I don't know if this thread is supposed to be a joke, or serious. So, I'll take it seriously:
So far, my largest complaint with the switch-over has been how it was handled/executed.
I suspect we as a membership are not privy to all the details of the process. We are not HP, nor are we Christopher, so we don't know all the details of their employment/contract agreement, or the time-line of what happened and when.
Questions like:
When did HP decide to go to a pay site?
Who approached who? Christopher or HP?
Weather it's his fault or not, all of the undesired changes seem to coincide with Christopher's arrival. He could be just a hired gun to execute HPs agenda.
Did Christopher bring his own agenda? (this is not necessarily a bad thing)
I guess, to sum it up, did HP decide to go 'pay', and then go find someone who could help implement that, or, did Christopher come along, and approach HP with the idea that he could convert it over to pay? Or, did he come along, have all kinds of ideas to add 'features', and then found out the equipment couldn't handle all the new data? I don't know. I'm not going to speculate, that wouldn't be fair, and I believe in being fair.
Now, I've been against the 'going pay' of this forum since it was proposed. Mostly on the principle of how it was presented to us: New guy comes along, creates lots more 'features', then tells us we have to pay to upgrade the hardware 'cuz the old hardware won't keep up with all his new 'features'. In any group, there is always a vocal minority - each direction, and then the masses who just go along. In this case, it appears the -get this- majority of the vocal minority would rather just go back to what it was, and keep it free, under the concept, of "we didn't want it, so take it back, and don't charge us for it.". Many of us feel changes we didn't ask for or don't want have been forced upon the members of the forum. Sure, we can choose to 'hide' certain stuff, or just not use it, but it takes computer space and energy to have those features, even if they are turned off. Weather it's coming from Christopher, or simply through Christopher, we don't know, and I suspect we won't know.
I signed on this morning with the general resolve that I would likely be upgrading to a paid member. It's less than a half-rack per year, and I don't like being told I can't go someplace that I have already been going and liked. But, I tried five times to log on, and each time, the request timed out, as 'snowest server too busy'. Each time, I went to a different site to see if it was my connection or computer, and each time, instant access. FIVE TIMES! And they want me to pay for that?
I don't know what I will end up doing, but for now, I'm back in the no-pay camp, at least until they follow through on previous commitments that the new hardware would be able to return our access speed.
PE
