how-to block ads
|
|
Uniqs:
12436 |
Share Topic
 |
 |
|
|
|
 CudniLa Merma - VigiladoPremium,MVM
join:2003-12-20
Someshire
kudos:13 | reply to La Luna
Re: CastleCops Closed said by La Luna:It's too bad there wasn't a few trusted people he could have handed over the day to day reins to, but still keep his foot in the door to oversee and keep things running as they were. no, what was bad was that there were trusted people but nothing was handed over
Cudni
--
"what we know we know the same, what we don't know, we don't know it differently."
Help yourself so God can help you.
Microsoft MVP, 2006 - 2008 | |
 La LunaSurvived AshrafulPremium
join:2001-07-12
Warwick, NY
kudos:3
 ·Vonage
 ·Optimum Online
| said by Cudni:said by La Luna:It's too bad there wasn't a few trusted people he could have handed over the day to day reins to, but still keep his foot in the door to oversee and keep things running as they were. no, what was bad was that there were trusted people but nothing was handed over Cudni Ok. I don't know enough about the site to say that one way or the other.
--
1/20/09 The Beginning of the End
12,489 DEADLY TERROR ATTACKS SINCE 9/11 | |
 EGeezerSummertimePremium
join:2002-08-04
Midwest
kudos:7
·Callcentric
| reply to KyeU
CastleCops domain registration I suppose one bright spot is that the domain is registered until April 14, 2015, so unless Mr. Laudansky chooses to sell it, the internet community has a few years until it's available for somebody else to nab it.
It would be nice to know what the plans are for the domain name, though.
--
The greatest dangers to liberty lurk in insidious encroachment by men of zeal, well-meaning but without understanding. -- Justice Louis D. Brandeis | |
 gwionwild colonial boyPremium,ExMod 2001-08
join:2000-12-28
Pittsburgh, PA
kudos:1
1 edit | reply to KyeU
Re: CastleCops Closed I would sincerely hope Paul ties it up [ed.: the domain name], for a while, at least [ed.: preventing squatting or misleading usage]. Think. Why did the site inspire such loyalty and interest? In a word, "integrity". If I pour my sweat and blood into a project, infuse it with my own character, I'm damned if I'll let the next wannabe take it over without some guarantee that they won't sell me short... which, in turn, sells my users short... and it looks as though I've put my imprimateur on their work, which... it may not, but it still MAY... may fall short of my own standards.
Imagine, if you will (and God forbid), that Justin could no longer manage DSLR. Would you want a commercial interest to claim the name and domain space? Would it be possible you might hit the new site after an absence, and think, "oh, wow, man, they really sold out", or, "Jeez, this place is really worthless, what a bender those guys (Justin and the hosts) must be on!" There's a lot of pride and deep love that goes into crafting a site. Any dolt or genius can have a blog, it takes a hell of a lot of real work and emotion to create a user community.
As regards archiving, hell, do I really need 1999 security briefs? Computer security theory and practice is changing hourly, and I sometimes think that it's downright dangerous not to recognize that. That aside, robots are bandwidth leaches, and I fully understand the balancing act a webmaster has to perform, the PR versus the cost of the leaching. No, it ain't free... bandwidth costs. Google 'bots can slow down a site with limited resources, while they're crawling, too. 'nuff said, there.
Can I suggest a wonderful tribute to Castle Cops? Go out and start a site, based on the same premise. Choose a name. Build a following. Credit them with your inspiration. Remember, it was exactly what Paul did... went out on a limb, worked his arse off, and created a credible, well-respected site from a dream ...
I lament the passing of CC... I wish Paul and Robin all the best in the coming new year(s). But I refuse to blame them, MS, or anybody else for the passing of their site. As with all things, time passes and conditions change. Kudos, and thanks... 
--
Semper Eadem
--
I can saw a woman in two
but you won't want to look in the box when I do
for my next trick, I'll need a volunteer... | |
gwionwild colonial boyPremium,ExMod 2001-08
join:2000-12-28
Pittsburgh, PA
kudos:1 | reply to dunworkin
Only if you let 'em...  | | |
|
1 edit | reply to Cudni
said by Cudni:said by La Luna:It's too bad there wasn't a few trusted people he could have handed over the day to day reins to, but still keep his foot in the door to oversee and keep things running as they were. no, what was bad was that there were trusted people but nothing was handed over Cudni It's a shame to loose such a great resource. I do thank the owners for all their hard work, time and effort, and wish them all the best.
As justin  , and Cudni , and others have mentioned, while it certainly (rightly or wrongly) is the owner's legal right to do as they wish, there are times when there are greater concerns than just "them".
This situation reminds me, somewhat, of when "rue", the mysterious author of the second phase of the Mozilla Fx extension Adblock went MIA, refusing to update "his" extension, _and_ refusing to turn it over to others, apparently as capable, or more capable.
As a result this "right", (tens?, hundreds? of) thousands of users, almost all of whom were not capable of coding it themselves, were stuck unnecessarily for increasingly erratic and longer periods of time without updates, since there apparently were qualified folks able and willing to move the project ahead, with or without it's then current obstructionist "owner".
In that case, I was not privy to the parties off-line interrelations, and here, I have no idea what transpired, except from what is posted in this thread (and links), but the point is that both projects relied very heavily on a "community" of volunteer support, in addition to the "owner" contribution, and both contributed to the "well being" (to varying degrees) of a HUGE number of users, and at least in the Adblock case, the "owners" actions eventually showed little-to-no concern for either group; Both projects simply were of greater import than _any_ single or pair of people, owners included.
While it is reasonable, and necessary to be very concerned about maintaining quality and standards after departing a project (and it may be that this is one of those rare cases where it is best to close up shop completely), how the owners handle recognizing all this, including the continuation of the project without them, is how they will be remembered, in addition to having created and nurtured "their babies".
Obviously this is what lots of folks have already expressed in this thread. | |
|
