Alex, GT staff,
Here is a list of some problems, questions I noticed in Gossamer Community app:
- I miss the frame based admin interface
- admin login page should be separated from standard user login, using admin.cgi or such (as in LSQL)
- sometimes there is no enough info about how to use an option, like the email_admin, system_banip (no info about separator)
- User Session length can not be modified?
- in Who's Online, there is no info about how many guests are online. Could be optionally add Guest listing feature?
- Can be possible to change the required fields of user data and/or profile data?

Best regards,
Webmaster33

---

Paid Support from Webmaster33. Expert in Perl programming & Gossamer Threads applications. (click here for prices)
Webmaster33's products (upd.2004.09.26) | Private message | Contact me | Was my post helpful? Donate my help...

Also missing the:
- dynamic_preserve feature & option

Without this, there is not possible to preserve the selected URL parameters from page to page, when you change the template set dynamically.

Best regards,
Webmaster33

---

Paid Support from Webmaster33. Expert in Perl programming & Gossamer Threads applications. (click here for prices)
Webmaster33's products (upd.2004.09.26) | Private message | Contact me | Was my post helpful? Donate my help...

Ah, for the "Can be possible to change the required fields of user data and/or profile data? " question the answer is yes. It can be changed by setting NOT NULL value to yes or no.

Best regards,
Webmaster33

---

Paid Support from Webmaster33. Expert in Perl programming & Gossamer Threads applications. (click here for prices)
Webmaster33's products (upd.2004.09.26) | Private message | Contact me | Was my post helpful? Donate my help...

Hi,

1. We are moving away from the frame based interface. I'd welcome suggestions to make the navigation better without frames.

2. We are also moving away from a separate admin directory and basing things on .htaccess protection.

3. Documentation will be improved as the program progresses.

4. This will get added, right now it's stored in the config file, but not editable.

5. No, not realistically. Community has no idea about guests.

6. Yes, this can be done in Database->Profile menu. You can add columns and make them required or not required.

7. Yes, we will look into making similiar option to dynamic preserve.

Cheers,

Alex
--
Gossamer Threads Inc.

That's really a bad news...
Max
The one with Mac OS X Server 10.4 :)

Alex, I welcome and aggree your answers to most of the questions.
But I would further discuss about the following ones:

I like the frame based admin interface.
Usually I don't like frames for public areas of websites, but for the admin interface, I think frames are very useful.
Admin interface should be fast, quick downloading, and frames are the best solution for that. IMPO.

I'm seriously against to share user logins with admin login (security reasons).
Even if you don't use .htaccess protection, should be need for a separate admin login script, which can be renamed to even avoid other Links users to try to hack the admin login.
I think you should consider that separate admin login area (with a separate admin login script or with .htaccess).

BTW: what is your reason to avoid .htaccess usage?

I would need & use the Guest users feature.
I would use the GCommunity app to display how many users are browsing my website. Likely I will base all my page displays and user logins on GT::Community & GT::Template. And connect GCommunity to my Links SQL, too.
So I would welcome that Guests feature (available at least optionally), similarly how GForum has that feature.

Best regards,
Webmaster33

---

Paid Support from Webmaster33. Expert in Perl programming & Gossamer Threads applications. (click here for prices)
Webmaster33's products (upd.2004.09.26) | Private message | Contact me | Was my post helpful? Donate my help...

@webmaster33:

I agree for 100% with your posting above!

Regards,
Manu

Shopping Portal Shop-Netz.de® | Partnerprogramme | Flugreisen & Billigflüge | KESTERMEDIA e.K. | European Affiliate Marketing Forum.

Apart from the bit that frames are fast :)

Because unless you use apache or have a special extension then a lot of servers don't implement it.

I also agree with webmaster33!
Max
The one with Mac OS X Server 10.4 :)

I'd like to voice an alternate point of view, lest Alex get the impression that the uniformity of opinion expressed here is representative of user sentiment as a whole.

I hate the frame based admin, and welcome a move away from it. In general, I find frames clumsy and error-prone, and the use of them in GT admin panels has caused frustrations and headaches (albeit minor ones, usually stemming from the unexpected consequences of an ill-timed "Back" request) far more often than I can claim to have enjoyed the "benefits" of frames.

I don't see how an .htaccess login system is inherently any more secure than the standard community login system. Seriously, if someone has the skill and inclination to hack into your website, they're going to be able to find your admin panel. It's not like /admin/admin.cgi is the most cryptic of urls, especially to anyone who's ever encountered a GT script before. IMHO, the only reliable way to prevent someone hacking in is to use good, hard-to-guess passwords and change them regularly.

While I can appreciate the "coolness factor" of a guests feature, that would hugely increase the burden on Community in a heavily trafficked site, and would require that every single page and every single link had guest tracking parameters built in. Surely that's doable with a plugin and a lot of meticulous recoding of your entire site, but I hardly think it should be a default feature in Community.

---

Fractured Atlas :: Liberate the Artist
Services: Healthcare, Fiscal Sponsorship, Marketing, Education, The Emerging Artists Fund

Hi,

In regards to the frame based interface. There are a number of reasons why we are moving away. First off, it is slower to load. When loading the admin, it requires 4 separate calls to admin.cgi. Each click on a main menu requires 3 separate calls to admin.cgi to load the framest and left and right frame. This is quite noticable, especially on slower computers.

Secondly, it can be confusing and difficult to work with. The different implementation of back buttons can lead to problems. Also, especially on Mozilla/Phoenix, reloading just a frame panel is difficult. Same issues when trying to view source.

As for the move from .htaccess, when implemented properly, both systems provide equal level of protection. However, we have seen a number of sites that don't properly protect the admin area. If we distribute the program with the admin protected by default (which is not always possible with .htaccess), we can ensure the majority of users are safe.

I don't believe a hidden admin with .htaccess offers any more protection then a script that is password protected.

Finally, as for guest users, this is often not possible as not all applications are dynamic. For example, running Links SQL in static mode, there is no way that Community can know the number of guests.

Hope that helps,

Alex
--
Gossamer Threads Inc.

<<<<
Finally, as for guest users, this is often not possible as not all applications are dynamic. For example, running Links SQL in static mode, there is no way that Community can know the number of guests.
>>>>
Ok but at list community can track the guest users that navigates in the dynamic side.... For the forum too (all dynamic... so?)
Max
The one with Mac OS X Server 10.4 :)

Community is dependant upon the programs which it manages as much as it is on itself.

Programs in static (as was stated) do not allow the flexibility that a dynamic program offers BUT they run so much faster and tax the server so much less that it is in some cases very worthwhile.

One way to increase the usage of registered guests is to increase the amount of products and services that are offered on the "non-guest" side of the street. Such as using the user_home in community to display many products and services that are not available outside. Without Community the place to add items such as this would be the login_success page in LinksSQL as well as the validation_success page.

While I am a REAL data junkie and feel like Johnny Five most of the time, data from guests can be seen through logs kept on the server as well. It may not be dynamically placed on a page within Community but it is real time with the right software.

Ultimately Community will offer a centralized login system for our sites as well as some expansion capabilities that cannot be attained or not easily reached with multiple user interfaces. The cross marketing concept becomes much more in control and the external marketing capability enhanced greatly.

Our goal is to convert as many look - i - loos as possible to registered users. With this we can control what they see, when they see it and how it is delivered to them. As per the guests, well if I cannot convert them to users then I need to look at the big picture a little bit more closely to identify shortcomings in the design and content.

Disclaimer:

Of course this is just my opinion and opinions will vary. Consult your local listings for a showtime in your area. Ages may vary due to dates of birth. Selection may vary based upon stock availability. And so on...

NOTE: The new Community interface is VERY cool. I like it much more than the frames version.

Brian

Links SQL is not a static script.. It's a dynamic script that builds static pages. But a user can navigate trough all links sql always being on the dynamic side as you know...

As for the log access guest tracking please... That's not realistic.. And will not fit purposes like dynamic <if guest> variables and so on...
Max
The one with Mac OS X Server 10.4 :)

Oh a guest feature isn't only a coolness factor!

It's also good for marketing reasons!

Normally users like sites with a lot of traffic (users online).

So it makes a difference if you show your users a "7 registered useres online" message or a "284 users online" message!

I agree the feature should be optional (switch on/off)!

P.S.: I really like the Frame-Admin. Quick and usable navigation!

Regards,
Manu

Shopping Portal Shop-Netz.de® | Partnerprogramme | Flugreisen & Billigflüge | KESTERMEDIA e.K. | European Affiliate Marketing Forum.

Yes, this is the situation. When loading the admin, it requires 4 separate calls.

1) But how much resource does the admin page use?

• 4 calls are executed only once, at admin login.
  
• When you click on Top menu, 2 frames are refreshed (3 calls).
  
• When you click Left menu only 1 frame content is refreshed(1 call).

Well not the admin page calls will hog down the webserver, right? IMHO if you want to move anyway to non-frame admin pages, and admin module already HAS the functions, would be not difficult task to make the frame based admin interface at least optional.

2) How many admin page calls are executed a day? Not so much. So from the viewpoint of server it does not matter... (admin page has has much less calls than user pages, so will not affect server resources)
But from the viewpoint of user frames does matter. User has likely wait for full load of each page (depends how you use the tables).

3) How slow a webserver must to be, to slow down so much the admin interface, that is not usable. My earlier (shared virtual!) webserver was Celeron 300 or 400. I even developed the earlier Links 2.0 (which also has frames), using Pentium I. 200 Mhz. Isn't that enough slow? But the admin interface is not affected so much.

4) Finally, anybody who uses slower computer than Celeron 300, is mazochist

How much performance do you gain without frames?
IMHO, I think it does not worth the efforts you put into...
But if you put into, then please make frames optionally available.


Do you know how many users use Mozilla, right? Below about 2%. Anyhow, not many.
BTW: I also use Mozilla, and still I like frame based admin interface.


I see your point. Yes, this is true and I definitely aggree with it.
I'm not against form the based admin login.

I'm only against the COMMON User & Admin login form. Admin login should be DEFINITELY done using separate script, which should fit the requirement to be renamed anytime (so no hardcoded admin script name allowed, max in 1 place: the config).

Quote:

guest users, this is often not possible as not all applications are dynamic. For example, running Links SQL in static mode, there is no way that Community can know the number of guests.

1. I think, those Community users who misses the guest user feature, want to use this feature on dynamic pages, not on static pages.
   
2. If we would really want to track online users on static pages, that would be possible through a 1 pixel size, dynamic, script generated image, placed into static pages, which also connects to Community db tables.
   
3. Also SSI calls on static pages would be also usable to track guest (even all users) users. Additionally SSI tracking is exact, not like the image based one.

So there would be possible to track site users on static pages. But I (and possibly others also) don't expect that feature, we would like to have the guest users feature just on dynamic pages.
Very likely, if Guests feature will be not added, I will create a plugin for myself to have that functionality.

Best regards,
Webmaster33

---

Paid Support from Webmaster33. Expert in Perl programming & Gossamer Threads applications. (click here for prices)
Webmaster33's products (upd.2004.09.26) | Private message | Contact me | Was my post helpful? Donate my help...

Excuse me if I'm just completely lost, but the guest user issue seems straight forward to me. If community generated a session ID for everyone, couldn't that give a close enough proximation of number of guests and users currently online. A session ID could easily be passed from static page to static page or dynamic page and back again. The session log would house all of the sessions to be counted. The trick, as it seems to me is to exclude the expired or logged off sessions from the total. Maybe when a session is finished it could be moved from the active session log to the session history log.

The fact is I haven't seen the community script so I'm trying to describe a painting in the dark but this seems reasonable based on other GT scripts I've seen. The real problem is that in order to track all of this and keep everything straight requires the session log api's to work three to five times harder and your service provider may complain. But, if you are running mostly dynamic scripts any way, the extra work of the server would be pretty small.

Another problem is that in order to really get this to work every time a visitor loads a page without a session ID or expired ID, the server would have to generate a new ID. Hard to do if they go directly to a static page. Your server could end up creating thousands of ID's every day just for people who clicked the wrong link on Yahoo.

The other option is for community to generate a random temporary user name for each "guest".

Like I said, I could be lost, but the problem is straight forward. There are many ways that community could track guest users but, most solutions have many drawbacks and community just isn't designed for that type of use.

It's just my opinion, but it's the only one I've got!
beetleman

Marcus L. Griswold

I wrote the following right in the first post: "Could be optionally add Guest listing feature?"
Once you understand that, your problems are not valid. Those who does not want to use guests feature, will simply not use this feature. By default Guests feature would be turned OFF.

No, there is not possible to pass session ID from static page to static page (at least not through URL)...
Just imagine, it's static :-) Therefore it's not possible to read the session ID nor from URL, nor from cookies by perl script.
I listed the possible solutions for static pages above: dynamic image (like a counter), or SSI.
(but unless you don't use mod_perl, dynamic image or SSI cgi call would result almost the same server usage as you would use dynamic page display).

This is not true. If you don't want to track Guest users on static pages, then do not place the dynamic image or SSI call into your pages, and your service provider will complain. Guest tracking would be not an obligatory thing...
Otherwise as you told correctly, "if you are running dynamic scripts, the extra work of the server would be pretty small".
Also the Guest feature should be implemented as optional feature, so your worries should be gone now.
You will be simply not affected by Guest users feature, if you don't want to be affected.

Best regards,
Webmaster33

---

Paid Support from Webmaster33. Expert in Perl programming & Gossamer Threads applications. (click here for prices)
Webmaster33's products (upd.2004.09.26) | Private message | Contact me | Was my post helpful? Donate my help...

I too think that the guests online feature would be a waste of resources - Alex's time in particular.

The number of non members online is in no way connected to how good a site is as a community. After all, the registered members are the ones who contribute. Having 1 or 1001 "lurkers" makes no difference to the amount of useful content available, which is what most people will be visiting for.

If there was a really high percentage of non-members compared to members I would likely begin to wonder why so many people didn't want to join in and whether they had been tricked into visiting via a misleading link.


I would also like a frames based admin panel to remain as an option. Despite my usual dislike for frames, I find the Links 2 and FileMan admin panels to be easy to use in that format - particularly if there are problems.

If the program fails for some reason, only the main frame is affected and all the other options are left intact on the screen.

I have had no speed related problems with the frames based admin panels, even on a P133.

Not that I agree of disagree with your thoughts on the amount of guests online VS users, but the Gforum Whos Online shows the information already and the following was taken from this forum:

4 registered users have accessed the forum in the last 15 minutes:
75 guests have accessed the forum in the last 15 minutes:

What is your thoughts on this and do you think it should or should not be shown in GForum?

In my opinion the guest count is cool but listing each guest is a bit too much.

Thanks

Wysardry,

Yes, Guests feature was already implemented once in GForum. I don't think, that adding an already developed feature into GCommunity, will take too much resource from Alex. Also would not affect users, since should be added as optional feature.
I think, for Alex it is more a matter of principle, and than a resource question...

IMHO, Guests count is a good thing, it shows for the visitors how popular is your site. Also, if you see that there are a lot users at the same time on your site, this means you can start your own chat service on your site to build a real community. Once user see that there are X users at the same time, they will like to contact them and share their opinion about your site, about your site content, or just chatting a bit with those who has the same interest... And at that point it's good idea to add chat and/or forum to the site.
That's one of those solutions how you can keep your visitors...

It's your right to refuse using these marketing strategies, but let others have the chance to turn on that option, if they want to use that feature.
Finally, yes, I aggree your reasons about the frame usage on admin side, I think the same way.

Best regards,
Webmaster33

---

Paid Support from Webmaster33. Expert in Perl programming & Gossamer Threads applications. (click here for prices)
Webmaster33's products (upd.2004.09.26) | Private message | Contact me | Was my post helpful? Donate my help...

Well, the guest users are tracked anyway (by cookie or IP), if we want to display guests count, so the fact that each guest is listed or not, is just optional. The data was already collected, sessions created, it depends on the programmer to display or not.

Otherwise yes, I aggree with you, that listing each guest is nor a necessary thing, nor required by any reasons. Listing each guest is just curiosity for users, nothing more (as I see).

But number of all users on the site (including guest & registered users) at the same time, may be useful in marketing reasons, as I expressed my opinion to Wysardry.

Best regards,
Webmaster33

---

Paid Support from Webmaster33. Expert in Perl programming & Gossamer Threads applications. (click here for prices)
Webmaster33's products (upd.2004.09.26) | Private message | Contact me | Was my post helpful? Donate my help...

A good point. The Who's Online feature is already available via GForum for those that are interested.

In other words, it doesn't need to be added to the community plugin in the first place. Perhaps using the plugin to make that info available from other GT products would be an option.

I actually think this is an acceptable way of doing things - the info is only shown if specifically asked for, on a page that doesn't do anything else.

My objections were mainly targetted at the idea of showing that info (without it being asked for) on pages that already use a lot of resources to do other things.

Listing each guest by name is a bit much, but I assume the number shown can be configured somewhere. I'd rather see the top 10 rather than 50, but everyone is different.

Yes, you're starting to go further down the road I thought a guests online feature would start people on. The quest for more and more features.

The community plugin was intended to allow users to register and log into all the GT products as if they were one. It wasn't supposed to add anything else.

Features like guest counts, chat boxes etc. should really be separate optional plugins or features of the GT library for those that want them.

Putting them in the main program would make it bigger and slower than it needs to be. Even if users could "turn off" the extra code it would still be there.

I have no objection to having a guests count feature if it's truly optional and completely separate, but I don't think it should become an integral part of the core code.

Now I'm not expecting GT to make their decision based solely on my opinion, any more than they would based on yours alone, but it's only fair that those who don't like the idea mention their views in the same way as those that do.

How else are they to know how many people would actually use the feature? They can't add everything people ask for.

Everyone wants different features, and to include them all would lead to a program as big and unwieldy as PHP-Nuke. (For those that don't know, it's a news publishing system that adds over 2600 files to your site before you even start adding content).

No, you mistunderstood me! I did not write, that chat should be implemented into GComm!!! I wrote "this means you can start your own chat service on your site to build a real community". This has nothing related to GComm features...

The "Who is online" is not a plugin of GForum, right? Why was it implemented into GForum? Why not created it as plugin?
As for the Guests count feature, at the moment we don't know what plugin hooks will be available in GComm... So we can't tell if will be possible to do the Guests count feature as plugin or should be implemented as core (but optional) feature...

Also if GComm is just an authorization script, nothing more, then all features what would be added, should be solved as plugin. That would mean a lot plugins, if you would want to create a whole system with a lot features.
Can you estimate how much plugin incompatibilities will be after adding 20-30 plugins to GComm? I don't think so. I researched the GT::Plugins core code (used in LinksSQL) and found a few annoyances what would cause problems if a lot of different plugins are added. While we can't set the execution order of plugin, there will be happen to have incompatibility problems between the plugins. Not necessarily, because incompatibility depends of plugin code, but there is the possibility...

As for PHP-Nuke, as I know it's plugin based so you need to add only those features what you want. Plugins in GT products are for the same purpose like modules in PHP-Nuke...

Best regards,
Webmaster33

---

Paid Support from Webmaster33. Expert in Perl programming & Gossamer Threads applications. (click here for prices)
Webmaster33's products (upd.2004.09.26) | Private message | Contact me | Was my post helpful? Donate my help...

As I said, the "whos on" is available in GForum but if you use GForum, GMail, LinksSQL, ETC., you are only getting one third of the information. As well if you make 3 versions of whos on you will get crossover that inflates the actual counts.

THe right answer is a plugin that is in Community that shows information based upon community logins only. Then your count would be closer to accurate and much more controllable.

If you want to see who is using what program this can be done through the normal server logs.

Just my opinion of course.

Maybe you didn't say that chat should be built into the community script, but once users online was added you'd want hooks for one added too. I've seen this happen many times before (and not just here), no matter how many features a program has, someone always wants something else added.


The main reasons why GForum has the Who's Online feature as an integral part of the program are:-

1. Many people consider it to be an essential feature in a forum
2. GT products weren't able to share information until the community script was written

Having a who's online feature in a forum can be useful if you want to send a priate message to someone you know and want a quick reply.

It's hardly a useful feature for a Links directory. Yahoo, AltaVista etc. don't have it. If you're searching for a site, it's not really a high priority to know who else is on the site you're about to leave.

The same goes for reading email.


Without knowing it, you're proving my point by mentioning 20 to 30 plugins. If that many features were added to the core script from the outset, it would be 20 to 30 times bigger than it needed to be for its intended use.

The whole point of plugins is that you add as many as you need and no more. Including them directly in a program - even if they can be "turned off" is a waste of resources. Very few users are likely to want that many features.

Building features into a program instead of making them separate modules is not going to magically remove any incompatibilities between them. In fact, building a program in a modular way is more likely to make the author/coder write the sections in a re-usable way.

The other things to consider are that each additional feature will take time to create, and there is a limit to how many GT would provide for free (if indeed it is going to be free). People have already been complaining about how long this program took to get to a beta version, and you want to delay the final release further by asking for new features?


Yes, in theory PHP-Nuke is supposed to be plugin/module based so you only add the features you want, but the standard installation (without addons) has over 2600 files. Am I the only one who thinks that is way over the top? It's only a news publishing script after all.

Well, I was under the impression that information would flow both ways via the community plugin. In other words, GForum would have access to the info needed to show all registered users and guests.

If it didn't/doesn't work that way, I'm sure the next version of GForum would/will fix that.

Personally, if I was using GMail, I wouldn't want to be shown as being online anyway as that's a private rather than a community related task.

The same is true (but slightly less so) of using Links SQL to search for another site.

First, before I write my reply about the GT related things, let me start with my opinion about PHP-Nuke to end talking about that offtopic app.
No. It's a content management script already. It's more than just a news publishing script.
PHP-Nuke and its successors like Post-Nuke or others, has many (thousands?) sites based on them...
It's very popular. If you don't like it having so much files, then don't use it, but don't bring it as example. IMHO, your example was bad, since all *Nuke scripts are very popular.
Anyway, I don't see any reason to talk about PHP-Nuke here. So I don't want to talk about *Nuke apps, in fact we are on GT forum.

This is how people works... Didn't you notice yet? People always want more & more...
Developers will decide, which suggestions they accept, and which not. You don't have to decide instead developers, if a suggestion is valid to be implemented or not!
We can just express our opinions, that we personally need a scecific feature or not, and our reasons why we need that.

Exactly! Therefore, there is no reason to keep Who's Online feature available just in GForum.
So the Who's Online feature should be available in GCommunity, since GCommunity treats sessions.

The fact, if we can use the comm_sessions table to also track Guest users (not just registered users) or not, highly depends on what plugin hooks will be implemented later.
If for some reasons we might be need to create a new table to track all online visitors, then this will result database redundancy! And database redundancy means badly designed database, which effect should be avoided...

This is simply not true. All applications which use the web & interacts with visitors in any way, would find Who's Online feature useful! Users like to meet other people browsing on the same website, at the same time. They like to communicate each other! No matter how, through email, through private messages, through chat appication, through forum software, etc...
So the Who's Online feature is the base of marketing strategies which continues in community creation using any of the above listed applications.

IMHO, many webmasters would want these features as base feature of GCommunity:
- Who's online
- Private messaging (at least basic one)

Why?
Because everybody thought, that GT Community name means a script, which helps them to create a great community on their site. Unfortunately not. GT Community will treat just authorization, nothing more.
In that case GT should have named as GT Authorize and not as GT Community!
The GT Community name seems misleaded people, who thought they will get more features in this script, not just authorization...

Of course it is another thing, that I know GT will not implement "Who's online" and "Private messaging" features into GCommunity as core features, because:

GT stated, that GCommunity will be just an authorization software similarly like MS Passport. GCommunity has nothing more to do, just to authorize users. You can check yourself what Alex wrote in this thread about this: Community Concept. (hmmm then why did not call it GT Authorize?)

Who's online - will be likely implemented as plugin (if it will be not available, I will develop it for myself. If others will ask to be released, I will release it as a cheap plugin)

Private messaging - will be implemented as plugin or as separate app (like GMail or LSQL), and IMHO it will be likely released as paid script , for somewhat less money like GT Mail currently costs. If for any reasons GT will release it as free, I'm sure it's done for marketing reasons, similar as they release GCommunity as freeware...

That's only my personal opinion about how GT plans its developments & releases in future, but I see it become true. However I would be really glad to have released both Who's online plugin & Private messaging plugins as freeware.
At the moment GCommunity app seems to become a "Barbie"-like product, as I expressed myself in "Community Concept" thread.

Anyway I welcome the GT Community script, and I also like that it's free. But I keep the right for me, to be a bit disappointed, that GT Community will be not community script, just an authorization script.

Best regards,
Webmaster33

---

Paid Support from Webmaster33. Expert in Perl programming & Gossamer Threads applications. (click here for prices)
Webmaster33's products (upd.2004.09.26) | Private message | Contact me | Was my post helpful? Donate my help...

Alex made the idea behind community clear from the very start. I'm not sure why you think you can tell him how he should name his scipts.

I don't force Alex to name his script in any way.
I told, that the name was misleading, and mentioned what name would describe correcty the features it currently supports.

Best regards,
Webmaster33

---

Paid Support from Webmaster33. Expert in Perl programming & Gossamer Threads applications. (click here for prices)
Webmaster33's products (upd.2004.09.26) | Private message | Contact me | Was my post helpful? Donate my help...

By integrating several scripts together allowing users to move seamlessly between them all creates a "community" - the core feature is authorization, but calling it "Gossamer Authorize" doesn't have any meaning. Look at authorize.net - they deal with merchant accounts and online transactions. Calling the script "Gossamer Authorize" is more misleading than commnuity.

Let we translate this in other form. We know GCommunity is similar like MS Passport.

So what you say, on a Microsoft forum this should look similarly like this:
''By integrating several websites together allowing users to move seamlessly between them all creates a "community" - the core feature is authorization, but calling it "MS Passport" doesn't have any meaning. Calling it "MS Passport" is more misleading than calling it "MS Community".''

I wrote the same what you wrote, but replaced the names & script => website. Result is funny, eh?
No comment.

Best regards,
Webmaster33

---

Paid Support from Webmaster33. Expert in Perl programming & Gossamer Threads applications. (click here for prices)
Webmaster33's products (upd.2004.09.26) | Private message | Contact me | Was my post helpful? Donate my help...

Sorry, not really sure what point you are making.

Anyway, it's not really important. I wouldn't expect Alex to change the name of community now :)

I'm saying the same: I wouldn't expect Alex to change the name of community
Again, I just mentioned, it was a misleading name, because it seems users awaited more features, based on this name, including me too.
We are in a lucky situation, that we can tell our opinion in beta stage, before the final release (however likely this will not change any of the main final features).

Best regards,
Webmaster33

---

Paid Support from Webmaster33. Expert in Perl programming & Gossamer Threads applications. (click here for prices)
Webmaster33's products (upd.2004.09.26) | Private message | Contact me | Was my post helpful? Donate my help...

I'm not going to get into an argument about the differences between a content management system and a news publishing script, but I will give my reasons for using PHP-Nuke as an example.

a) I couldn't use a GT product as an example, because GT scripts don't suffer from the problem I was trying to point out
b) It is a well-known program
c) Although there are several forks, it was the first and one of the biggest

Yes, I noticed many years ago that's how people are. I was just pointing out the consequences of including every feature that people say they need.

I really don't see why you object so strongly to someone giving their reasons for not including a feature if you yourself feel entitled to give reasons why it should.

By your reasoning, you yourself shouldn't be saying a feature should be included as that's up to the developers. Alex gave reasons why guests online couldn't/wouldn't be included, and you've since given your opinion on how/why it should.

Just because someone's opinion differs from your own, it doesn't mean they aren't just as entitled to express it.

You're giving your opinion on why you'd like certain features added, and I'm giving mine on why I wouldn't.

At the end of the day, it's Alex who will decide, and he already said the feature wouldn't be added on the first page.

Wysardry,

Unfortunately it is not likely, that Alex will implement the features what the people thought they will get with GCommunity. Anyway, yes, Alex will decide about that finally.
I already expressed my suggestions & my opinion about these things, so I have nothing more to say in that subject.

Best regards,
Webmaster33

---

Paid Support from Webmaster33. Expert in Perl programming & Gossamer Threads applications. (click here for prices)
Webmaster33's products (upd.2004.09.26) | Private message | Contact me | Was my post helpful? Donate my help...

So it's not just me

http://gossamer-threads.com/...33%20opinion;#196827

Paul, you can't forget your griefs, right?

Best regards,
Webmaster33

---

Paid Support from Webmaster33. Expert in Perl programming & Gossamer Threads applications. (click here for prices)
Webmaster33's products (upd.2004.09.26) | Private message | Contact me | Was my post helpful? Donate my help...

So I think that we are jumping the gun here. The whole concept of the GT Community script will make all of our sites much more attractive to visitors. Alex finally gets a beta release of the script out after so much anticipation and everybody starts in on how the script should be better. Aren't you people ever happy? After all, the script does exactly what GT said it would do, give your users one login page for all GT scripts. Literally giving users access to a community of scripts with one login.

Perhaps GT Community 2.0 will offer a feel of a community of users instead of a community of scripts.

I personally could care less about any features outside of central logins. I figure that a wide variety of plug-ins, mods, and hacks will be available in a short time. For now lets just try to work the bugs out of the beta and get Community 1.0 ready for implementation.
beetleman

Marcus L. Griswold

Yes, well said !

I think this is and should be the one and only task at the moment!

I am (and others too) waiting for a working release of community for more than a year now and if I'm reading all the bug reports I get an very uncomfortable feeling that it will still last a few weeks (month?) until all this bugs are eliminated by GT and a working script is out!

What do YOU ALL think, how long will it last if they(GT) start to implement all or just some of the wanted features?

I wouldn't be happy at all if the release of a working script would last longer than necessary!

Regards,
Manu

Shopping Portal Shop-Netz.de® | Partnerprogramme | Flugreisen & Billigflüge | KESTERMEDIA e.K. | European Affiliate Marketing Forum.

Yes, I aggree. First GCommunity should be bugfixed, and v1.0 finally released.

We all want to have the final release out. Not new features.

My worries are about that GT even LATER will NOT plan to implement Who's Online & Private Messaging as dore feature of GCommunity...

Best regards,
Webmaster33

---

Paid Support from Webmaster33. Expert in Perl programming & Gossamer Threads applications. (click here for prices)
Webmaster33's products (upd.2004.09.26) | Private message | Contact me | Was my post helpful? Donate my help...

It seems you don't get my point. So I will express my opinion in details.
First let me express again, I'm glad that GComm is released, and that it's free.
Secondly I have some worries, I wrote in earlier posts.

Let me show the origin of my worries...
All my problems starts with the MONEY...:
1) I spent ALL my saved money to buy Links SQL.

2) I will buy some cheap plugins for Links SQL of a max US$100 value

3) I will have to buy a copy of GForum. I don't know yet how, because I don't have money, but I will have to buy it. It costs US$200. (to have comparison about how much money it is, in my country 1 month salary is about US$230-$250 ...)

4) Now of course after buying GForum, I will install GCommunity. It is offered for free. I welcome this, however I really afraid, that we will pay much money to have it for free.

5) After I have installed the GCommunity, I would like to make possible for users to contact each other (Private Messaging system). Allowing communication between users will strengthen community. Altough I have the Private Messaging system in GForum, what already bought in step 3, and I can not use it sitewide...

For a community software I would await at least the 2 mentioned features as base feature. But GT will likely release GCommunity software with authorization feature only, and seems does not have plan to implement these 2 features as core features. I asked the question why?
Here I supposed, that if GT does not plan to implement Who's Online & Private Messaging as core part of GComm, they will likely release as paid plugin. And this is my problem. How much would they ask for a Private messaging plugin? US$50? US$100? US$200?
If the cheapest GT Mail version costs US$650, and the most expensive version costs US$4950, how much would cost the Private Messaging system? Likely will be below US$200, because the GForum price.
If I bought GForumalready for US$200 in step 3, which contains Private Messaging, I would await (IMHO fairly) to have the Private Messaging available sitewide for free, using the GCommunity.

6) Theoritically I spent already at least US$800-$900 and still did not earn even a cent with the site. So if I also want to earn money, I have to buy the PayPerClick LinksSQL plugin for US$1500... This would be in overall about US$2300-$2400....

Unfortunately even after spending more than $700 until the step 4, I simply will have to stop buying new products, because I will have no more money to buy anything...
This is my point to be disappointed, and because likely Who's Online and Private Messaging will be not implemented as core feature of GCommunity...

The dream to spend even US$2400 to start making money on my site, but this is thousands miles away...


Perharps money isn't a problem for most of you, but it is for me. So until money & prices affects me so much, until that time I will fight to have the Who's Online and Private Messaging available as core feature of GCommunity (not in first v1.0 release, but at least in v2.0). Both features I asked were developed already, nobody should say, it's very difficult to implement an already working feature...

Best regards,
Webmaster33

---

Paid Support from Webmaster33. Expert in Perl programming & Gossamer Threads applications. (click here for prices)
Webmaster33's products (upd.2004.09.26) | Private message | Contact me | Was my post helpful? Donate my help...

I think you are moving too far away from the idea behind community. Alex has said numerous times it is a plugin to tie all of their scripts together.

I'm sure extra features will come with time, either by Gossamer Threads or by developers when plugin hooks are added, but at the moment I think you need to concerntrate on the issue in hand which is helping Alex find/fix bugs and suggesting improvements to the current plugin rather than trying to suggest new features at such an early stage.

As a developer, you don't want to be adding new features at beta stage...you want to stabilize the product.

While I expressed my opinion and worries in this thread, I also submitted numerous bug reports I found in beta version of GCommunity, so you can't blame me.
I exactly done, what you told it's needed to do now.

Best regards,
Webmaster33

---

Paid Support from Webmaster33. Expert in Perl programming & Gossamer Threads applications. (click here for prices)
Webmaster33's products (upd.2004.09.26) | Private message | Contact me | Was my post helpful? Donate my help...

Please stop

I too have made suggestions for new ideas to go along with Community. I also understand that the reason I made these suggestions now is to assist in potential hooks for the FINAL release and have no desire to see these added to a beta. And this IS a beta release.

There are good reasons to make suggestions now (to assist in hooks, etc...) and even more to be patient now (to give time to fine tune and stabilize the beta).

Everybody has good points. Just leave it at that!

Remember: Community is what Community does and Community can be what Community inspires.

Brian

Teambldr,

Did you ever read my posts above? Read it again!

I wrote:
I think you don't even read posts of others. You completely missed what I wrote...

I wrote, first I also want a v1.0 GCommunity release, without new features.
But I would like the mentioned features into v2.0, because I have NO money to buy them separately, once I also buy a product (GForum) which has that feature implemented.

Best regards,
Webmaster33

---

Paid Support from Webmaster33. Expert in Perl programming & Gossamer Threads applications. (click here for prices)
Webmaster33's products (upd.2004.09.26) | Private message | Contact me | Was my post helpful? Donate my help...

*chill*

Think happy thoughts.

Quote:

6) Theoritically I spent already at least US$800-$900 and still did not earn even a cent with the site.

Sorry, but are you sure, that it makes sense to you going on to develop your site if you still make no money with it ??

GCom (and private messaging) helps to make a site more usable..but it don't gives you a license to print money!

Regards,
Manu

Shopping Portal Shop-Netz.de® | Partnerprogramme | Flugreisen & Billigflüge | KESTERMEDIA e.K. | European Affiliate Marketing Forum.

Well, we could analyze and discuss marketing & business strategies, and that how can be possible to make money on the internet. IMO, this isn't the place where to discuss about that.

But I'll show you a short example, how it mostly works for Links based directories... The example below is only true for a part of websites. Those websites, which basically gives free service, but asks money for value increased services (link ranking, restricted areas, paid extra features, etc.)... And these websites are the most on the web...
My website belongs to this category. And IMO, most websites also belongs here, which are based on Links 2.0 or Links SQL... They mostly make money by providing value increased services...

There are several things you have to do, and which affects a website's life:
1) get the visitors to your site
2) keep the visitors & make them somehow to return
3) make the visitors to pay for something (services, products, etc.)

In that case, what you mention about GCom and Private Messaging, simply belongs to step 2).
Step 1 & 2, is prerequisite for step 3. And GCom and private messaging is needed for that.

Further details of my website strategy is not available for public. But the info I gave, should be enough for you, to see that the community tools, services like Private Messaging, Forum, Chat are necessary for a similar website, before they can make money. And yes, common login for services (what GCommunity does), also belongs to step 2.
Finally in step 3, the money-making tool, the PPC plugin (which can really start the money making on website), costs US$1500, which is incredibly much money for me to be able to invest into site.

BTW: the time, when the sites were able to make money with banner advertisements, it's over. Only the biggest sites are able to get ad income, or sometimes those sites which are grouped into ad networks. I participate in ad network, but unfortunately they can not get enough paid ads. That's the situation. The age of ads is over...

Best regards,
Webmaster33

---

Paid Support from Webmaster33. Expert in Perl programming & Gossamer Threads applications. (click here for prices)
Webmaster33's products (upd.2004.09.26) | Private message | Contact me | Was my post helpful? Donate my help...

If the age of ads is over why do you have about 7 ads on the main page of your site (including 5 dead images I should add)

Hehe. Yeah.
Those ads are not making any money. They are banner exchange with other sites (making traffic for me), or are Commission Junction (CJ) banners, which made about hard US$20-$30 in a year. WOW, what a business to make money from ads...
I replace CJ banners anytime with exchanged banners, without a teardrop...

But again, those ads are not making money, but instead brings traffic...

Best regards,
Webmaster33

---

Paid Support from Webmaster33. Expert in Perl programming & Gossamer Threads applications. (click here for prices)
Webmaster33's products (upd.2004.09.26) | Private message | Contact me | Was my post helpful? Donate my help...

Whats the point in them bringing traffic if you make no money from it?

You should fix the dead images though ;)

The point is to make first a popular site, then create value added services.
But first all the plugins needed for LSQL on my site should be finished.

No. Just checked and there are nor broken images, nor broken ads. Could you PM me the broken image URL, if you really see one?

Best regards,
Webmaster33

---

Paid Support from Webmaster33. Expert in Perl programming & Gossamer Threads applications. (click here for prices)
Webmaster33's products (upd.2004.09.26) | Private message | Contact me | Was my post helpful? Donate my help...

>>
if you really see one
<<

Are you implying I'm lying?

Isn't that your add filter?

Ivan
-----
Iyengar Yoga Resources / GT Plugins

Paul, please remove my site attached screenshot! I told you send me as PM, not to put out to the forum!
Otherwise those banners are working, I told you.

And I DID NOT IMPLIED THAT YOU LIE!!!!!!
I was very kind to you, so why you say, that I suggested that you lie???

Again, please remove the screenshot from the forum.
Also the posts #56, #57, #58 are far out of topic, so I recommend to also remove them.

Best regards,
Webmaster33

---

Paid Support from Webmaster33. Expert in Perl programming & Gossamer Threads applications. (click here for prices)
Webmaster33's products (upd.2004.09.26) | Private message | Contact me | Was my post helpful? Donate my help...

Isn't what my add filter?

You really need to chill out Konrad. The images don't work for me as the screenshot proved.

Oh I see what you mean...no it isn't, it doesnt block images on webpages, plus it isn't installed.

Paul, please remove topics from #56 to #62. Are far away from the topic, contains personal things, which are not related to the topic in any way, so please remove them!

Best regards,
Webmaster33

---

Paid Support from Webmaster33. Expert in Perl programming & Gossamer Threads applications. (click here for prices)
Webmaster33's products (upd.2004.09.26) | Private message | Contact me | Was my post helpful? Donate my help...

Well firstly I can't remove them, but even if I could I wouldn't.

I don't see anything personal nor anything that needs removing?

If you get back on topic then we won't be off topic :)

Probably you did set your browser not to display 3rd party images, from domains other than current one. That's why you don't see images. Otherwise I don't bother about it. It's my site, and I know the images works. I don't need to prove anything for you...
Ok. I will then contact Alex to remove offtopic posts...

Best regards,
Webmaster33

---

Paid Support from Webmaster33. Expert in Perl programming & Gossamer Threads applications. (click here for prices)
Webmaster33's products (upd.2004.09.26) | Private message | Contact me | Was my post helpful? Donate my help...

Do as you wish.

Seems everyone has a case of last-post'itis. I'm locking this thread.

Cheers,

Alex
--
Gossamer Threads Inc.