Board discussion and feedback

[Anonymous Coward]

A very practical question before we get ahead of ourselves adding people:

What's a healthy rate of additions? 

Even if they're all the right people, I still imagine that it can't be unlimited. This site has costs, and with more traffic, I imagine its costs (and the probability of crashes?) would rise. 

What's the Goldilocks number?

[FearlessF]

I obviously enjoy this board and the people here.

I'd like to see more numbers of folks like the group here to create more traffic to entertain me, but I'm also fine with a small group.

But, if growing the group is important, I'm all for that.  I can handle some goofballs.  I even got along just fine with Crunch.

I try to bring this place up to old friends from past boards in an attempt to get them to join us here.  Becasue they were all good people.

The Sharkwater party is next weekend, I'll try to remember to invite others.

[Drew4UTk]

according to the results of my testing and the manner the server has it's FPM configured, 100 people can post at the precise same microsecond and the site won't buckle.  this isn't 100 people present at the same time, this is 100 people hitting 'post' or some other action, maybe navigating to another page or thread, at the precise same moment.  there can be thousands on the page at the same time- hell there can be tens of thousands.... 

the server is set with 16 2.3mhz processors on 32GB of RAM, and 1TB of storage space on a SSD drive.  i also run a cache script that takes massive work off the DB, making it less likely to stumble.  then, sitting in wait are other servers that will come online when (if) the site 'flares' with traffic, and shrinks back when it doesn't need it.  

we're pretty damn stable.  

last year you guys may recall long pauses after hitting post... that was a result of bugs... those bugs are largely if not all gone now, and the error log usually only has contents when someone mistypes their password, or the security apps decide to challenge you a little more (a way to keep robots from figuring out your passwords).  

......................... all of this said........................

more traffic is and would be nice... more exposure to the limited adverts i've put on this place will certainly allow it to pay for itself in whole instead of in part...... but i would hate to see a shift from quality to quantity.  good folks? hell yeah.... chest beating mouth breathers?  not so much...... 

[MrNubbz]

one of the things that kept me at Scout after I first discovered it was the 'conference' boards as opposed to 'team' boards.  it makes a person present things and consider things more objectively than the confined 'group think' of team boards.

Team Boards degenerate into polluted,slanderous views of reality and open,honest discourse.I'll stop by for program information but don't usually stick around for unsolicited opinions

[ELA]

Team Boards degenerate into polluted,slanderous views of reality and open,honest discourse.I'll stop by for program information but don't usually stick around for unsolicited opinions

Agreed.  They turn into cesspools of anti-homer conspiracies and convincing each other that all of their rivals are cheating.  The pre-Twitter days were a good source of some insider info, but now, they aren't even really good for that, at least the publicly accessible ones.
We claim the rationality of our board, but I think a part of that is the other fan bases are here to keep collective mentalities from snowballing like they do on the team boards.

[NorthernOhioBuckeye]

I know I don't post here often but I do try to read it most days. I want to thank Drew, ELA, 847 and all others for this board. It is far and away, the best college football community that I've ever had the pleasure of being around. And I agree that quantity does not always equal quality. But I will shake to trees to see if some of my college football friends (reasonable ones of course) would be interested in taking a peek at this board. 

[MrNubbz]

Agreed.  They turn into cesspools of anti-homer conspiracies and convincing each other that all of their rivals are cheating.  

Right out MP's Holy Grail "she's a witch"

[huskerdinie]

I agree with pretty much everyone's take on this board.  It is definitely one of the most civil boards I have ever seen.  I like it being a conference board rather than the more homer-centric team boards I have been a part of. Most days I get so overloaded with the political bs, social media sniping, and just general nastiness that it is a relief to come here and read some very polite discourse.  I love my team (even this year when we suck) but have no problem with acknowledging the good in our opponents, and while I am by no means an expert on any of the X's and O's, it's still fun to see how knowledgeable everyone else is~!  At least here, if I make a stupid / uninformed comment, the corrections are politely given, lol.  

So, I say good job all!  

[OrangeAfroMan]

I probably ran a lot of people off from the SEC board, and may be the reason some don’t return.  But I found it to be a lazy-thinking good-ole-boys forum.  I challenged their assumptions and brought analysis to the board while insisting they do as well.  Maybe that wasn’t helpful.


I do enjoy the back-and-Forth some May view as untoward squabbling.  But I find those to be productive (if not painful) steps in the right direction.  I’m certainly guilty of having a thin skin here, but again, I consider the name-calling lazy - taking the place of real, valid opinion.


You’ve all been patient in accommodating me here as the SEC board has dissipated.  I hope I’m viewed as someone, while at times rascal-ish, to be knowledgeable and always able to support my convictions.

[FearlessF]

you're the reason Crunch is not here?

[Anonymous Coward]

I probably ran a lot of people off from the SEC board, and may be the reason some don’t return.  But I found it to be a lazy-thinking good-ole-boys forum.  I challenged their assumptions and brought analysis to the board while insisting they do as well.  Maybe that wasn’t helpful.


I do enjoy the back-and-Forth some May view as untoward squabbling.  But I find those to be productive (if not painful) steps in the right direction.  I’m certainly guilty of having a thin skin here, but again, I consider the name-calling lazy - taking the place of real, valid opinion.


You’ve all been patient in accommodating me here as the SEC board has dissipated.  I hope I’m viewed as someone, while at times rescalish, to be knowledgeable and always able to support my convictions.

I don't know the eleventh word from the end, but I do like this post. It's a hard balancing act, though. Practicing good citizenship and braining at the same time.

[FearlessF]

I kinda like having you brainiacs around

[jhetfield99]

One potential thing is if any of you guys comment on SBNation blogs for your team... I think most allow you to have a "signature" line. I could just see putting something like "The most reasonable college football forum on the internet: https://www.cfb51.com/" in your signature and seeing if people click over. Or just the URL.

This is a good call, I'll do that on my GoldandBlack.com account, as I believe you can have custom sigs there.  I would mention the old place several years ago on there and we'd gained a few new occasional posters. 
Overall I'm at a place in life where I'm so damn busy with work and kids I simply don't post anywhere like I used to.  I fell guilty about it, but figure I'll pick it back up at another time in life.
I like the forum overall and thinks the handful of games we have is fun. 

[OrangeAfroMan]

you're the reason Crunch is not here?

I hope so.
One of my biggest quips with the rest of the SEC board was why they liked having him around.  I was very critical of that.  

If it wasn't me, it may have been UT's performance the last couple of seasons - an 0-8 conference record might have led him to do the unthinkable.