Fix The Site Or Shut It Down

[chefdude]

[QUOTE=TrappedinCalifornia;n54582563]

Just in case you missed it...

The site didn't 'take down' iTrader or the ratings. We were warned, for years, that any change to the site software was going to have consequences. iTrader only worked with the iteration of vBulletin (the software the site uses) that Kestryll kept, despite the potential problems, so that iTrader would work. The change was forced on the site with the host going out of business and the new host demanding an update to a more recent version of vBulletin. (That information came from a post by Librarian.)

The other problems, including the Gateway Errors, we assume, are a result of having to move historical/legacy data through several iterations of vBulletin updates. No. We didn't get that from Kestryll, though there are other issues, including limitations placed on the moderators' boards, which has negatively impacted their powers. We have been told, by friends of Kestryll, that he's been going through some personal issues and we were informed, by Kestryll, that the remaining fixes are beyond his technical abilities. Some time back, we were told that one of the members and his team were brought in on a voluntary/part-time basis to make fixes; but, we haven't seen any updates in quite awhile. Personally, I assume that Kestryll isn't posting updates due to the persistent and constant complaining regarding things not being instantly fixed; i.e., one of those lose if you do, lose if you don't post things.

The bottom line is that there are many theories out there, some from people who claim a level of technical expertise, as to why this or that problem occurs. The reality is almost no one has insight behind the curtain, meaning that the vast majority of the theories are, in essence, guesses and no matter how logical, they remain just that... guesses. I've stated that it would be nice and is probably time for some form of update, no matter how cursory, from Kestryll; but, I also have my own take on why he's not providing any. We know his last activity is logged as 6/13/25... today. Thus, assuming Kestryll is logging in as Kestryll, he hasn't completely abandoned us.

What most of us have come down to is the idea that one has to simply accept the site for what it is and realize that not only will 'demands' not be addressed, but that there is a cadre which has, for a year or more, been pushing the idea of 'fix it or turn it over.' We also know that a 'fix' turns out to not be as 'simple' as the vast majority of what is posted as potential 'fixes' and that there have been those elements attempting to chivvy Kestryll into turning over control/ownership, with the majority of us not particularly caring for what is being 'offered' by way of new management.

Insofar as the other site, reporting errors may be minimal or nonexistent. However, there are quite a number who remain here who actually tried the other site and don't care for the difference, having primarily returned here. There are others who actively participate over there; but, the sense we get is that the majority of them don't place a priority on the historical knowledge or the 'latitude' in what is allowed vis a vis this site. Ultimately, the choice remains with the individual and 'pushing' any other site as an or THE alternative is not generally well received.

It may not be an 'answer,' but it is, by and large, where we're at. [/QUOTEthank you I have missed a lot because the times I am able to log in I get the error message and have kind of given up but I appreciate the answer and you honesty

[TrappedinCalifornia]

Just in case you missed it...

The site didn't 'take down' iTrader or the ratings. We were warned, for years, that any change to the site software was going to have consequences. iTrader only worked with the iteration of vBulletin (the software the site uses) that Kestryll kept, despite the potential problems, so that iTrader would work. The change was forced on the site with the host going out of business and the new host demanding an update to a more recent version of vBulletin. (That information came from a post by Librarian.)

The other problems, including the Gateway Errors, we assume, are a result of having to move historical/legacy data through several iterations of vBulletin updates. No. We didn't get that from Kestryll, though there are other issues, including limitations placed on the moderators' boards, which has negatively impacted their powers. We have been told, by friends of Kestryll, that he's been going through some personal issues and we were informed, by Kestryll, that the remaining fixes are beyond his technical abilities. Some time back, we were told that one of the members and his team were brought in on a voluntary/part-time basis to make fixes; but, we haven't seen any updates in quite awhile. Personally, I assume that Kestryll isn't posting updates due to the persistent and constant complaining regarding things not being instantly fixed; i.e., one of those lose if you do, lose if you don't post things.

The bottom line is that there are many theories out there, some from people who claim a level of technical expertise, as to why this or that problem occurs. The reality is almost no one has insight behind the curtain, meaning that the vast majority of the theories are, in essence, guesses and no matter how logical, they remain just that... guesses. I've stated that it would be nice and is probably time for some form of update, no matter how cursory, from Kestryll; but, I also have my own take on why he's not providing any. We know his last activity is logged as 6/13/25... today. Thus, assuming Kestryll is logging in as Kestryll, he hasn't completely abandoned us.

What most of us have come down to is the idea that one has to simply accept the site for what it is and realize that not only will 'demands' not be addressed, but that there is a cadre which has, for a year or more, been pushing the idea of 'fix it or turn it over.' We also know that a 'fix' turns out to not be as 'simple' as the vast majority of what is posted as potential 'fixes' and that there have been those elements attempting to chivvy Kestryll into turning over control/ownership, with the majority of us not particularly caring for what is being 'offered' by way of new management.

Insofar as the other site, reporting errors may be minimal or nonexistent. However, there are quite a number who remain here who actually tried the other site and don't care for the difference, having primarily returned here. There are others who actively participate over there; but, the sense we get is that the majority of them don't place a priority on the historical knowledge or the 'latitude' in what is allowed vis a vis this site. Ultimately, the choice remains with the individual and 'pushing' any other site as an or THE alternative is not generally well received.

It may not be an 'answer,' but it is, by and large, where we're at.

thank you I have missed a lot because the times I am able to log in I get the error message and have kind of given up but I appreciate the answer and you honesty

Some of us have come to believe it might be partially tied to the type of technology you're utilizing; i.e., desktop, laptop, smartphone, et al. The reason is that there are varying levels and types of problems.

What I've said before is that it comes down to a personal choice and a level of persistence many aren't prepared to commit to. But, that points to yet another issue. Access to the site appears to be uneven among the membership. Some can get on during times when others can't even access the site (usually getting some form of Gateway error). I know I've seen people with time stamps on their posts which were generated when I couldn't even make contact with the site.

In the end, as I noted, there are all kinds of theories, but very few of them have been 'proven' with any degree of certainty and those who claim their pet theory has been generally shown as 'true' have an agenda or peeve rather than 'proof.'

[jarhead714]

Friday night and it’s alive! ALIVE!!!!!!!!!

[Imageview]

Some of us have come to believe it might be partially tied to the type of technology you're utilizing; i.e., desktop, laptop, smartphone, et al. The reason is that there are varying levels and types of problems.

What I've said before is that it comes down to a personal choice and a level of persistence many aren't prepared to commit to. But, that points to yet another issue. Access to the site appears to be uneven among the membership. Some can get on during times when others can't even access the site (usually getting some form of Gateway error). I know I've seen people with time stamps on their posts which were generated when I couldn't even make contact with the site.

In the end, as I noted, there are all kinds of theories, but very few of them have been 'proven' with any degree of certainty and those who claim their pet theory has been generally shown as 'true' have an agenda or peeve rather than 'proof.'

This is an interesting position; what you are basically claiming is that all theories are equally valid. By your reasoning if I theorize that magical gremlins are chewing on the internet tubes is causing the issue that we experience using this site then that is as likely as your theory that browser compatibility is somehow a significant contributor. That’s a funny position to take. I think it’s likely that some opinions are more valid than others, people with experience professionally in this area for example. You can dismiss them because it doesn’t fit your desired narrative or you don’t like them, but that’s not a super rational position.

calguns is hosted by in motion, who are a not huge provider but don’t seem to experience these issues across their portfolio of hosted sites. So it is unlikely that the issue is with the data centers or pipes going in to those data centers. It could be that there is some limitation with their use of the data centers or pipes that is hitting a threshold, but that would 1) fail more gracefully and 2) would be a clearly identifiable issue that wouldn’t be ambiguous; the answer in that case would be to simply find a new host and it would have been done already. Server configuration is a possibility, but this is also easy to test. Do a clean install of this version of vb with the same addons and see if it experiences the same issues. Stress testing could be accomplished by redirecting traffic from this installation to that one temporarily.

I have actually tested device compatibility because I thought it was really unlikely but I was curious. It wasn’t super thorough, but I saw nothing to suggest this had any impact. I also did this across different networks at the same time, no difference in the result there either, That leaves only a couple possibilities of what it could be. Given several decades of professional experience working with forum installations I have a pretty good idea of what I think it is. I could be wrong, but we’ll likely never know because if I’m correct the cost would be difficult in terms of community acceptance and at this point the remaining dedicated few are the ones that keeping the small amount of discussion here going. That would have been viable months or years ago, now I am not so sure.

[TrappedinCalifornia]

This is an interesting position; what you are basically claiming is that all theories are equally valid. By your reasoning if I theorize that magical gremlins are chewing on the internet tubes is causing the issue that we experience using this site then that is as likely as your theory that browser compatibility is somehow a significant contributor. That’s a funny position to take. I think it’s likely that some opinions are more valid than others, people with experience professionally in this area for example. You can dismiss them because it doesn’t fit your desired narrative or you don’t like them, but that’s not a super rational position.

calguns is hosted by in motion, who are a not huge provider but don’t seem to experience these issues across their portfolio of hosted sites. So it is unlikely that the issue is with the data centers or pipes going in to those data centers. It could be that there is some limitation with their use of the data centers or pipes that is hitting a threshold, but that would 1) fail more gracefully and 2) would be a clearly identifiable issue that wouldn’t be ambiguous; the answer in that case would be to simply find a new host and it would have been done already. Server configuration is a possibility, but this is also easy to test. Do a clean install of this version of vb with the same addons and see if it experiences the same issues. Stress testing could be accomplished by redirecting traffic from this installation to that one temporarily.

I have actually tested device compatibility because I thought it was really unlikely but I was curious. It wasn’t super thorough, but I saw nothing to suggest this had any impact. I also did this across different networks at the same time, no difference in the result there either, That leaves only a couple possibilities of what it could be. Given several decades of professional experience working with forum installations I have a pretty good idea of what I think it is. I could be wrong, but we’ll likely never know because if I’m correct the cost would be difficult in terms of community acceptance and at this point the remaining dedicated few are the ones that keeping the small amount of discussion here going. That would have been viable months or years ago, now I am not so sure.

Potentially more accurately... invalid.

You said... what you are basically claiming. That's a misrepresentation to fit a narrative. Go back and look at what I said... Some of us have come to believe it might be partially tied... That's not a claim. It's a statement of a shared, caveated belief. Truth or belief? (See Post #133) What you are doing is ascribing a caveated belief to me as something I'm presenting as 'truth;' which is precisely what I'm NOT doing. Instead, I noted why some of us have come to believe it as a possibility.

What was that about 'desired narratives?'

It doesn't matter what your 'professional experience' is. 'Validity' is not the same thing as 'truth.' Carefully note the following under 'validity' - Validity is tied to the information available. Thus, if you don't have access to facts, it's still a guess based on argument and arguments are greatly dependent upon the assumptions which they are based.

Look at your argument. It's full of it's own caveats and assumptions; e.g., "don't seem," "it is unlikely," "It could be," "a possibility," etc. Likewise, I never said it was THE problem. I said it might be partially tied to the technology individuals are using. Just like doing a test with a version of vBulletin sans the threads which are based on the outdated version of vBulletin, ignoring the changes, which are often subtle, to each variation. Clearly identifiable? Not necessarily. Anyone who has ever migrated data from just one iteration to the next knows that not to be true, let alone bringing data through several iterations of changed software and hoping to match it or make it compatible with various software utilized.

Devices (hardware) is not software. A Windows 11 capable machine can, potentially, run files saved on a Windows 97 machine; but, it won't necessarily come through 'clean' and likely won't. In some cases, it will require minor tweaking. In other cases, it may require wholesale reentry due to the differences in programs, particularly if the newer programs have changed to take advantage of the newer levels of performance or capabilities of the newer hardware and/or newer capabilities of the software. Such is precisely what we're seeing.

It's just like you claiming to have a pretty good idea of what you think is wrong. That's not quite accurate. Ultimately, while it may or may not prove to be correct, what you have is a belief as to what you think may be wrong, in part or in whole. That belief then forms a core assumption in the argument you are making. Yet, you acknowledge that it's unlikely we'll ever know if you are correct; again failing to differentiate between whether it is a 'truth' (fact) or a 'valid' belief (a reasonable argument).

Then you demonstrate an assumption upon which your argument hinges; i.e., that only a 'dedicated few' remain. While it is true that there is a core of members who keep discussions going, such has always been the case. There have always been far more readers and lurkers than active participants insofar as contributions to threads. What you're not factoring in are metrics you can't see. Are you keeping a record of which of the 352,400 members or even which of the 6,385 active members constitute those currently online and how often they sign in vs. contribute to threads? I thought not. Thus, your statement is an unsubstantiated claim and it is based on it contributing to your narrative.

What was that again about 'desired narratives?'

As has been stated, numerous times by numerous members, putting the site into a functional state would be a relatively straightforward operation - IF - the loss of the historical data were viewed as acceptable. However, those who value that data are those who form the core of the 'active' members who contribute to the threads. Those who value things such as what is allowed to be contributed rather than sublimate their contributions to the sensibilities of a management which desires a radically different and far more restrictive standard (for their own reasons) also form a significant part of that core. Then that core doesn't necessarily indicate the 'users' who may not and may never have actively contributed on a regular basis.

What was that again about 'desired narratives?'

For those who would claim this is yet another ‘word salad,’ think of it in terms of claims that the 1911 is ‘outdated.’ Is such a ‘truth?’ In a sense, yes. In another sense, it’s a declaration of a belief based on unspecified criteria. The ‘truth’ is that the 1911 can still perform the same functions it did in 1917, 1944, 1969, 1983, et al. Are there more modern firearms which can do the job ‘better?’ Again, in a sense, yes. But, such a statement is a declaration of a belief based on unspecified criteria.

The ‘truth’ is that the 1911 will still perform the way it was intended to if utilized in an appropriate manner. Does that mate well with a ‘modern battlefield’ or a ‘modern’ self-defense scenario? Does that mean that the 1911 doesn’t require a level of maintenance and an acceptance of its requirements, not to mention comparative limitations, to function appropriately?

Let’s say that, in some ways, you attempt to ‘modernize’ the 1911. Do the parts drop in and function correctly or will there be some fitting and tuning involved; not just to the parts, but to the parts and the original assembly? Will it stop being ‘outdated’ in the opinion of some or will it ‘better fit’ modern scenarios/sensibilities to a degree? Will the new parts allow for a sense of historicity or will it be something so ‘different’ that continuing to call it a 1911 would be a misleading statement?

What if you’ve lived somewhere 20, 30, or even 50 years and more? Have you adapted to the changes as they occurred? Do you ever lament not having what used to be, only to realize that you aren’t what you used to be and couldn’t necessarily live like that again? Is there still enough of what used to be to provide a sense of familiarity?

What I’m getting at is that I and others are proffering our observations and caveating our conclusions with what we hold to be of value. What others are putting out there are what they present as statements of fact which may or may not be true, let alone valid, and are dependent upon what they hold to be of value. Are those values shared (held in common) or are they divergent, to whatever degree?

That is the crux of a community; i.e., common interests, common values, and common goals or a reasonable compromise acceptable to the majority. If you no longer believe in the commonality of interests/values/goals and if a sufficient number shares that lack of belief, the community falls apart, by definition. In that case, some will seek to change the community and others will seek to maintain it, to whatever degree possible. That is precisely what we’re seeing.

Now go back to what I have said any number of times. If our faith in Kestryll and our belief in what is valuable about this site is proven wrong, we’ll know, likely sooner than later. Does that mean the site will cease to exist? For some, in a pragmatic sense, yes. They’ll go to another site and participate there. Some will go so far as to declare that this site is no longer accessible, while posting it indicates access to the site, or that it’s not posting their contributions, but likely ignore the fact that it did, the three times it was impatiently entered because it did not immediately appear on their screen. (Let’s just say it’s happened and let it go at that.) Does that mean this site failed to work or does that indicate someone demanding the site work the way they want it to, in the moment, and failing to recognize that it did do what it was supposed to… three times?

You see, it’s not about a bunch of old codgers being unwilling to accept change; something we’ve been accused of. Change has already occurred and we’ve adapted or are adapting to it… To one degree or another. What we’re fighting over is the rapidity and the degree of change many are declaring as ‘necessary.’ Why? Because we value something from the community which many crying for more changes don’t and, as a result, we don’t see the necessity, with some having stated the common sense conclusion that were the site no longer economically viable, it would have already been shut down or if the fixes were considered unmanageable, the site would have already substantively changed or been shut down.

Ultimately, that's the nub and the rub. It's not that we don't want to see things fixed and back working at full functionality. It's that we aren't demanding, nor do we want, the types of changes others are insisting will fix things when we're fairly certain that's a compromise for 'speed of fix' over 'quality of fix.'

[Bakerloo]

I just got some "reopening part 2" message. I had to sign back in. I guess we shall see how it goes.

[Nefarious]

I just got some "reopening part 2" message. I had to sign back in. I guess we shall see how it goes.

Anyone else? Nothing for me

[TrappedinCalifornia]

I just got some "reopening part 2" message. I had to sign back in. I guess we shall see how it goes.

Was it the one above the ads on the homepage...

Reopening Part Deux! We have a more powerful server, twice the CPU and four times the RAM.
I'm kind of afraid to say this but... let's stress test this thing!

If so, that message has been up for over an year.

[Preston-CLB]

Was it the one above the ads on the homepage...

If so, that message has been up for over an year.

Trapped, has it really been that long?

Anywho, for Bakerloo, that page is the default CG login page when you are logged out and need to log back in. Click the 'x' in the upper right corner and that message will go away.
-P

[TrappedinCalifornia]

Trapped, has it really been that long?

Maybe not.

Internet Archive shows this from 29 August last year...

Well, as most of you have noticed our 'soft rollout' of the new server has been less than optimal. In simpler terms it has sucked. This has been due to a weak CPU on the server(4 core/8 thread/32GB RAM) that I was told would have enough power for a forum. I am upgrading to a 'larger' server (8 core/16 thread/128GB RAM).
Check www.calguns.org or the FB Calguns Members group for updates.


Kestryll

There's a thread on .org from 30 August 2024... Reopening Part Duex

We have a more powerful server, twice the CPU and four times the RAM.

I'm kind of afraid to say this but... let's stress test this thing!

Thus, it's likely more along the lines of "10 months" or thereabouts. Part of the problem is that Internet Archive has nothing for the site from May, June, and July 2024.

[zatoh]

I am sad for Calguns. I will keep on trying. My success rate has been 10% - 20% the past couple of weeks.

[The Gleam]

Cheaper by the dozens.

---

[socal m1 shooter]

Seems to be much better during certain hours. 8 a.m. has been not good, but 5-7 p.m. has been fine the last couple three days. Over the past year or so I learned to not even bother checking this site from about 4 p.m. to 10 p.m., but seems good now. No idea what changed.

[M1A Rifleman]

No access available since last night. Is this a DDOS attack?

others stated there appears to be thousands of non members shown to be on the site constantly including late and night very early morning.
Sounds suspect.

[saudadeii]

No access available since last night. Is this a DDOS attack?

others stated there appears to be thousands of non members shown to be on the site constantly including late and night very early morning.
Sounds suspect.

Have no idea how accurate the count is. Here are the numbers right now as I post this (assuming it posts).

cgnusercount.jpg