Limited Access

[Robin]

Our IT guy, Yassine sent me this note:
"Hi, I managed to keep the executions per hour between 50 and 75% from the allowed amount.(during the night it's pretty low like 20~30%)
But the total executions per 24h, are still high, and sometimes they reach 100% to 120%"

So, Yassine offered me two options, upgrade with our hosting company (I just renewed the 1 year commitment with Siteground, our hosting company in Feb.) or limit access to non members till next Feb when we can make some changes then with a new host company that better fits our needs.

The new policy is that the entire site will be limited to logged in members, guests will be limited to these areas. This should take place shortly.
New registrations policy
News
Small scale site related retailers
Media Room

General Discussion
Let's Get Together

Gear

 

[memaquay]

Does that mean that nobody else would be able to join, or would it just limit non-members to browsing certain areas? Is it time for more money, cause I could send some.

 

[memaquay]

Just had a look at who's online. 14 users and 67 guests. Are all these guests legit, or are some of them spambots? Sure seems like a lot of guests.

 

[Odyssey]

I think it means that nonmembers (lurkers) are welcome to access (read) the areas listed by Robin above. Other areas would be only available to members. Of course non members would be welcome to join. I guess the traffic approaches the limit allowed by our current host arrangement.
That's how I'm understanding it anyway. I'm okay with this for the time being. When the time comes for renewal perhaps this situation can be revisited?

 

[Robin]

You are correct Odyssey,
"I think it means that nonmembers (lurkers) are welcome to access (read) the areas listed by Robin above. Other areas would be only available to members. Of course non members would be welcome to join. I guess the traffic approaches the limit allowed by our current host arrangement."

I'm not sure who are real guests and who are spam bots, I'll ask Yassine.
Anybody can still join, and there is plenty of $$ left from the last fund raiser, no need for any more. I'm just trying to be cautious with other peoples money and taking Y's advise.
​

 

[shanks]

I check out the site all the time without signing in...I'm sure a handful of the "guests" are lazy members like me.

 

[Glenn MacGrady]

I don't understand this, mainly what "executions per hour" are. Nor did I understand Robin's prior post about "usage quota" as it relates somehow to an old freestyle thread. Maybe I don't need to know or even want to know, but now I'm slightly curious.

What I think I understand is that limiting non-member lurkers to certain site areas will reduce "executions per hour", but if all the lurkers register as members we would have the same executions per hour issue. Since most members don't post but just lurk, what's the difference if non-posters are members or non-members? What I have in mind is that forcing all lurkers to become members just to read the entire site might have two dubious results:

1. All or most lurkers register as members but still don't post, and we have the same executions per hour issue.

2. The new policy just drives lurkers away so that they never become members, but we do have fewer executions per hour.

Maybe this technical stuff relates in some sense to what the site should be and how much, if at all, it should grow. Robin can make decisions about this as administrator, and we each can make our own decisions by how much we participate and what topics we participate in.

I'm not sure I understand what I just wrote.

 

[B.Yassine]

I don't understand this, mainly what "executions per hour" are. Nor did I understand Robin's prior post about "usage quota" as it relates somehow to an old freestyle thread. Maybe I don't need to know or even want to know, but now I'm slightly curious.

What I think I understand is that limiting non-member lurkers to certain site areas will reduce "executions per hour", but if all the lurkers register as members we would have the same executions per hour issue. Since most members don't post but just lurk, what's the difference if non-posters are members or non-members? What I have in mind is that forcing all lurkers to become members just to read the entire site might have two dubious results:

1. All or most lurkers register as members but still don't post, and we have the same executions per hour issue.

2. The new policy just drives lurkers away so that they never become members, but we do have fewer executions per hour.

Maybe this technical stuff relates in some sense to what the site should be and how much, if at all, it should grow. Robin can make decisions about this as administrator, and we each can make our own decisions by how much we participate and what topics we participate in.

I'm not sure I understand what I just wrote.

Hi,
This host has a special limitation (not used in all hosts), it's the "Allowed executions". It's like a number of file executions you don't have to exceed.
The thing is doing this, it's not for limit access to people that are interested with the content of the forum, but for the people who aren't + the bots
In other words, if you're registered, you're legit. If you're legit, you can visit/post content all day, and it won't be a problem. If you're not legit (bots), instead of having like a member visits 5~10pages/minute, we can have a bot making 80~100 pages/minute (there are solutions for spam registration, but not for spam visits)

And it's not like visitors won't have access to anything, but the trip reports, site news and that stuff, but "General discussions" and "Gear" .. will still be accessible.

 

[Robin]

Thanks Yassine, that's pretty clear and makes sense.

When someone registers here, I send them 3 questions to confirm that they are really a person and are really interested in canoes. Everyone has been very receptive to these questions and I thank them. A few never answer but who knows for what reason.
This has stopped hackers and spam so far and I plan to continue to use this method for the foreseeable future.

It is somewhat frustrating to go thru this vetting and to the have the new member never log in again. It's about 30-40% now of folks who never log in again.

I understand that lurkers who don't join will loose interest if they can't read all the threads as non members, but to join has no cost but a few minutes of their time. They can even keep their on line status invisible if they want. I'm not buying more usage quota with donated funds to provide spammers easy access, so lurkers will have to easily join or have limited access.

My feeling is, if folks now have to join and log in (the "remember me" function now works well) to see the forums content, they might be inclined to join in the discussion.
I would much rather have 700-1000 members with 300-400 active, that's my goal right now. It's all about the active members who add to the discussion and keep the site fresh and lively.

 

[paddlindan]

For whatever this is worth: I visit this site daily to see what threads have been updated. I often browse the new posts, especially if I have kept up-to-date with the topics or if they are of interest to me. I doubt it is more than 1-2/minute. I don't always log in and do not stay logged in because I often exit my browser and/or shut my computer off. I was therefore surprised today when I visited and couldn't see all of the various sub-forums.

But, after reading this thread and partially understanding the rationale, it seems reasonable to me to limit non-member access to less than the entire site. If I have to log in more frequently, that isn't a problem, I can certainly do that.

I joined last September, but have only posted a handful of times. I am certainly interested in canoeing and canoe tripping. But, I've also learned that when I don't have much to say, it's better to remain silent...

Robin, thanks again for your management of this site. By the way, did you ever buy that Mad River Freedom?

dan

 

[sweeper]

I was also wondering about the 'execution numbers' thanks for clearing that up and it sounds like a great plan to combat the bots.

 

[Robin]

Robin, thanks again for your management of this site. By the way, did you ever buy that Mad River Freedom?

dan

Yes I did. My daughter found it for me in Maine. The aluminium gunnels are in badly bent so I'll install new ash gunnels and it needs skid plates.

 

[red langford]

This a great site. I gladly donated to it and will again if I'm able to when the time comes up again. You just keep doing exactly what your doing and whatever you need from me (us) just ask. May the wind be forever at your back.

 

[Glenn MacGrady]

I never knew that spammers and bots were so frequent and took up so much computer capacity. They're probably all kayakers.

 

[Mars]

How does one donate to help find the site?

 

[Robin]

There was a fund raiser last November and it was very successful. No need for any donations now but most appreciated.
Thanks

 

[Mars]

There was a fund raiser last November and it was very successful. No need for any donations now but most appreciated.
Thanks

Ok. Thank you for what you've done this far. I'm new here but have found this a very squared away forum and very much along my style.