ok. lets cover the immediate topic. I have spoken to gregg briefly regarding the future - albeit only the immediate one.
hosting is covered. in house. for now .... it won't necessarily be the ideal setup and if the sql side falters, we could be looking at extended down times but that doesn't happen all that often. it won't require any money at this time but we are probably gonna have to go ahead and use some ads on the site to help offset the cost. I have never liked that idea but I admit there is little choice so it'll be happening. when? not sure but it will take place.
the transfer will likely take place later on this month and there will be down time and probably a glitch or two after ....
but with our current needs, it means the site will stay online. who knows what will take place regarding the site performance. it might actually get better - or it might be slightly off ... we will have to wait and see.
but that doesn't solve the problems as I see it. we still have the lack of membership and the lack of participation by the existing membership to deal with.
every idea given thus far regarding direction and structure are good and deserve looking at - but - and it's a big but, only when we address and at least partially solve the lack of activity problem. if we show some sort of increase in this regard, we will revisit all the suggestions and probably start to adapt the site to some sort of changes that might make us more easily accessible and popular. no promises but I think some of your ideas have merit stebs. and we have a few ideas of our own that might fit in .... but - we simply must increase our user base somehow first. otherwise, it's all just a lot of work for basically no return.
so, despite the premise that what we have here may indeed be an outdated concept - the whole peer review system, it is the system we have and even in these times, we can do better at it than what we have. and we have to if we're gonna adapt.
take your thinking caps, twist them around a bit and maybe tilt them to screwy angles and come up with some ideas - real ideas - on how we can bring back our existing membership and go on a membership drive to attract new blood. try to do it without the idea of changing what we have and what we do for now. lets dance with who brung us .... we are not gonna go into a site overhaul and conceptually change what we do without there being some promise that it will be for more than 6 to 12 people. I realize it may be the old chicken before the egg and visa versa problem but we have what we have here. and the fact remains that amongst the worlds population, we really ought to be able to come up with a hundred = or even a few hundred people who really dig the concept still.
we need to find them and bring them here. how do we do that? what can be done individually and collectively and as a website?
don't let up on ideas now. simply cus this isn't as glamorous a task as site concept. this is where gregg and I have been stifled. this is where we need the help most. we aren't against having to add a few pages and modifications to suit new ideas but they must be within the concepts or what we already do. and that is review independent music. I might be ready to try to enlist gregg in setting up a pro review system where a band can purchase a panel review.
kim and I have had the same idea come to light .... specialty reviews by our ap expert panel. covering what our reviewers are best at .... there's a possibility we can cover all aspects of a song with different people. technical .... emotional .... musical .... lyrical .... etc etc ..... but do understand, when a band buys into this, the panel must be there to do the work. as immediately as possible. and we must be professional.
that's one idea but it must be something we can spread the news about. how? where? the ideas must be accompanied by how to make it work .... otherwise, we're still in the same boat.
so, what say you?