When do we discuss the elephant in the room?

[GrumpyOne]

I know GoDaddy didn't used to have an amazing reputation around 2003-04 but I think things have turned around as I haven't heard anything too bad over the last few years. Having said that, I haven't heard anything bad about Dreamhost either. Just having a quick glance at the specs, it looks like GoDaddy offer slightly more memory for that $30 mark.

Battye, changing hosts will not solve the problem.

You can't expect to run phpBB3 with this amount of users and posts on a $30 per month shared hosting account.

I run a forum of a similar size and found shared hosts and VPS had problems. Running 2 forums one 1 dedicated server slowed both websites down and caused similar problems. I had to move the forum onto its own dedicated server.

At the end of the day, you get what you pay for and $30 pm will not get you far. Consider a dedicated server.

BTW, I have used Dreamhost and had nothing but problems - then again, maybe it was just a dud VPS. There tech support was below average.

I hope somebody reads this.

[saint66au]

I know GoDaddy didn't used to have an amazing reputation around 2003-04 but I think things have turned around as I haven't heard anything too bad over the last few years. Having said that, I haven't heard anything bad about Dreamhost either. Just having a quick glance at the specs, it looks like GoDaddy offer slightly more memory for that $30 mark.

Battye, changing hosts will not solve the problem.

You can't expect to run phpBB3 with this amount of users and posts on a $30 per month shared hosting account.

I run a forum of a similar size and found shared hosts and VPS had problems. Running 2 forums one 1 dedicated server slowed both websites down and caused similar problems. I had to move the forum onto its own dedicated server.

At the end of the day, you get what you pay for and $30 pm will not get you far. Consider a dedicated server.

BTW, I have used Dreamhost and had nothing but problems - then again, maybe it was just a dud VPS. There tech support was below average.

There we go...exactly what I was going to post

98% of the people on this Forum know nothing about the technicalities of website hosting..so why should they have sort of democratic say in who the admin chooses.

If people are so paranoid about Battye having a lone hand in choosing the replacement (and I for one would totally trust his judgement and have no time for anyone who has criticized him for any aspect of his volunteer work here) ..why not get 2-3 extra people who actually have expertise in this field (like the poster above seems to have), hook em up by any one of the 100 different ways the Internet now allows us to...and they can discuss the options and work out the best solution

[matrix]

lets just find out the price of the best friggin avl

[Enrico_Misso]

If upgrading to a more reliable system involved a greater cost then why not ask for a voluntary levy - I would be glad to chip in.

[battye]

I know GoDaddy didn't used to have an amazing reputation around 2003-04 but I think things have turned around as I haven't heard anything too bad over the last few years. Having said that, I haven't heard anything bad about Dreamhost either. Just having a quick glance at the specs, it looks like GoDaddy offer slightly more memory for that $30 mark.

Battye, changing hosts will not solve the problem.

You can't expect to run phpBB3 with this amount of users and posts on a $30 per month shared hosting account.

I run a forum of a similar size and found shared hosts and VPS had problems. Running 2 forums one 1 dedicated server slowed both websites down and caused similar problems. I had to move the forum onto its own dedicated server.

At the end of the day, you get what you pay for and $30 pm will not get you far. Consider a dedicated server.

BTW, I have used Dreamhost and had nothing but problems - then again, maybe it was just a dud VPS. There tech support was below average.

Thanks SaintAndrew, you've raised some valid points.

Changing hosts will solve some of the problems. Month long down time and suspensions for artificially created problems are not par for the course. That was the incompetence of this current host, pure and simple.

The post count is not an issue as long as the database is not restricted on size. Only the concurrent users could pose a problem. The $30/month package I was looking at on GoDaddy wasn't a standard shared package, it was a VPS. As we won't have unlimited funds to play around with, I would much prefer to start off with a lower priced VPS and move up to a dedicated server if the need arises. Otherwise we could be paying double what we need to when in actual fact a VPS might be sufficient.

This is nothing against your experience SaintAndrew, but I think this shows why it's virtually impossible to collectively come to an agreement with regards to selecting a webhost. Someone else recommends Dreamhost, you say you've had bad experiences. I say I've had a good experience with GoDaddy, someone else says otherwise, etc. There's no way a consensus will be reached when most people will have varying experiences and it becomes even more difficult when people who have no experience with webhosting also want to be a part of the decision making process. Whatever choice is made, the best interests of the site will be the focus.

[SaintAndrew]

Thanks for your update Battye.

Makes sense, upgrading your VPS as you need it and as the site grows.

I fully agree with you regarding choosing a webhost service. It's not easy.

As a long time lurker, I love this site and would like to help out anyway I can to keep it alive. If I can help out in any way, please contact me off the forum.

[stinger]

I know GoDaddy didn't used to have an amazing reputation around 2003-04 but I think things have turned around as I haven't heard anything too bad over the last few years. Having said that, I haven't heard anything bad about Dreamhost either. Just having a quick glance at the specs, it looks like GoDaddy offer slightly more memory for that $30 mark.

Battye, changing hosts will not solve the problem.

You can't expect to run phpBB3 with this amount of users and posts on a $30 per month shared hosting account.

I run a forum of a similar size and found shared hosts and VPS had problems. Running 2 forums one 1 dedicated server slowed both websites down and caused similar problems. I had to move the forum onto its own dedicated server.

At the end of the day, you get what you pay for and $30 pm will not get you far. Consider a dedicated server.

BTW, I have used Dreamhost and had nothing but problems - then again, maybe it was just a dud VPS. There tech support was below average.

There we go...exactly what I was going to post

98% of the people on this Forum know nothing about the technicalities of website hosting..so why should they have sort of democratic say in who the admin chooses.

If people are so paranoid about Battye having a lone hand in choosing the replacement (and I for one would totally trust his judgement and have no time for anyone who has criticized him for any aspect of his volunteer work here)

good upon you....

[asiu]

Peace be with you (shark)

[GrumpyOne]

$360 per year ($30pm) is chicken feed compared to what we could raise amongst us. Why go for the cheap solution?

State outright that we are going for a better solution as plan A and see if enough people are prepared to chip in.

The $30pm plan could them be plan B.

[Richter]

$360 per year ($30pm) is chicken feed compared to what we could raise amongst us. Why go for the cheap solution?

State outright that we are going for a better solution as plan A and see if enough people are prepared to chip in.

The $30pm plan could them be plan B.

+1



EDIT: sorry didn't see the other thread - I will contribute there!

[joffaboy]

$360 per year ($30pm) is chicken feed compared to what we could raise amongst us. Why go for the cheap solution?

State outright that we are going for a better solution as plan A and see if enough people are prepared to chip in.

The $30pm plan could them be plan B.

+1



EDIT: sorry didn't see the other thread - I will contribute there!

As i said it is a privilege to post here not a right.

We need a BF type of payment for membershiip of $10-15 per year. Gives you extra bandwidth, rights to an avatar, more PM and email etc.

Others can still use the site but it will be slower and not as many extras.

I think we would get 100 users a year at least to pay $15 p.a.

[stinger]

Peace be with you (shark)

and with you....

[Dr Spaceman]

I think we would get 100 users a year at least to pay $15 p.a.

I'd be up for that.

However if we're putting those dollars in we should at least get a coloured cap to wear so people can tell how important we are

[clarky449]

I think we would get 100 users a year at least to pay $15 p.a.

I'd be up for that.

However if we're putting those dollars in we should at least get a coloured cap to wear so people can tell how important we are

Purple would fit in at games, wouldnt it?

[matrix]

+1 for what grumps said and what the Dr said

[sunsaint]

As i said it is a privilege to post here not a right.

We need a BF type of payment for membershiip of $10-15 per year. Gives you extra bandwidth, rights to an avatar, more PM and email etc.

Others can still use the site but it will be slower and not as many extras.

I think we would get 100 users a year at least to pay $15 p.a.

really really disagree, this atttitude is one of my main gripes about the direction of SS in the past. A few posters seem to think this is their own sandpit. Smacks of elitism doesnt it joffa?
We have been down the path of donations, so what, you get 100 to donate $15, will you then restrict non payers from posting???

If the user database and hits have grown to become the number one saints site, then its time to get a little more professional
Advertising revenue is the way to go, oh & ban animated avatars
(to reduce bandwidth costs)

[matrix]

oh & ban animated avatars
(to reduce bandwidth costs)

absolute shocking decision

[asiu]

best part of some peoples contributions.

.... where's that giraffe

[therabbitinthehat]

oh & ban animated avatars
(to reduce bandwidth costs)

you realise that the avatars are not hosted by the site so don't use bandwidth right?

as for raising $$ to pay for the site maintenance, a similar system to big footy might be useful - advertising around the site which gets removed if you donate. That way those that wish to donate can and then not have to see the advertising, and those that don't want to donate are still contributing but just have to put up with a few ads here and there.

It also means people can actually see who has donated to the site as that would be a new userclass.

[bergsone]

First one to admit I dont understand how this all works ,turn on computer,log onto saintsational all good,sometimes
Willing to make a contribuation to keep it up and running,even if I have to read some of the drivel on here

Just a thought could it be included in the payment we make for players sponsorship?

[saintbrat]

Just a thought could it be included in the payment we make for players sponsorship?

except I'm pretty sure MM has been carrying atleast a few $$ for that over recen yearst

[sunsaint]

oh & ban animated avatars
(to reduce bandwidth costs)

you realise that the avatars are not hosted by the site so don't use bandwidth right?

as for raising $$ to pay for the site maintenance, a similar system to big footy might be useful - advertising around the site which gets removed if you donate. That way those that wish to donate can and then not have to see the advertising, and those that don't want to donate are still contributing but just have to put up with a few ads here and there.

It also means people can actually see who has donated to the site as that would be a new userclass.

yeah I do know about the off site link, but its just that if you are going to add the advertising banners, which are pretty heavy in data transfer, I think it compounds the issue for a growing number of mobile users
PS matrix sorry i turn off animated gifs anyway, so all your hard work is for naught

[saintspremiers]

I hate to agree with JB but do on this.

[asiu]

What did he say ?
I'm practicing with the beta version of the new ignore function.

[therabbitinthehat]

I think it compounds the issue for a growing number of mobile users

the newest versions of phpbb have a built in template for mobile browsers, so it shouldn't be an issue to only have text/link advertising rather than image advertising on that template