Building a new site

It is good to show your trust and support, HiddenX, but at the same time I think it is good to address issues and questions that may rise. If answered in an open and thorough way general trust and support will benefit from it, they'll increase.

Originally Posted by Taluntain
Naturally, there will always be naysayers and second-guessers with their own view of how it's all just fun and games with no effort required and ideas how they would do it all better, cheaper, more effectively and so on. But that's just part and parcel of being on the internet, where talk is very cheap. In the end you either put some trust into the person who is ultimately responsible for the whole website, or you don't. I've been at this for 23 years now, so I'd like to think that that counts for something.

Not sure how you get to the idea that we think it's all fun and games with no effort. Everything we've been discussing in this thread is an acknowledgement of how that's very much NOT the case. But, I don't think that has much to do with the points we were discussing.

But you have to bear in mind that we don't know you from Adam, and we weren't involved in the decision, so we might want to discuss it. There's a huge amount of positivity around the decision, so I don't think a few skeptical voices are a problem, and IMO are appropriate. It won't be an issue for you, because as you'll probably have discovered before, most people will go along happily enough without rocking the boat. If we bang on too much, they'll start telling us off.

And there are a few reasons to be skeptical, IMO. For example, the matter of what your TOS says, and yet you being a regular participant on the Codex, including that delightful "The Watch is Dead" thread. Not that I care what goes on at the Codex - they're free to play by their own rules, as far as I'm concerned. But it does raise the question of what other policies might be stated but ignored. And when you say that not every word on your site is still relevant, to us that means we can't know what's accurate and what's not.

So, for me, a few things that I find a bit questionable.

Originally Posted by Eye
And how much work, according to your estimation, does the Watch ask compare to the Codex?
And if, at a certain point, donations fall short, what is the chance of it ending up closing down?

It's far too early for me to say as I don't know the full extent of everything involved here, but generally the initial biggest chunk of work will be doing the conversion from vBulletin to XF2 and hopefully to an existing XF2 CMS, along with the site style and entire back-end. How feasible doing all that at once will be remains to be seen and will largely depend on how much Myrthos and possibly Arhu can contribute code-wise to port the back-end and integrate it with XF2. I'm not a coder myself, so we'll need to work together on that.

From my experience with past similar projects, dividing the transition into more manageable chunks/stages would make it much easier vs. attempting to do it all at once, but we'll see. Every little thing takes time and it all adds up.

Donations will likely not be a primary source of revenue to cover the costs any more, so the continued existence of the site will not be dependent solely on them. But naturally, the advertising only goes so far and for any larger expenses that go beyond the regular web hosting fare, I would expect to run occasional separate donation drives as we do on all the other sites. But this is all further down the line, there's a lot of planning to be done before we get to that.

Will this site be ready then to make the transfer from Myrthos to you by the end of July?

I doubt that we could realistically pull off everything that needs to be done in terms of site development by then, as this is not a full time job for any of us. But in the end it doesn't really matter, we can transfer the site as is if need be. The site will still be usable either way as the development is going on, so that's the most important thing.

Originally Posted by Pladio
Certainly does and like most people I believe we appreciate that the Watch will live on, but having 20 years of experience does not mean that things couldn't possibly be done better. I'm one of the people who has donated hundreds of pounds to this forum over the years and one of the sole reasons for me doing so is that I felt there was a strong sense of transparency involved.

If Myrthos had not been transparent about it I would likely have donated much less or none at all.

Obviously you will end up running your website however you want, but be aware that - at least in my opinion - transparency counts for a lot.

Sure, that's fair. I realize that the way I'm doing things is not the same as Myrthos, so I'm being upfront about that. I don't expect anyone to just carry on as previously if they don't think that I'm doing a good job.

Keep in mind though, that taking care of the advertising so that it pays at least a good chunk of the site bills every month then becomes my own responsibility. So whether anyone wants to donate either to disable all the ads, to get various perks, just to say "thanks" or to help with a larger site expense, becomes much more optional and not a condition for the site to stay online.

Like others have said - I'm very happy with the Watch continuing to live on and I have no reasons to doubt you will do a good job. I just wanted to highlight my two cents

Good luck

Originally Posted by Ripper
Not sure how you get to the idea that we think it's all fun and games with no effort. Everything we've been discussing in this thread is an acknowledgement of how that's very much NOT the case. But, I don't think that has much to do with the points we were discussing.

But you have to bear in mind that we don't know you from Adam, and we weren't involved in the decision, so we might want to discuss it. There's a huge amount of positivity around the decision, so I don't think a few skeptical voices are a problem, and IMO are appropriate. It won't be an issue for you, because as you'll probably have discovered before, most people will go along happily enough without rocking the boat. If we bang on too much, they'll start telling us off.

And there are a few reasons to be skeptical, IMO. For example, the matter of what your TOS says, and yet you being a regular participant on the Codex, including that delightful "The Watch is Dead" thread. Not that I care what goes on at the Codex - they're free to play by their own rules, as far as I'm concerned. But it does raise the question of what other policies might be stated but ignored. And when you say that not every word on your site is still relevant, to us that means we can't know what's accurate and what's not.

So, for me, a few things that I find a bit questionable.

I wasn't actually referring to you specifically, Ripper. This happens everywhere.

I don't mind skepticism, but constantly circling back to the Codex when the subject is the future of RPGWatch is pretty pointless. The Codex will have no influence on the developments here, I can promise you that. I'm happy to leave the Codex where it is when I come here, so I hope that everyone else will as well. I don't own or run the Codex, so if you want an actually representative example of a website from me, look at SP instead.

And have no fear, the overwhelming majority of the TOS in question still stands. But I'm not a rules lawyer by heart because I know full well that if someone wants to find an issue even with a long list of rules, they will always be able to do so.

Originally Posted by Taluntain
I don't mind skepticism, but constantly circling back to the Codex when the subject is the future of RPGWatch is pretty pointless. The Codex will have no influence on the developments here, I can promise you that. I'm happy to leave the Codex where it is when I come here, so I hope that everyone else will as well. I don't own or run the Codex, so if you want an actually representative example of a website from me, look at SP instead.

And have no fear, the overwhelming majority of the TOS in question still stands. But I'm not a rules lawyer by heart because I know full well that if someone wants to find an issue even with a long list of rules, they will always be able to do so.

Well, I think you might have missed my point, if you look at what I said. I don't care about the Codex itself at all, I'm perfectly happy for that to do things its own way, and issues around our respective TOS are not my concern. The point of looking at the Codex is simply that it's the major example we have of how you run things, and some questions arise from that, in relation to the other concerns. It's not a matter of circling back to the Codex, out of particular interest in that.

My point is that, the SP TOS states certain rules, and that hosted sites must abide by them, while participating in one hosted site that gleefully disregards them, with no action. And I'm not suggesting you to take any action. This issue is that if that's one of the stated policies of SP, and you clearly disregard it, then perhaps other stated policies are not to be taken seriously, either. You see my point?

Yes, I think the problem is mostly in the difference between the TOS here on RPGWatch vs. SP. On SP, we actually have several sets of "terms" based on where and what they apply to. Everything from the privacy policy, legal disclaimer, hosted site terms, basic forum TOS and the specific forum rules & guidelines. In addition to that, every hosted site has it own sets of rules, terms, a privacy policy and so on.

The hosted site terms were put in place very early on and serve as a set of general guidelines that the hosted sites should adhere to, but they're not "rules" in the sense of forum rules and I'm not policing every thread on every hosted site to make sure that nothing stated in the general terms is being violated. That would be a full time job. In the end the owners of the websites in question are responsible for the content being posted there and to make sure that they don't violate any actual laws (mind, guidelines or terms don't really count). And the US laws are quite a bit more relaxed than the EU ones. I hope that this clears things up a bit.

Originally Posted by Taluntain
(…) In the end the owners of the websites in question are responsible for the content being posted there and to make sure that they don't violate any actual laws (…)

Now your sentence raised a doubt here. After the moving, who'll be RPGWatch's actual owner? You? Myrthos? Anyone else?

I think, like some of the other problems, the issue is in the impression people are clearly being given. I would say that if you read your TOS, it's a damn sight stronger than "guidelines". So, people considering whether they might want their site or community hosted on SP (or muppets like us trying to figure out if we're happy about it) are getting a very misleading message. I would say that your advertised terms and standards, particularly as a host, are significant beyond your obvious freedom to strike whatever deals you like; when I look at whether I want to use a particular host, one of my criteria is that I not be listed next to 8kun.

Originally Posted by henriquejr
Now your sentence raised a doubt here. After the moving, who'll be RPGWatch's actual owner? You? Myrthos? Anyone else?

If you read Myrthos' news post, he explains it:

It has been decided that in July, RPGWatch will move to Sorcerer's Place. This means that the site as you know it, will still be available after July, but hosted by Sorcerer's Place and its owner, Taluntain, will become the new owner of RPGWatch.

So yes, the websites that I actually own are my own responsibility as well.

Originally Posted by Ripper
I think, like some of the other problems, the issue is in the impression people are clearly being given. I would say that if you read your TOS, it's a damn sight stronger than "guidelines". So, people considering whether they might want their site or community hosted on SP (or muppets like us trying to figure out if we're happy about it) are getting a very misleading message. I would say that your advertised terms and standards, particularly as a host, are significant beyond your obvious freedom to strike whatever deals you like; when I look at whether I want to use a particular host, one of my criteria is that I not be listed next to 8kun.

That's a fair remark. The different terms on the site were put together at different times and for different purposes, so they're fairly different in tone and might give a wrong impression. Nobody's really bothered to read them in a very long time so it wasn't something that got updated at any point over the years. Another thing to put on my to-do, I guess.

Let's just see what happens… and not worry so much, lol.

To me, it sounds like a promising new beginning for rpg watch. All the tiny details don't matter that much, if at all…my 2 cents. [I will take note however, that the sorcerer's.net website seems down right now, but maybe they are working on it…]

Originally Posted by Arkadia7
Let's just see what happens… and not worry so much, lol.

Sure, and I'm going to give things a chance. But I do think there are some issues to consider, and I do find some of the responses to be a bit hand-wavy, and who-would-care-about-that-anyway.

I'm just trying to figure out what I think of this bloke.

I have known Taluntain for a long time, but only online. Never met him, never talked to him, don't know what he looks like. We have a good relation based on our respective needs. More than a year might have passed in the last decades that we were not in touch, so it is not like we chat a lot.
He is not a friend, he is someone I know online. Our mutual relationship is based on respect. I respect him and am convinced that based on that and what I know about him, this is a viable path to keep RPGWatch alive. He has been realistic to me in what he can and cannot do with RPGWatch, which is something I value.
RPGWatch was, from a technical perspective, managed by Arhu and me. Taluntain depends on other people to do some of the technical work. These people do not work free of charge. As a result there have been donation campaigns in the past to pay those bills. Which makes it also simple, if there isn't sufficient drive from the community for a change, why bother with it.

It is fine to be skeptical though. This is a change and perhaps for some it isn't going to be a change for the better. Without mentioning the things that bother you, nobody is aware of them and there is no reason to think about changing something.

Nod, one thing I learned some decades ago is never purchase trouble in advance. Assume the best, plan for the worse, and let things fall out as they may. Be calm, have courage, watch for signs.

With all that said, I'm hoping for the very best to continue!