Replies to post #20678 on The Question and Answer Board (IHUB)

[Churak]

Very well said, MATT. Why mess with what works? I am all for change...however, if it ain't broke...don't fix it.

[marcos]

On principle i voted no to censored pump-boards, and to whether they would succeed or fail i voted no answer, because i believe the principle to be the overwhelming factor in this case, and not to be disregarded in any way ever .... but, between you and me, i doubt that such a board would attract near the interest as would a free-speech board where all views were represented

Such a board as is proposed must have, if some hypothetically demented management were ever so short-sighted as to establish it, some reasonable disclaimer presented, at the top of each post and prominently in bolded caps .... may i suggest the following -

EVERY SINGLE WORD YOU THE VIEWER SEE HERE IS DESIGNED FOR THE EXPRESS PURPOSE OF PARTING YOU THE VIEWER FROM YOUR HARD-EARNED CASH IN EXCHANGE FOR SOME XXXX.BB PAPER WE'D LIKE TO GET OFF HIGHER

... ever notice how all this absurdity comes up on bulletin board and pink sheet productions? .... hmmm .... one sincerely hopes that individuals among these herds are eventually discovering exchange-traded securities, lord knows there's ample risk in them too, just not so many looking to stifle debate

[Bob Zumbrunnen]

I'm usually pretty secretive about anything remotely resembling our financials, but...

Bottomline is that it does not come down to the clicks.

Amen to that!

Advertising was less than 25% of our revenue last year and I'm expecting it to be substantially less than that this year. It's not that "that's all we were able to make on ads". Our business plan does not call for a strong reliance on advertising. Currently, subscriptions is intended to be (and is fulfilling our expectations) our main revenue stream. I have two other revenue streams slated to roll out in the first half of this year. Big ones. They'll help to reduce the role advertising plays here.

I agree wholeheartedly with you that when anyone says we're trying to let a bunch of dramas play out on the boards so we'll get more traffic and more advertising dollars because of the traffic, they don't know the first thing about internet businesses and what advertising is really worth to a site as a revenue stream.

Money is in subscribers. And they are simply rare among the one-stock BB posters.

Interesting hypothesis. I ran a query a little while ago to satisfy my curiosity on a similar point. Lemme go find it and run it on a few boards.

EDIG: 1.8% of boardmarks are placed by subscribers.
IDCC: 22.8% of boardmarks are placed by subscribers.
Zeev's: 22.9% of boardmarks are placed by subscribers.

I'd say you're probably right.

[sunpoop]

Matt, I cannot pass on your related message....I understand a board such as IHUB should be open to HONEST discussion. There SHOULD be pro's and con's posted to provide the members, who choose to belong, a broad incite into the topic in which they are interested, in this case EDig..

However, I do believe that you feel "backed into a corner" on the subject of openness. It's a nice theory, "letting everyone have their say", much as its a nice theory to "target little old ladies in wheelchairs" at the security gate when boarding an airplane while letting "young middle eastern gentlemen" pass on through with no check by guards because we must NOT discriminate, or profile them unfairly...

Sounds good but sooner or later it will sow the seeds of destruction.

Honest discussion, YES, but that is where your theory falls apart. The posters you so fervently maintain do nothing but provide us with another, contrary, view are NOT HONEST. They have an agenda and in reading material you have posted I do not understand how an intelligent person as yourself cannot understand that.

It is painfully obvious that this agenda is not directed at informing the rest of us facts we have no knowledge. Lies, half truths, aliases are their stock in trade (why would a poster you so eagerly protect use multiple aliases if not to obfuscate their true purpose in the use of IHUB) What in the h e l l does one have to hide to resort to that kind of behavior?

Multiple posts, often into the hundreds, with the same message but above all the same tenor and tone to their statements all devoted to the destruction of EDig.

AND YOU DEFEND THAT AS NECESSARY?

For what? In my mind the road you walk down is very dangerous if your desire is to maintain IHUB as viable. I have been saying for months that I see the same signs at IHUB that were so prevelant on RB before it turned into what it did.

I am retired. I have lived a good life with one Golden Rule that I have followed that has kept me safe and sound, that being "DON'T SHOOT YOURSELF IN THE FOOT"

Matt, you keep going this way and you will be "walking on crutches".

Frank