Did anyone ever deny it?

jim koloctronis.

Of course, since this name change controversy started, the words "masturbation" and "whorehouse" have been constantly displayed at the top of the "recent messages" portion of RC.com's Front Page. Hopefully the irony of this is not lost on site management.

Curt

We, the users, build up this fantastic routes database, picture gallery, and fountain of technical information (which is what the forums could be); the product finally becomes saleable; and Trevor, and possibly and a small group of owners, are the only ones who see any return for their efforts.

-Jay

Of course, since this name change controversy started, the words "masturbation" and "whorehouse" have been constantly displayed at the top of the "recent messages" portion of RC.com's Front Page. Hopefully the irony of this is not lost on site management.

Which is what I've been trying to point out all day, and still nothing has been changed by the moderators.

EXACTLY.

The users are being used. Then told to feck off when they complain.

i have offered to change it, but have not received any complaints - and at this point, i'm about to be offline for five days.

But thats exactly it, nobody has contacted you because nobody cares! So why was the title changed in the first place, and all this started???

Which is what I've been trying to point out all day, and still nothing has been changed by the moderators.

It's more like, no one's ever admitted it. It has been, and still is, ambiguous. The site was originally billed as a grassroots effort, and still operates that way on the public level: 99% of the work done to improve the site is done for free by a large user base.

As it now stands, the site's features -- the routes database, for instance -- aren't of sufficiently high quality to be a profitable product. But it is easy to see, with enough effort from the public and good programming,

how it one day could be. That is what I think is unfair about the present organization. We, the users, build up this fantastic routes database, picture gallery, and fountain of technical information (which is what the forums could be); the product finally becomes saleable; and Trevor, and possibly and a small group of owners, are the only ones who see any return for their efforts.

If there is a windfall, it will not be shared.

Yes and no. Without user input the site would be worthless. But without some directed labor by (eg.) Eric and Trevor and myself, that user input, at the volumes we see it and in the disorganized fashion it is proferred, would be significantly less useful than it is.

Eric is working full time for wages that would horrify a waitress.

This has been an issue for literally years, and it's still an issue of potential (rather than realized) income.

Stop right there. You've just crossed the line from that which the general public is eminently qualified to do (submit information) to that which a tiny percentage can (program for a high-traffic website with thousands of unique visitors daily). That is why commercial concerns enter the picture -- donations can't keep Eric from starving and aren't enough to pay our hosting bill. Even with our current income stream, we are again seeing problems in keeping up with growth and demands. This is where the problem surfaces.

Why, if you are unpaid and unhappy, do you use the site, did you moderate the site, and do you answer users' questions on topics you clearly consider banal?

And as far as return on investment -- Trevor gets almost nothing (beyond a sales commission) for the 8 years he has spent on this site. I may have broken even, possibly, due to some paid consulting to implement email and other hard, nasty systems programming done last spring. I've donated a server and a lot of unpaid trips to the colocation facility in return.

Trevor has tried to set up remuneration for the mods and admins -- free subscriptions, gear to review, pretty much exactly what we can afford to do

-- and I am more than a bit surprised that you continue along this track. But that's your prerogative. Just have the decency not to project it onto everyone else.

... the oldest and most moronic argument invented by man:

It's my ball!

OK, so here is what should really be done.

1) The name of the original thread should be changed back to what it used to be.

2) This thread should be moved to Community.

3) the original thread could also be split--at the point the name change occured, because the thread went a different direction then.

Simple, eh?

Curt

Tim, I just don't believe that this situation will continue indefinitely. I don't believe that Trevor, you, or the others who supposedly haven't made a dime off this site are doing this as a hobby. I think there are plans to go completely commercial, and when that happens, a lot of people are going to feel that they've been had.
-Jay

Questionable Content
These are publicly visible forums; please act as you would in a public place. What precisely is 'questionable' enough to be removed is left to the discretion of the individual moderators, but may include any material that is knowingly false and/or defamatory, misleading, inaccurate, abusive, vulgar, hateful, harassing, obscene, profane, pornographic, threatening, invasive of a person's privacy, illegal, or overtly destructive. In a nutshell... If it couldn't go on a public library's community bulletin board, then it shouldn't go here.

Pornography, in particular, is a subjective label. Anything which can be interpreted as sexually explicit, images or text, is likely to be removed from the site. If you post something that can be viewed as obscene, you are willingly taking a chance that your account may be suspended. This is your choice, and while we do not place prior restraints on a user's posts, there may be consequences for offending other users' sensibilities. It is a good idea to ask a mod or an admin first, if you are unsure whether a post will be viewed as 'obscene'.