Will PCA put a limit on registered membership?

  CurlyWhirly 17:19 12 Dec 2004
Locked

I am aware that this PCA site is *huge* and it has suffered from server problems in the past due to it having more than 150,000 registered members!


Is it likely that PCA will *limit* new membership to stop the server getting overloaded or do the 150,000+ membership figures *not* give the true facts as *some* members will have registered when the forum was launched in 2000, and *no* longer come back here?
Just curious!

  Salinger 17:33 12 Dec 2004

No Comment!

  CurlyWhirly 17:35 12 Dec 2004

Why no comment?
Oh now I know why!
I will tick as resolved!

  €dstowe 17:54 12 Dec 2004

There are a number of members registered on the forum who post once with a specific problem and when that is answered they are never to be seen again. Fair enough. They add to the membership figures but I don't think they add anything to the overload of the server.

You can see from the posts that there is a "hard core" membership who try and help others - the ones who pass in the night. There are also a number of "lurkers" who follow the forum but who seldom, if ever, post. Lurkers should not be deprecated. Someday they may make some huge contribution.

  GANDALF <|:-)> 18:00 12 Dec 2004

You have too much time on your hands and does this really matter? So long as there are people here to help it matters nothing if there are 2 or 200,000.

G

  LastChip 18:04 12 Dec 2004

It would rather defeat the purpose of the site; wouldn't it?

Anyway, the amount of registered users is irrelevant. What's more important, is the total number on the site at any one time, as it is this that consumes bandwidth.

  CurlyWhirly 18:10 12 Dec 2004

I hope I haven't opened up a can of worms guys!
The *only* reason why I posted was that for the last month or two the forum has been running quite fast with *no* JRUN errors or timeouts, and I didn't want it to go back to how it was.
Oh how I wish there was a delete button!

  Forum Editor 18:21 12 Dec 2004

you should say "Why no comment? Oh now I know why!" or even why Salinger should say "No comment" in the first place.

The truth, for what it's worth, is that we have no intention of limiting membership - why would we want to do that? The JRUN errors aren't anything to do with the server being overloaded - they were/are caused by database glitches. The fact that things are running smoothly at the moment is due to a lot of hard work on the part of everyone involved in keeping this site up and running, and we're all hoping that it will stay that way.

The site traffic statistics show us that our forums are being visited by roughly the same numbers of people as during the summer - obviously there is some 'churn' in the membership, and although some people don't revisit us after a while, new people join, so all in all the traffic figures follow a fairly predictable pattern. As GANDALF <|:-)> says, as long as there are enough people online to cope with the demand for advice (and there usually are) it doesn't really matter. We're not in some kind of numbers competition with any other forums - there are very few who could touch us in that respect anyway.

  Dumble452 14:35 13 Dec 2004

I think the "no comment" is because if you make a statement rather than asking a question it is not possible to mark the thread as resolved until there has been a response.

  Sapins 15:20 13 Dec 2004

I hope not, I want to be re-incarnated as the oldest member;-) thats after a few more "lives", one of which may be Forum Editor!!!

  Forum Editor 16:23 13 Dec 2004

Dream on.

No harm in aiming high though.

This thread is now locked and can not be replied to.

Elsewhere on IDG sites

Fujitsu Lifebook P727 laptop review

Converse draws on iconic heritage for a fresh brand identity

Mac power user tips and hidden tricks

Comment lancer Windows 10 en mode sans échec ?