memberships climbed by 29, and the Level 2 memberships climbed by 23.


I think you will find these Level 1 and Level 2 memberships go into decline after Janauary. Some of us only want them to assist with determining what rings are worth hanging onto. Its like paying a fee for the garbage collectors to come and take away the trash.




Replied - 10/23/2006
"The Ugly: The total number of Rings (both actual and active) have hit their lowest numbers since 2001. Since deleted rings appear to automatically get restored the next day, that would not appear to factor into the drop."

This isn't always a bad thing. Kind of depends on the topic. For an example I'll take a topic I have a ring in - soapmaking.
Right now there's 32 rings there. Most deliver little or no traffic to their members sites. They're all just basically duplicates of each other, except for the one with a uniqueness of 100.

Back in 1999 there was one or two. Those rings got over 10,000 hits in and 8 week period. Nowhere near that now, or at anytime since multiply rings were added.

For awhile I belonged to a thing named "Zeal" It was eventually bought by one of the search engines, then destroyed after all the sites had been added to the search engine. But anyway, it's original format for the same category of soapmaking was:
List 1)Sites selling handmade soap.
List 2)Sites selling soapmaking supplies.
List 3)Sites that were instructions, libraries, forums, groups, etc.

I knew when I was looking for supplies where to go. I didn't have to search thru 140 sites offering handmade soap to find the suppliers. It had more value to me than a search engine because I got only what I was looking for, not a list of other search engines or useless pages.

I guess in some categories more isn't better...it's just more.




Replied - 10/23/2006
This isn't always a bad thing. Kind of depends on the topic. For an example I'll take a topic I have a ring in - soapmaking.
Right now there's 32 rings there. Most deliver little or no traffic to their members sites. They're all just basically duplicates of each other, except for the one with a uniqueness of 100.

Back in 1999 there was one or two. Those rings got over 10,000 hits in and 8 week period. Nowhere near that now, or at anytime since multiply rings were added.


Exactly, which is why there is a dire and desperate need for a purge of the system. Hardly any of these duplicates would have been created in the first place if common sense had been applied when SSNB navigation was introduced.




Replied - 10/23/2006
So the rest of us sensible ringmasters have to suffer at the lack of everyone else's common sense. Oh well.

A similar thing happened over at Livejournal... in the past, you were required to use an invitation code to create a new account. When they did away with the code system, people started creating accounts right and left and now the system is full of duplication, clutter, and squatted usernames.

A purge of obvious spam rings, or 0 member rings and instating any sort of invitation system to ensure that only people with genuine interest create new rings in the future would have been a much more favorable option, IMO.




Replied - 10/23/2006
Purging is good then? I agree! And yet, on Saturday, when (after notifying ALL members of my intentions 3 weeks ago) I began to purge my rings, Webring immediately jumped in and removed all my rings from me.

I was accused of 'adopting rings just to delete them in protest' and told that I 'should have notified them (webring) of my intentions' (?). All but 1 of my 17 rings was adopted, starting in 2002! How is that 'protesting'? I thought I was SUPPOSED to clean up my rings? Was I supposed to put them ALL up for re-adoption?

In the ring description, I noted that the ring was Adopted in 200X and would be closed in 2006. Apparently this was not the right thing to do and it has cost me ALL my rings (even my memberships). I had signed up for Level 2, and was intending to move down to FREE at some point. I had even added some affiliate links to my site.

I really don't know what I've done wrong, and I would love for someone from Webring to explain it here. I don't want my rings back, but I would like a rational explanation. Please.

Ms_C



All Threads |   All Posts   ]





Contact Us | Copyright © 2001-2016 WebRing®, Inc. Terms of Service - Help - Privacy Policy