O-Trap
Posts: 14,994
Jun 26, 2012 12:09pm
sleeper;1212094 wrote:If something is true, its simply a reality.
Correct, if not a touch redundant. However, the hasty conclusion asserts something as true before it can be known to be.
If I stated that OSU yearly cheats in their sports programs, I could assert it as fact. I could be convinced that it is fact.
Doesn't mean it is. Doesn't mean it isn't. To suggest that something is fact simply because I, myself, am convinced that it is is shortsighted in light of what I do not know.
sleeper;1212094 wrote:The fact that said poster takes offense to said reality ...
I don't think I've seen anyone on here take offense to a fact or fact claim, even. This isn't North Carolina discussing the rising sea levels.
The only offense I've seen taken here has been the attitude displayed through the use of non-quantifiable or unsubstantiated descriptors -- inferences FROM said facts.
Actually, this depends. If the speaker does not communicate himself clearly or impartially, then it reflects as poorly on him as anyone.sleeper;1212094 wrote:... reflects poorly on said poster and not the person presenting the facts.
sleeper;1212094 wrote:Why punish those who bring facts to a debate and vindicate those who remain ignorant in their various positions?
Who is punishing for facts? Facts are impartial. Facts draw no conclusions by themselves. Facts are raw data ... rarely descriptors, PARTICULARLY when dealing with non-physical elements (such as whether or not something is fraudulent) or when contingent on subjective definitions of terms (see the same example).
What I'm wanting to see is a level of civility and maturity between people whose difference in belief in what is fact suggests that discourse still needs to occur before assuming a conclusion and expecting others to adopt the same view.
You're playing a semantics game. Trolling is the act of posting with the primary intent to invoke retaliatory or offended responses.sleeper;1212098 wrote:Trolling is an uninformed opinion at worst and could be a fact at best. Again, what's your problem with trolling?
justincredible
Posts: 32,056
Jun 26, 2012 12:09pm
I'll make note of this.sleeper;1212112 wrote:You don't need it. Tweet #sleeperwins and my people will contact you.
C
Con_Alma
Posts: 12,198
Jun 26, 2012 12:11pm
What's not cheap?O-Trap;1211981 wrote:It's not a cheap thing to run a forum of this size. Making money would be a breakeven strategy, ensuring that the site could continue in the foreseeable future, unless you're planning for paying for it out of pocket every month. Have fun.
...
If I didn't see it as a hobby I wouldn't personally do it....but then again I think we were supposed to answer it from the perspective of what we would do as a hypothetical as opposed to what we thought should be done.
What are the costs to run this site?
THE4RINGZ
Posts: 16,816
Jun 26, 2012 12:13pm
Sleeper's "people" 
O-Trap
Posts: 14,994
Jun 26, 2012 12:14pm
That's a good question. I'm assuming a site with the volume of traffic and rendering as this one gets probably uses a dedicated VPS. Justin?Con_Alma;1212115 wrote:What's not cheap?
If I didn't see it as a hobby I wouldn't personally do it....but then again I think we were supposed to answer it from the perspective of what we would do as a hypothetical as opposed to what we thought should be done.
What are the costs to run this site?
justincredible
Posts: 32,056
Jun 26, 2012 12:14pm
I pay ~$70/month for the server.Con_Alma;1212115 wrote:What's not cheap?
If I didn't see it as a hobby I wouldn't personally do it....but then again I think we were supposed to answer it from the perspective of what we would do as a hypothetical as opposed to what we thought should be done.
What are the costs to run this site?
justincredible
Posts: 32,056
Jun 26, 2012 12:15pm
Yeah, this site is hosted on a VPS. I also host a couple other small, negligible traffic sites on it.O-Trap;1212122 wrote:That's a good question. I'm assuming a site with the volume of traffic and rendering as this one gets probably uses a dedicated VPS. Justin?
C
Con_Alma
Posts: 12,198
Jun 26, 2012 12:16pm
Did someone take offense to the "reality" you combat those with whom presented their religious beliefs?sleeper;1212094 wrote:... The fact that said poster takes offense to said reality, reflects poorly on said poster and not the person presenting the facts.
...!
C
Con_Alma
Posts: 12,198
Jun 26, 2012 12:18pm
Thanks. I've never knew what type of costs it might be.justincredible;1212124 wrote:I pay ~$70/month for the server.
O-Trap
Posts: 14,994
Jun 26, 2012 12:20pm
Most people don't.Con_Alma;1212130 wrote:Thanks. I've never know what type of costs it might be.
C
Con_Alma
Posts: 12,198
Jun 26, 2012 12:22pm
That's probably because most people just don't care...at least it wouldn't seem like they should.
ernest_t_bass
Posts: 24,984
Jun 26, 2012 12:22pm
sleeper;1212089 wrote:Neither am I.
Sleeper, please. I like you, but you are an incredible asshole.
C
Con_Alma
Posts: 12,198
Jun 26, 2012 12:25pm
That's a good definition.O-Trap;1212113 wrote:...
Trolling is the act of posting with the primary intent to invoke retaliatory or offended responses.
Determining intent can sometimes be a difficult thing. Other times it's glaringly obvious.
O-Trap
Posts: 14,994
Jun 26, 2012 12:27pm
Well, if you've got an extra $70 laying around that isn't budgeted anywhere, then probably not. It's hardly unreasonable to expect Justin to look for ways to avoid paying $420 a year just so we don't have to pay $12 a year.Con_Alma;1212135 wrote:That's probably because most people just don't care...at least it wouldn't seem like they should.
O-Trap
Posts: 14,994
Jun 26, 2012 12:27pm
Sometimes, you're right, which is why warnings are vital to such a system.Con_Alma;1212138 wrote:That's a good definition.
Determining intent can sometimes be a difficult thing. Other times it's glaringly obvious.
Also, it isn't as though we don't have the Basement.
C
Con_Alma
Posts: 12,198
Jun 26, 2012 12:29pm
??????O-Trap;1212141 wrote:Well, if you've got an extra $70 laying around that isn't budgeted anywhere, then probably not. It's hardly unreasonable to expect Justin to look for ways to avoid paying $420 a year just so we don't have to pay $12 a year.
I didn't imply it was unreasonable. I think you might read my posts above.
I answered how the question was asked which was what I would do not what I think Justin should do.
O-Trap
Posts: 14,994
Jun 26, 2012 12:32pm
Ah! I misunderstood. Fair enough. The "should" part threw me off.Con_Alma;1212143 wrote:??????
I didn't imply it was unreasonable. I think you might read my posts above.
I answered how the questions was asked which was what I would do not what I think Justin should do.
justincredible
Posts: 32,056
Jun 26, 2012 12:34pm
$840 a year. Learn to math.O-Trap;1212141 wrote:Well, if you've got an extra $70 laying around that isn't budgeted anywhere, then probably not. It's hardly unreasonable to expect Justin to look for ways to avoid paying $420 a year just so we don't have to pay $12 a year.
O-Trap
Posts: 14,994
Jun 26, 2012 12:35pm
Dear sweet FML ...justincredible;1212151 wrote:$840 a year. Learn to math.
C
Con_Alma
Posts: 12,198
Jun 26, 2012 12:43pm
I guess the point of my decision was that complying with the revenue provider can be what determines certain rules and how the site is run...which I certainly don't blame them for. The whole point of having a site like this would be to have fun with it and be able to create the environment and culture of my choosing...or in the case of my example the choosing of the people/posters. I wouldn't want to see the requirements of the revenue providers to influence that so significantly.
O-Trap
Posts: 14,994
Jun 26, 2012 12:48pm
Ah, but this creates a fun new puzzle: how to achieve both via loopholes (see my sister site example)!Con_Alma;1212161 wrote:I guess the point of my decision was that complying with the revenue provider can be what determines certain rules and how the site is run...which I certainly don't blame them for. The whole point of having a site like this would be to have fun with it and be able to create the environment and culture of my choosing...or in the case of my example the choosing of the people/posters. I wouldn't want to see the requirements of the revenue providers to influence that so significantly.
C
Con_Alma
Posts: 12,198
Jun 26, 2012 12:54pm
Yeah, I saw that. It could be a solution I guess.O-Trap;1212165 wrote:Ah, but this creates a fun new puzzle: how to achieve both via loopholes (see my sister site example)!
mcburg93
Posts: 3,167
Jun 26, 2012 12:55pm
Does clicking the adds help earn this place money? I am not real sure how that shit works. But if it helps make money for the site i will click a few here and there and get rid of my add block.
O-Trap
Posts: 14,994
Jun 26, 2012 1:03pm
My recommendation is to click a few, and not too many. Here's why: If there end up being far too many clicks, and there are no conversions, then Google doesn't make money from having Justin as an affiliate, and they give him the thunder foot treatment. It's about volume of clicks for Justin, but it's about conversions:click to Google, Justin's merchant.mcburg93;1212173 wrote:Does clicking the adds help earn this place money? I am not real sure how that shit works. But if it helps make money for the site i will click a few here and there and get rid of my add block.
Justin, have you considered other CPC platforms? I'm just curious.
justincredible
Posts: 32,056
Jun 26, 2012 1:13pm
I have but they don't have the ease of use as adsense. At least as far as what I've looked at.O-Trap;1212177 wrote:Justin, have you considered other CPC platforms? I'm just curious.