SCP Community Sites
If you're an SCP Foundation Admin, you've gotten this Private Message from Wikidot staff. Thoughts and debate here, please.
SCP Community Sites
Forum
» Policy & Voting / Policy Discussion
» SCP Community Sites
http://www.wikidot.com/faq:community-sites for more info.
Though not an admin, my thought on this is that we cost them way more than we pay them, so it's a bit of a dick move on our parts to push to continue that trend. Ads not being displayed to logged in users makes me ok with this.
I just figured it was only going to be our problem for a short while, as hopefully Project Foundation would have taken care of that.
Project Foundation will be a longer process than just Mackenzie developing it…we still have the fundraising aspects of it to take care of, the physical move itself, various things. It's hard to say how long it's going to be before we do that, and it being another year is entirely possible methinks.
True that.
Well, aside from that, there really isn't any real problem with the change in everything that I can see.
EDIT: Apart from the issue that Mann just brought up.
Well, there would be no change to logged in users…
Admin, SCP Wiki
My main issue is control of the wiki. As I understand it, they can simply reassign new admins at will on the community site. That troubles me.
That, is where I would draw the line.
Admin, SCP Wiki
your site generates quite a lot of traffic — about 550 GB in October — which would sum up to 1,000 USD per year (take average price $0.15/GB)
550 GB * $0.15/GB = $82.50. I think they either got the math wrong or the units wrong or something. It might be inconsequential, but just thought I'd bring it up.
Also, Mann, I'm not seeing where in the FAQ they say they can reassign new admins at will. Is that on a different page, or am I just missing it?
if your reading this your gay
That's $82 for one month. Twelve months of that is around $1000.
*headdesk*
Ah, I goofed on the "per month" thing. Never mind then.
if your reading this your gay
I may have misread. Looking back over it, it doesn't look like they would do so.
Other concerns (which Bland brought up in PM):
- What are the file storage limits? i didn't see them.
- Are we going to be held to some sort of "Community Standard" instead of a "Customer Standard" (which is one of the reasons we're moving)
- We won't be able to delete the site, we'll have to make sure to avoid becoming an "abandoned" site that anyone can claim.
These are all very valid concerns, particularly the last one. I want to hear his answers to these questions, but I have a feeling that we are going to want to avoid going to a Community Site.
I would recommend we be up front about our eventual plans to move away from Wikidot. I do think that we're not going to get away with being ad free while we're still at WikiDot. So, I think our best course of action is seeing if they'll allow us to continue as we have, but with advertisement, as he describes in his PM. He seemed to be very accommodating, so hopefully we can reach an agreement that won't be too unobtrusive. I know that it would be best if we could go completely ad free, but given our traffic, I don't think it's reasonable to ask at this point.
We won't be able to delete the site, we'll have to make sure to avoid becoming an "abandoned" site that anyone can claim
Oh, that's a big concern. I didn't think that we'd ever fully delete the old site, if only to preserve the various comment threads, but I assumed that we'd lock the site into read-only mode once we moved. If us as a community site can be hijacked after we leave… no thank you. We do NOT need someone coming behind us either A) claiming to really be us or B) tarnishing our reputation.
Giving bearhugs to the unsuspecting since 1872.
The ads that are mentioned as an example in the PM are pretty subtle anyway, just little links at the bottom of the page. I don't see a problem with the transition, assuming we retain enough control that we can make this go where we need it to when PF is ready (into read-only or archive mode or what have you).
Sounds like a lot of concerns associated with this. I'm as curious to see the answers as anyone.
However, FWIW, I don't think the ads part of it is a big deal, especially considering we still plan to go through with PF & there's no change for logged-in users.
Is there any way we can get a copy of the PM posted here on 05 for those of us not currently on chat (and not administrators)?
[to all admins of SCP Wiki]
Hi,
we have recently introduced Community Sites - a new Wikidot site category specially targeted towards community-driven wikis. Because we have designed Community Sites with sites like yours in mind, I have decided to contact admins of SCP Wiki personally.
Community Sites offer a number of features that might be useful for you. What I would like to point out is that we can offer any reasonable help developing your site and promoting it, including paid advertising campaigns to get you new users. The site will be extra protected against removal or any accidental disastrous actions — this includes daily full backups (which also helps agains vandalism). There is also no "ownership" with Community Sites — the site would belong to the community, not a particular Master Admin (which, as I believe, much better reflects your current situation), but the Admins+Moderators+Members groups are preserved. Needless to say, it is free and should suit your site better than any paid Pro plan we have.
Please give the Community Sites a deeper look — there is a blog post and a FAQ page that should answer most of your question.
I can see you have already purchased a Pro Lite account — if you decide to convert to a Community Site and you do not need the paid subscription any more we can issue a refund.
One of the questions you might have is running ads on the site. This is a delicate topic but I prefer the honest and straightforward approach: your site generates quite a lot of traffic — about 550 GB in October — which would sum up to 1,000 USD per year (take average price $0.15/GB) — and the price of the Pro Lite ($50/year) covers only 5% of our costs here.
We are actually planning to introduce extra charges for sites with outstanding traffic, but we will officially announce it well ahead of — this is not official yet, but something to keep in mind.
I just want you to realize we are not trying to earn millions on your site, we want to balance the budget in a way that we can all accept.
A reasonable solution to this is letting us run some ads on your site, but not the full-page colorful animations. I realize SCP is about creative writing and you want to keep it as clean as possible. So do we. So here is what I am suggesting:
- we can try running ads in bottom location only and see how it goes (we usually use 2 boxes, see e.g. http://aqwwiki.wikidot.com - there should be ad boxes above and below page content)
- if you think the image and video ads are too much annoying, we could try text-only ads
- we will not show ads to logged-in users — this is our global policy and we will keep it this way for all sites
- we can look into other less intrusive ways too
We extremely like what you are doing with SCP Wiki. I believe that converting it to a Community Site would be a great thing.
If there is anything you would like to ask me, please do not hesitate. Just reply to this message and I will try to do my best.
Also, if you have any idea how we (the Wikidot Team) could help you with your site, I would be eager to hear your ideas.
Please discuss this option in your community and let me know what you decide!
Cheers,
Michał
CEO of Wikidot Inc.
PS. I realize it was a bit long. Thanks for getting to the end though! :-)
if your reading this your gay
Thanks! Much appreciated.
Got this PM from Bland.
Just read the pastebin letter. That's… worse then I thought. I was hoping it was a form letter, but it's VERY specifically targeted at us.
Basically "SCP is costing us way more then we're getting. Let us put ads on your site. [implied: or we're gong to change the agreements and make you take them or maybe shut you down because we can't afford you.]"
Question - If we DID convert to a Community Site, and didn't like it, can we convert back?
Side point: I wonder how many of our members have made other sites and gotten pro memberships.
I was a proponent of leaving the site up after we moved, but now I'm not sure I like that idea. Damnit.
if your reading this your gay
I honestly don't think it's that dire. It sounds like they really are trying to come to a decent accommodation, and I think (I hope) it's possible to work with them for something that will be workable for both of us. We have concerns, and I certainly intend to bring them up. But I don't think they're insurmountable. Sure, it's targeted at us. I don't doubt that we're one of the biggest sites on Wikidot, and that's almost certainly why they came to us. Not only are we a major drain on their bandwidth, we're also a potential source of income (likely not a huge source, as he says, but certainly enough to offset the bandwidth).
I don't see this as a threat, so much as "we want to work with you, and here are the options we've come up with." Let's give them some counter-proposals. I'm sure we can find some middle ground.
Okay, so, here's what I intend to tell them. I'll probably pretty it up some, but this'll be the gist of it.
I'm afraid for various reasons, we're not interested in a community site. As well, we do eventually want to move to a site where we have more control, and the description you've given us of a community site suggests that this would be difficult for us to do (since someone else could come in and take over the site after we've moved). We are very grateful to Wikidot for the support they've given us and to the Wikidot community, but we're getting to the point where we need things that Wikidot can't offer.
However, we're not ready to move just yet, and we agree that it's not fair to Wikidot to shoulder the burden of hosting us without receiving due compensation. Therefore we suggest that they run the aforementioned ads on our current site. Let's start with text-only ads, and if that isn't generating enough revenue, we can move up from there.
Again, thank you for your support, and I'm hopeful we can come to an accommodation that will benefit both Wikidot and the SCP Foundation.
I'm gonna send that tomorrow night. Any suggestions/objections, voice 'em now.
Tactful and well phrased. I like it.
You need to be much more specific with what we're conceding, Mann.
Text only, bottom of the page, only people who are not logged in. I do not want those damned double-green underline ads back on the site. Also, I'm still just a mite pissed over Wikidot deleting the record we kept here of the pedo-user without so much as a fucking notification, and their incredibly flippant response to Bright when concern was addressed. It's interesting to see how now, when they want our help, they're coming hat-in-hand. But when we wanted answers? We were told to fuck off, in so many words.
I'd also like to note that we really don't want to tell them that we're going. It has the tendency to make people jump all over the bandwagon and try to take advantage of the situation. If we were to tell them that? I'm not sure what the reaction would actually be, and I don't care to find out.
I'm in a bad mood, so if this is coming across as aggressive, then good. :)
"WELL FOUNDATION. YOU MADE IT SO EASY. SO VERY VERY EASY." - dimensionpotato
Though I think Mann's PM is well-written, I'm inclined to agree with Troy. I don't trust Wikidot to operate in good faith with us; I don't even think it's malicious so much as a matter of priorities. Priorities that do not favor us. I think they do want to work with us, in a positive fashion, but that does not at all mean we should not err heavily on the side of caution.
Though I should emphasize again that ads may be a necessary evil at this point. Maybe even those fucking awful double-green underline ads. Ugh. I agree we should resist that but it may be the only choice.
Evidence seems to suggest that they read 05, judging from some of their statements in the PM. I assume they're aware of it.
Probably, but I'd prefer to err on the side of not emphasizing it. Not hiding it, but not emphasizing it either. (And yes, I'm saying this with full awareness that it could, or could eventually, be read by 'them'. Hopefully I'm being clear enough as to why I would have this opinion that they'll understand.)
We should deal with this issue - IMO - on two levels: (1) If Project Foundation never goes through, what's the optimal situation for us?, and (2) If Project Foundation does go through as planned, hopefully by the end of next year (I assume), then what's the optimal situation for us? - and try to get a solution that would work for both (1) and (2). Mann and others in this thread seem to be just aiming for (2), and in-my-humble-I-am-not-an-administrator-opinion, that's bad practice. Let's err on the side of caution.
I'm pretty okay with this, with Troy's caveats. Also, if (much of) the issue is the amount of bandwidth we consume, what about migrating images offsite so they're not downloaded from Wikidot? I don't know how much bandwidth we could actually free up, and I realize that moving images offsite introduces a different set of problems, but it can't hurt to at least look into it.
/forum/t-597206/scp-community-sites#post-