Open Discussion Ive figured out how to fix the slowness problem

TALLY 2.0

TALLY 2.0

Bluelighter
Joined
Sep 1, 2010
Messages
10,018
Location
Life aint nothin but bitches and money...and I don
Everyone knows how we have had problems with slowness here on bluelight lately. Well, I think I may have thought of something that might alleviate some of the traffic that is causing blueight to run so slowly.

Members Only Browsing

Every time I look down at the bottom of the screen there are numerous people who arent signed in/arent members who are browsing bluelight and taking up a lot of bandwith. For instance, there are 41 people in the lounge and ONLY 13 of them are members. I say that you should only be allowed to view bluelight if you are a member and you are signed in. That woud take away 28 people who arent even members out of the situation and would take back the bandwith they are sucking dry from the real members of this website. I mean, this will dramatically reduce the the number of people on the site at once by atleast half. Therefore, the less amount of people, then speeds will go up and it wont take forever for the page to load on saturday afternoon.

What do you guys think?
 
I don't think it would work for several reasons:

- People often find this site via google when looking for an answer to specific questions, and this would prevent BL from being a resource to anyone who wasn't previously familiar with it.
- Many people lurk for a while before becoming members, so by making it members only people wouldn't see how awesome BL is and sign up and become a member.
- Turning BL into a members only community won't spread the message of harm reduction and will just turn it into a private board.

I'm sure there's even more reasons, and other BLers will jump in with them, that's just what first came to mind when I read the post.
 
purple_cloud said:
I don't think it would work for several reasons:

- People often find this site via google when looking for an answer to specific questions, and this would prevent BL from being a resource to anyone who wasn't previously familiar with it.
- Many people lurk for a while before becoming members, so by making it members only people wouldn't see how awesome BL is and sign up and become a member.
- Turning BL into a members only community won't spread the message of harm reduction and will just turn it into a private board.

I'm sure there's even more reasons, and other BLers will jump in with them, that's just what first came to mind when I read the post.
Click to expand...

Yeah, your first point is good, but as for the 2nd, I dont think the people who are actually members should suffer just because of a bunch of non members want to lurk and not sign up. Thats bullshit. I think the actual members of the site should be priority over the people who dont even have the courtesy to become a member. Plus, they can still lurk after they sign up.

As for your 3rd point, it would not be turned into a private board. Anyone can still sign up, they just have to make an account.
 
Along with what purple_cloud said,OD is often 200-300 lurkers to 20-30 signed in members. I assume a great many OD lurkers are inexperienced folks getting valuable tips on not dying or hurting themselves. Lurkers in the drug discussion and focus areas are mission critical. Its mostly for increasing recreation drug knowledge and safe practices that most of us are here. I can not picture blocking or even throttling access to non-members as working well given the ideal of spreading HR.
 
Enki said:
Along with what purple_cloud said,OD is often 200-300 lurkers to 20-30 signed in members. I assume a great many OD lurkers are inexperienced folks getting valuable tips on not dying or hurting themselves. Lurkers in the drug discussion and focus areas are mission critical. Its mostly for increasing recreation drug knowledge and safe practices that most of us are here. I can not picture blocking or even throttling access to non-members as working well given the ideal of spreading HR.
Click to expand...

I just dont understand why you all would choose to focus on helping people who arent even members of the site over people who actually spend time on the board. 300 lurkers is bullshit. They should sign up. I mean its not that hard to do.
 
If they sign up they would actually be a bigger strain on the server. Members can access the search function and other resource intensive features that non-signed folks can not. I don't have the complete details on this but a logged-in member is larger over all user of resources than a web user.
 
look theres a way to fix this make a time out session thing for the non members that are lurking, like give them a 10 min timer and then give them the option to sign up. that way people can go google ask ther question most likly find it, thus causing harm reduction and ellimanating the problem of lurking people making bl slow.
 
There are actually more queries for a member than a guest so that would probably make things worse tbh.

Also the whole point in browsing as a guest is that you can remain (almost) anonymous to everyone else (including admins and mods).

Whereas as soon as you sign up you're no longer able to do that.
 
RandomGuy123 said:
Oh noez, they have to remember their login!
Click to expand...

Having to log in isnt the problem, its having to stay logged in. I know I've been logged out while browsing before, and every now and then, for whatever reason, the system wont want to keep you logged in unless to check the "remember me" box, which not everyone wants to do, so having to re-log in just to browse every time you get logged off would really become annoying.
 
^ The logging out is automatic (after 10 minutes or so of no activity) if you don't check the "remember me" button. At least it is for me.
 
^Correct, would you want to have to re-log in every 10 minutes? I wouldnt. (I think its 15, actually, but same idea)
 
Is there a way to allow non-members to only view a no-frills stripped down version of Bluelight to take up less bandwidth? Basically just threads in plain text?
 
^ they could view the archived version, thats not such a bad idea actually IMO. It'd need to be modified slightly though.
 
That's what I was thinking of. I know that I've googled stuff before and been brought to some type of old BBS looking bluelight threads. I'm guessing that's the archived version?
 
Cool. That seems like it would solve both problems; it allows lurkers to get important information they need and it (I'm guessing) uses much less bandwidth.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top