More Bandwidth and Revenue Needed

[SQ]

[OT Comment removed]

Phade:
I agree witht he bandwidth cap. I don't agree with the queue. Queues are HORRIBLE. They not only make me not want to donate, but they make me want to leave the site and never come back again. If you make it a high download cap (like 80kbps or something), then it wouldn't be so bad to complain about, since your rates are already so high(I get up to 2mb per second, sometimes).

And just to emphasize others' ideas, custom titles for donators = GOLD.
I'd pay a lot more than I usually do for a custom title. I honestly don't know why random people got custom titles in the first place(I know it stemmed from the OT junkie thing, but I must've missed the dedicated thread. )

Pictures in vid info/journals: Somehow allow all HTML and/or BBCode in journals and video info. I'd pay a buttload to get that. You don't even have to host the pictures people are uploading: tell them to direct link to something like imageshack.us or photobucket.

Personal banners and paying for them: No go. Just. Ew. No.

OT Forum for donators: GOD YES. I miss the OT forums SO BADLY. I'd seriously pay $50 to get that back.

My own idea:
Faster regression donation priveledges. The only reason I've donated in the past was to help out the site (I didn't care about the donate ads or anything). But after my priveledges started to wane away, I've wanted to donate again. Before, you said that the priveledges would never go away, so I figured I'd never donate or again unless I had some insane surplus of money.

But I think I lost all my priveledges aside from the search now, after two years. And it's getting to me. So I think if you made everything go away after one year, people would donate more. Perhaps an auto-email/pm warning people their status will go down once the year is in December or something would be a good idea, also.

On a sidenote, Phade, Personally, I think you should've never done the local video thing. Most of the older, nicer regs here knew this insane leeching would happen, and I really do think we're better off without a local system alltogether.

SuperFusion: Currently, it is impossible to code donators being allowed to edit their posts anywhere. That doesn't really work with phpbb, and if it does, I really doubt Derobert/Kalium can handle modding and upkeeping it in such a way.

[MOD22: I've split OT comments from this thread. Please keep it to the topic.]

[Devolution]

If you make it a high download cap (like 80kbps or something), then it wouldn't be so bad to complain about, since your rates are already so high(I get up to 2mb per second, sometimes).

i thought of that too, only at a about half that speed(a 50meg video would take around 20mins at 40kb/s). my justification was going to be that people on highspeed would find it a hassle to wait 40mins for a 50meg video to download at 20kb/s. then i stopped before i posted and remembered that it's SUPPOSED to be a hassle, and that would be what inspired them to donate.

either that or they would just not bother downloading at all, which would also solve the problem, since fewer people would be downloading from local. (not an actual suggestion, i just realized that would probably be a side effect of bandwidth caps)

[Ainaelle]

We need to find out why non-donators are not donating. We can only guess so much. Trying different methods to read peoples minds is just more guesswork and can backfire if done wrong.

Well, my two cents then:

- the most logical choice for me would be IPMO, but sadly, I can't send IPMO to US from where I live;
- the second best choice would be sending cash by mail, but a) I have bad experiences with sending cash by mail (even as registered letters), and b) given the amount I could afford donating, the cost of sending cash by mail as an insuranced letter would be proportionally unjustified;
- I don't trust PayPal a single bit (and it would be too much of a hassle to sign up just for that).
- I only have a Visa Electron card, so no other form of on-line transfer is possible, afaik (even if the site accepted other forms than paypal).
- the charges for international bank checks are even more crazy than for international insuranced letters.

These are the main reasons why I haven't donated yet. Another would be that I'm constantly broke (though not to the point of not being able to shell out 12 bucks a year), but others might be in better financial situation than me (keep in mind the disproportion between the average income here and there, however). And while this might seem like giving excuses for myself (and to some point it is), I think it's fairly representative for people from outside the US of A with limited abilities of transferring money.

Make of it what you want. And, uh, hope this helps. ;-)

Regards,
Ain.

PS. Oh yeah, and welcome forum. Don't hold it against me if I won't write anymore (at least in this thread), I'm really bad at keeping the conversations up.

[Zero]

I think i got the killer feature right here!

An off-topic forum just for donators!!!

Actualy, I like this idea!

But lemmie see if I can pull up that old thread...

*Scrambles on HypeOdermic Studios to find it*

Maybe hosting for videos should be changed. For example:

If you don't donate, you're allowed 50Mbs per video and up to ten videos.

If you donate at least $50/year, you get 100Mbs per video and up to, say, 50 videos.

If you donate at least $100/year, you get Unlimited Mbs per video and unlimited videos.

While this idea may never fly, I'm just throwing it out there for disscussion.

There was alot of disscussion and stuff on that forum based on my ideas and the like. What are your ideas?

-Zero

[SQ]

x_rex: All the mods are doing is trying to stop the flame war. Be understanding. X|

Phade: Being able to delete local videos. I did some thinking about it. And it basically came to this.
If you can't delete your video information page, then technically the video is still in the catalog. If you are not uploading to the org, you can delete your video. If this is somehow defiling your catalog, then why do you even allow indirect/direct links?

So I think if you had a higher donation rate to have the ability to delete local videos (say, 10 USD or so), then that would be great, and more plausible, I think, than all the other ideas I and others have suggested (other than the bandwidth cap).


Also, you could appeal to those who hate reviewing videos. Donate 1 USD or more, get rid of that "pesky" give a star rating for every 10 local downloads.
Or even better, force a new rule on non-donators. Every 10 local videos you must star rate, every 20 or so, you must opinionate. Sure, this might result in some spammy opinions, but we get so many when it isn't forced, so I don't really see how it would make a difference(if anything, the breakdown in numbers might be better than one number overall, since it forces a certain standard other than "I liked it so it gets a five").

If that was enforced, you could cater to those tastes as well. Donate, and you won't have to opinionate any more.

Or you could completely switch it around. Donate, and you are able to have star ratings for your indirect/direct download.
This provides incentives for two things: One, stop uploading so much crap to local.
Two, donate to the org.

If this sounded chastising, I'm sorry.. I didn't mean it that way. I'm simply trying to toss ideas around.

[SQ]

Maybe hosting for videos should be changed. For example:

If you don't donate, you're allowed 50Mbs per video and up to ten videos.

If you donate at least $50/year, you get 100Mbs per video and up to, say, 50 videos.

If you donate at least $100/year, you get Unlimited Mbs per video and unlimited videos.

While this idea may never fly, I'm just throwing it out there for disscussion.

There was alot of disscussion and stuff on that forum based on my ideas and the like. What are your ideas?

-Zero

What if you paid for amount of videos you could upload to the donut instead of how much speed you got?

At first I was thinking filesize (30mb to non-donators, more to donators) but then the 100mb thing seemed plausible enough as it was, plus some people honestly don't have the tools to compress...

... What was my point, again? ><;

[Ainaelle]

Phade: Being able to delete local videos. I did some thinking about it. And it basically came to this.
If you can't delete your video information page, then technically the video is still in the catalog. If you are not uploading to the org, you can delete your video. If this is somehow defiling your catalog, then why do you even allow indirect/direct links?

So I think if you had a higher donation rate to have the ability to delete local videos (say, 10 USD or so), then that would be great, and more plausible, I think, than all the other ideas I and others have suggested (other than the bandwidth cap).

In other words, paying for the ability to manage your personal data? Having read the "video info locked" thread, I can't see how this would end good...

However, I think you're up to something with forced opinions after N downloads. This could work at least a little bit (teamed up with the new shiny "Report spammy/worthless opinion" button for the video creators).

Regards,
Ain.

[SQ]

I think the video info lock is fine, and should be instated whether you download or not.
I mean, you have two weeks to correct all your typos, and you can append it after that, so there's nothing wrong with it (in my eye).

Cataloging videos, knowing they existed, is good to me. It used to be that this whole site was full of empty vid info pages. People do get embarrassed about their older works. I think a creator should have every right to take his/her links down if they want.

They do not however have a right to take their video information down fully.

In otherwords, I don't see how it could end up being messy, because the video info lock would always be around.

[Arigatomina]

If you donate at least $100/year, you get Unlimited Mbs per video and unlimited videos.

Make that '100mbs' instead of unlimited size per vid, and that's what I thought would happen when I first joined. Some sort of standard amount - pay for the hosting service. But you know, since it's bandwidth, maybe it should be according to how often those videos are downloaded.

Lots of sites charge for bandwidth, and they don't charge the people downloading. The problem would be those really popular vids that are huge and get downloaded a lot, for months on end - you'd want to add the bittorrent option for those so the creators aren't hit that hard.

We could still have 'donations' for those wanting to get videos - so they're not 'paying for vids'. But charging for bandwidth used by the creators (or capping according to a pre-paid amount), would be different. People would still be able to list their vids in the catelog for free, and and they'd probably still save money compared to hosting their vids elsewhere.

But this would require a 'on/off' toggle for local videos. If a creator nears his cap on bandwidth, he should be able to choose which vids he wants to be downloadable.

If you charged per vid, you'd need the same toggle except it would actually have to *delete* the vids to make room for new ones - or have a true 'one-time' payment per video for the hosting that doesn't take into consideration the bandwidth used over time. You don't want to charge people for the same video every year unless you give them the option to replace that 'used storage space' with newer vids.

[x_rex30]

Also, you could appeal to those who hate reviewing videos. Donate 1 USD or more, get rid of that "pesky" give a star rating for every 10 local downloads.

I like that idea a lot! @_@ That thing pisses me off the most in this site.