Please, please, please fix this site.

[TrappedinCalifornia]

Yeah, how dare people expect to use a website... bro, I just want to find a ppt on a site where ppts find each other. I am proud to keep my posts focused. Seeking same.

As I said, the situation is not 'ideal.' However, what you seem to be missing or ignoring is that YOUR 'use' of the site doesn't necessarily represent the 'majority' of users on this site. It speaks to one cohort and, actually, one part of that single cohort. Yet, you feel free to denounce what I have to say as you are attempting to represent yourself as 'the majority' and claiming that I'm listening or represent the 'minority.'

Trading, as I indicated, is ONE aspect of what this site offers and it's not even the most prominent. Notice how the site is divided up... Firearms Discussions; Politics, Litigation, and Activism; General Discussion; The Calguns Community; Specialty Forums; Concealed Carry/License to Carry; Outdoors, Hunting, and Survival; Interests and Activities; California Shooting Clubs and Organizations; then you get to the Marketplace and Vendors (which are different than someone necessarily looking to conduct a PPT).

I'm not going to get into whether your price tag represents a 'deal' or is simply a 'regular' asking price for an used version of the item, meaning if your, personal focus is simply to make a trade, let's just say, again, it is simply ONE aspect of the site, not necessarily representative of what you term 'the majority of California gun owners' or the membership here. Realize that there are many, many websites which allow for such trading and, as I indicated, there some is debate as to which is 'best' on that score.

Again, you might want to give 'the community' a try in terms of your actual participation to develop a more realistic sense for what it represents. Who knows? Rather than drawing attention for complaining that things 'aren't working' the way you want them to, actual participation in the other activities the site offers could even draw someone's attention to what you're attempting to market. Just a thought.

[TrappedinCalifornia]

He thinks he is right no matter what evidence is presented, and continues to insist that his path is both a majority opinion and the only objectively correct one. Engaging with him is pointless.

Frankly at this point he might be right, who knows. The damage is done.

If you're referring to my responses, the 'evidence' being presented that you reference is fragmented as virtually no member has access behind-the-scenes vis a vis the actual data, and is largely based on opinion and perception. That means my, personal perceptions, based on my observations are just as valid. Are they correct? Who knows? Are they 'wrong?' Again, it depends on what prism you're looking through.

Continuing to accuse me of thinking I'm speaking for the 'majority' while claiming that others actually do is... self-serving. I don't necessarily claim to speak for the the majority. Instead, I claim that there isn't necessarily a single, majority view beyond a desire that this site survive and that it be brought back to a more 'ideal' status as opposed to a 'loud' cohort with an agenda. Instead, what I highlight is that there are a series of cadres with their own interests which don't necessarily represent the interest of the owner or even the desires of the majority of the cadres. You'll also note that my responses are actually the ones REACTING to posts being made, indicating that those posts either ignore things which have actually been posted by TPTB or seem to be consistently portrayed. In fact, were it not for that, I wouldn't even be 'engaged' in threads like this; i.e., there's simply too much griping based on personal takes or agenda.

If you go back, you'll find that I acknowledge that there has been 'damage' to this site vis a vis it's reputation. The only way to 'recover' from that is to get it up and working, not simply kvetch about how this or that should be done the way someone else wants to see it done. If you want to talk about 'majority opinion,' bear in mind that the preservation of the knowledge contained in the databases IS something which has been talked about as a desired outcome by the majority still active here, and that includes the owner. Otherwise, the quick and dirty solution is likely something which would have been opted for some time ago. Logical, right? I mean, why else would someone tolerate the supposed loss of income, loss of members, loss of... Well you get the idea.

Right or wrong. Good, bad, or indifferent. We are where we are at and those who are still active, majority or not, continue to deal with it in the hopes that something will be worked out. What we continue to REACT to is a narrative which seems to dovetail with the personal interests of someone we know doesn't necessarily have the best interests of THIS site in mind. You see, that's the crux of it. What you accuse me of is simply a viewpoint from another perspective. What isn't appreciated, I guess, is that there are various perspectives, almost all of which have some basis in legitimacy, but not necessarily all of which have a basis in the 'best interest' of this site's success.

[Fnfan]

Who owns this site? If you want to sell it, message me.

[cgncgn112]

doesn't necessarily represent the 'majority' of users on this site.

Yeah... I'm speaking for the majority of enthusiasts in California. The majority that can't log on here most of the time and most who long ago gave up trying. Your self-selected sample doesn't say much for all to the rest of us.

People want to log in the first time, and that builds the community I want. It brings in people who expect things to work and deals to be honored. I want to connect with those people.

[TrappedinCalifornia]

Yeah... I'm speaking for the majority of enthusiasts in California. The majority that can't log on here most of the time and most who long ago gave up trying. Your self-selected sample doesn't say much for all to the rest of us.

People want to log in the first time, and that builds the community I want. It brings in people who expect things to work and deals to be honored. I want to connect with those people.

Self-selected huh?

You do realize there are numerous members who sign on everyday, most days, and many days... right?

I have told you there are problems and we all recognize it. We all want the problems resolved. Needless to say, that's why this and other threads exist. However, there is virtually nothing the membership can do about 'fixing' things and, as I've already told you, steps have been taken and, hopefully, are continuing by the individual who can. (There is evidence the owner has not 'abandoned' us, including in an OT thread from yesterday where someone had trouble with their password and it was dealt with and that's just a single piece of the evidence which has been made available in the threads.) Again, what is causing the delay has already been addressed as well.

You want to 'connect' to people to be able to trade. Many, many others want to connect to garner and exchange knowledge. Again, look at how the site itself is laid out. Trade is only a piece of the picture. Yet, trade and knowledge exchange, among other things, are still achievable, even with the issues. Thus, at some level, the site is working and your continued 'posting' is evidence of that.

The community has banded together to keep the site viable via posts, traffic, and even, yes, trading. It's sheer hubris for you to to declare that you speak for the 'majority of enthusiasts in California' as, frankly, most enthusiasts haven't even heard of the site, let alone belong. Well, unless 355,415 members accrued over the years out of approximately 39.5 million estimated current residents of California alone is a number you think reflects all or even the majority of 2nd Amendment enthusiasts in the State and we assume that you speak for even the majority who are still active.

Let's just say you seem to have some... uh... self-selected facts you're using to support your desire to kvetch about the site.

[cgncgn112]

Good point. Not self-selected. Selected externally, by poor site reliability.

You get the people who are willing to put up with this. And that's not most of 'em.

Uptime is not an debate. Connection comes first. Community comes second, and right now I am LUCKY to break through once a day to bump my ad, let alone browse the knowledge base. We. Are. On. The. Same. Side.

[TrappedinCalifornia]

Good point. Not self-selected. Selected externally, by poor site reliability.

You get the people who are willing to put up with this. And that's not most of 'em.

Uptime is not an debate. Connection comes first. Community comes second, and right now I am LUCKY to break through once a day to bump my ad, let alone browse the knowledge base. We. Are. On. The. Same. Side.

I agree that uptime is something which is important; but, it doesn't necessarily trump 'community' at this point in the game. For a 'new' website, it might. Although, even with a new site, just building the community adds to the sense of one. For a site which has been around for over two decades, community is crucial and, in fact, it's the reason the site continues to exist, thrive, and survive. in fact, it is 'community,' be it the site's or the larger 2nd Amendment community, which allows for things like the trading which occurs.

It's just like your claim of being 'lucky' to break through 'once' a day. Yet, here you are, now posting multiple times in a 24 hr. period. Could your 'once a day' have more to do with your schedule than the site's actual 'uptime?' Again, bear in mind that while the site is unreachable during periods of the day, it is also reachable during other periods of the day. Is it possible you haven't 'caught on' to the latter yet?

As I said, it's not the 'ideal' situation, but the situation is what it is and members must choose, based on their own criterion/criteria, whether to remain, be active, be inactive, leave, et al. Remember, simply being a 'member' doesn't necessarily make one part of the 'community.' That just pads the numbers. What makes someone part of the community is their contribution to it, be it via site traffic, posts, active trading, clicks on retail links, etc. Most of all, what factors in is their desire to see the site 'survive' through both good and bad times; i.e., not take the good times for granted or kvetch misleadingly (not to mention publicly) during the bad times.

[cgncgn112]

more to do with your schedule than the site's actual 'uptime?' Again, bear in mind that while the site is unreachable during periods of the day...

You folks getting this?

[TrappedinCalifornia]

You folks getting this?

We all 'get it.' We've been arm wrestling with it for awhile now. You seem to be the one having 'awareness' issues with it and/or with having to deal with it.

I've told you, several times now, none of us like what's happening and all of us want it fixed sooner than later. We simply accept it is what it is and those who don't want to do so have other options. That's no more than the truth, just like it's no more (or less) than the truth that, at some level, TPTB are working on it. You're not telling us anything that's new and you're not going to get what you want simply by making a bunch of noise about it. We know. We've had these discussions, a number of times and it's something you seem to also be unaware of.

By the way, have you noticed how often you've been on and posting, just in the last 24 hours? 6 posts between yesterday and today. Almost daily posts since the middle of last month; i.e., almost daily posts from the time you listed your WTS. It appears YOU are getting on to the site and the site is functioning for YOU on a nearly daily basis. Could it be that your frustration has more to do with your advertised WTS not selling or not selling as quickly as you'd like than it does even with the site's issues? Could it possibly have to do with, as I noted, it not being a 'deal' and being listed at the regular asking price as those posted on other sites geared toward actually selling rather than 2nd Amendment and related discussions, with 'trading' being an associated activity?

That doesn't mean, by definition, that it has to be a 'deal' to make it work. What it does mean is that it may not all have to do with a lack of 'traffic' and site issues. Likewise, it may not have to do with you acontextually clipping portions of my responses, hoping that readers won't go back and look at the actual posts to see what our 'conversation' has been about.

[alaskascottr]

You folks getting this?

No, thankfully. I blocked him and my life is so much better!

If I was going to reply though, ☕️

[Cowboy T]

This is the first time in a month than I've been able to get on to CalGuns. It is 5:43am PST (8:43am EST).

The error is 504 Bad Gateway (timeout).

[OlderThanDirt]

It’s still alive.

[Imageview]

The irony is when Voldemort argues, he presents everything as a false binary. Database can be wiped while data is still preserved for example. It involves translating the data to a static web format, which will work perfectly well. It won’t be part of the new living forum but it will still be easily accessible. The forum part itself is then fully functional and we can all go on our merry way posting. That however has not been good enough. The irony is he loves the site so much he is unwilling to concede in anything which might have a hope in fixing it. Fortunately he is not the site owner. Just a guy who posts his opinions like the rest of us.

[TrappedinCalifornia]

The irony is when Voldemort argues, he presents everything as a false binary. Database can be wiped while data is still preserved for example. It involves translating the data to a static web format, which will work perfectly well. It won’t be part of the new living forum but it will still be easily accessible. The forum part itself is then fully functional and we can all go on our merry way posting. That however has not been good enough. The irony is he loves the site so much he is unwilling to concede in anything which might have a hope in fixing it. Fortunately he is not the site owner. Just a guy who posts his opinions like the rest of us.

You mean something similar to what I mentioned back in Post #112...???

...Everyone who wishes that knowledge to be maintained recognizes the possibility that, at some point, an alternative approach may be needed; e.g., partitioning the 'old' into a 'read only' section and offering a 'new' matrix for current and forward contributions being one example which has been talked about. But, again, that's not the preference and we haven't necessarily reached that point, yet...

[Imageview]

Your own post has you shooting down the idea as we haven’t reached that point yet in your estimation even after losing 90% of users and over 2 years of the current situation. So… yes. Kinda like you dismissed it several years ago, and a few times in between. Thanks for the evidence of what I am talking about.