Functioning Site

Hi Gary,

You're right. The transition sucked big time. I'm not going to get into who did what and why because as you correctly implied, it doesn't do any good and isn't the point. Hopefully, now that I'm back on board (we were all "locked out" when Zafir sold the site), we can correct these issues.

Hopefully, you can see that the site is turning around. If you don't feel that way, then please let me know what it is you don't like and hopefully we can fix it.

Cheers,
Tom Archer
Web Master - dev-archive

>>>
Still, my biggest "annoyance" is the wavy line that was voted on ages ago, was promised to be removed, and is still sitting there like a slap in the face. Sounds silly, I know, but the fact that it is still there is like saying "We'll ask you what you want but we will do what we like". Once again, only time will fix that and the many other "disappointments" that the months of ostrich behaviour have built up.
<<<
Actually, as I mentioned in another thread on this subject:
1) The wavy line vote was 50% combined for the three options of Love it, Like it or Don't care and 50% for Dislike it and Hate it. Therefore, contrary to what some people have stated here, there was hardly a concensus to remove it. BTW, I voted "Hate it".
2) We are in the midst of reorganising all of the EW sites to provide more of a seamless integration of all of the developer-related sites. In all probability, the wavy line will be history when we unveil the new site.

>>>
Having said that, the contributions by people still are amongst some of the best I have ever seen - but EarthWeb cant really take any credit for that (nor can it really do anything to detract from that either). But, as I said, the code has also been placed on other sites as well and EarthWeb dont have a monopoly on the code.
<<<
When has EW taken credit for anything other than simply being the owners of this site? In addition, EW doesn't own the code that's on this code whether or not it exists on other sites. This has been publicly stated by EW several times.

>>>
I still think that some explanation as to why section and site managers were "locked out" of EarthWeb after the transition is in order. Why wasnt that sorted out before the sale? What would stop it happening again? Why were all the complaints by the contributors and users just ignored for months? I am sure you can see how silence on these (and other) issues does not help in building back up rapport where it has seriously been lost.
<<<
Well considering the fact that I was one of the people that was locked out, it's not my place to answer that. Chris Eastwood, Essam Ahmed and I were unable to log in to the servers and therefore, had no control over CG readers not being answered.

Do I know why we were locked out and what exactly happened? Sure. However, it doesn't do anyone any good and doesn't help the situation for me to point fingers. The bottom line is that CG is back online and those of us who chose to stay (and the newcomers) want to do the same job you guys came to expect of us before the EW purchase.

Cheers,
Tom Archer
Web Master - dev-archive

>>>
I think my original reply may have come across as too attacking or threatening. It wasn't meant to be such. The things I mentioned were things that matter to me (which I think is what you were asking in your original reply) but I realise they may not matter to others.
<<<
Actually, I didn't take your message as being anything but a concerned reader asking very valid questions which is why I don't mind taking the time to address them.

>>>
...the EW people did promise to remove it and it never happened...
<<<
That I never knew. Don't know what to say here since this is the first I've heard of it, but on behalf of EW I do apologize.

>>>
I was saying that the quality of the code on the site or the quality of the contributors has nothing to do with the design of the site or the ownership of it by EW. That the success of the site (now or in the future) is due to the quality of the code and the contributores and not to the design. Without quality contributors then EW would not have a site. However, a poorly designed site *could* easily be the downfall, even if the articles themselves are of a high quality.
<<<
I definitely agree with respect to a poorly designed site. However, in order to keep good contributors coming back we need to be more than just a code repository. As you mentioned, there are a lot of sites that do that now. We need to provide services that can not be found on other sites. IMHO, that's how you keep the best programmers coming back for more. Things like tighter integration with all our sites, P&M, etc. are what I feel will separate us from others.

>>>
And I think that is my point. Although I think it is great that the original people have been allowed back in, it doesn't excuse the previous actions. And I do think it sad that the people responsible for the lock out do not seem to be able to relate to the group well enough to explain the whys. Once again - it may be something we never know but, for myself, it is a lingering doubt of "will it happen again one day".
<<<
Actually a couple of notes here:

1) Due to the time when CG was down, we lost a number of very valuable volunteers at dev-archive. Therefore, I don't want to insult these people by incorrectly implying that everyone came back. Some very key people did return, but we also lost a bunch as well.

2) The people that made the mistakes that resulting in CG being down are no longer involved with the site.

3) We've thought about posting a message to everyone explaining the situation. However, we eventually nixed that for the simple reason that people don't want to hear excuses. We will win people back by doing one thing and that is working our butts off to deliver a quality site.

>>>
My desire to know what happened is all based on trust - once again. As you were asking what I personally needed to make the site better, this is one thing that is critical for me. Having "members" running the site is a good thing - its as it was and as it should continue to be. But we never hear from the owners (and they can pull the plug or do whatever they like whenever they like).
<<<
I understand completely. I suppose anything's possible (as with any other site), but the whole situation is different now. I think you do hear from the owners. Every day this site gets a little better and you get responses like this is due to EW giving us the freedom and lattitude to provide that service. Therefore, they are responding to your concerns by letting us do our jobs.

>>>
The only reason I say this here - as opposed to saying it elsewhere - is an issue in its own right...... its so hard to know where such comments should be directed! I tried several times to find an email address that I could send things to privately (without having to embarass anyone publicly) but couldn't find anything. Some type of "complaints" address would have been (and could still be) useful.
<<<
Actually, I don't mind answering questions here that I think are relevant to many people. That IMO, is what this forum is for. Also, we have added a "Contact Us" link to the home page for future reference.

>>>
I can only assume that, as you have been able to regain some control over the site (to the benefit of us all) that you may also have the ear of a few of the people behind EW to pass on these sorts of comments.
<<<
That's what I meant with my statements above. EW may have had some problems in the first couple of months of ownership, but some people have taken over at EW that have shown tremendous support in letting us run CG the way it was run before. This is why I'm so positive about the future of CG. As anyone in this industry knows, there's nothing better than when you have management that realizes that you know your job and they step out of the way and let you do it with their complete support. That is what we now have with EW and CG.

>>>
As you do have some control, and obviously some sort of pathway, it unfortunately makes you the messenger.
<<<
I understand. No problem.

>>>
I am really hoping that this doesn't come across negative. I personally dont see anything wrong with being out in the open about things. In the company I work for (working in a very different core industry but providing the same sorts of facilities) things are very open with the staff, clients and management. I find it makes for a more honest and flexibile working arrangement. I had felt that the original Code Guru was built on these ideals. I am just hoping that the same sorts of values can be redeveloped within the site now it is part of EW.
<<<
I completely agree which is why I dedicate so much time to answering these sorts of inquiries. I never have a problem with posts like this because its (IMHO) the only way to truly get an indication of what the readers of this site want. Therefore, always feel free to post any questions either to this forum or directly to me at tarcher@mindspring.com

Cheers,
Tom Archer
Web Master - dev-archive