Questor has a very good question which should be answered:
"What if some of us decide to contribute funds equal to or above Springer's contribution? What do we get in return?"
Thanks to Springer..., page 5
privacy
reply posted on 10-2-2004 @ 03:29 PM by Voice_of Doom
On one hand, I hear a lot of poor-mouthing about how much it costs to run ATS. Bandwidth costs, upgrade costs, Security costs, IT costs. The site
goes up...it goes down...up...and down...and now you're forced to "break the rules" to get the financing needed JUST to keep going.
Yet on the other hand. There's two threads going around about "record posts" over the last two days. The consensus from those being that this is a GREAT thing.
"Good gravy what are we going to do with 500,000 posts?
S.O. you better build a shed to store 'em all in!
This is awesome, the more the merrier I always say. Think of the miriad points of view and multitudes of minds ATS is attracting.
This could REALLY become something HUGE" - Springer
"-- 2333 -- the numbers keep rolling in
Yesterday, our members smashed our previous one-day post-count record...
www.abovetopsecret.com...
2,333 posts for February 5th, 2004. This broke the previous one-day record of 2,007 on January 21st, 2004.
Way to go members!!!" - Skeptic Overlord
There's also a thread asking people not use the "quote" function so much as its depleting bandwidth and hogging space.
So what gives? Do you want all the traffic or not? Is the poor-mouthing just a routine for soliciting funds from "eager beavers" drooling to be "on the inside", or a con for the Google advertisers?
I have become confused with what ATS is about. Are you aiming to be the biggest "conspiracy" site on the web? If so why? Does "ad hits" and "web-traffic" really allow us to "Deny Ignorace" better?
Why is there such a push for "ATS legitimacy" from the outside world with such obvious examples as ATSNN? Why has that become so important? Why are we trying to get bigger and bigger when there's NO money available?
Perhaps the members should be let in on the grand plan for ATS. The people here tend to be smart, educated and are obviously loyal. It might help to CLEAR THE AIR with them.
- The Village Grouse
Yet on the other hand. There's two threads going around about "record posts" over the last two days. The consensus from those being that this is a GREAT thing.
"Good gravy what are we going to do with 500,000 posts?
S.O. you better build a shed to store 'em all in!
This is awesome, the more the merrier I always say. Think of the miriad points of view and multitudes of minds ATS is attracting.
This could REALLY become something HUGE" - Springer
"-- 2333 -- the numbers keep rolling in
Yesterday, our members smashed our previous one-day post-count record...
www.abovetopsecret.com...
2,333 posts for February 5th, 2004. This broke the previous one-day record of 2,007 on January 21st, 2004.
Way to go members!!!" - Skeptic Overlord
There's also a thread asking people not use the "quote" function so much as its depleting bandwidth and hogging space.
So what gives? Do you want all the traffic or not? Is the poor-mouthing just a routine for soliciting funds from "eager beavers" drooling to be "on the inside", or a con for the Google advertisers?
I have become confused with what ATS is about. Are you aiming to be the biggest "conspiracy" site on the web? If so why? Does "ad hits" and "web-traffic" really allow us to "Deny Ignorace" better?
Why is there such a push for "ATS legitimacy" from the outside world with such obvious examples as ATSNN? Why has that become so important? Why are we trying to get bigger and bigger when there's NO money available?
Perhaps the members should be let in on the grand plan for ATS. The people here tend to be smart, educated and are obviously loyal. It might help to CLEAR THE AIR with them.
- The Village Grouse
but not evil surprises 