What changes to CAG would you like to see in 2007?

[quote name='Lieutenant Dan']Call me greedy, but I would like to see CAG not reach out to non-members. Pretty soon every douchebag and his douchebag friends are going to be on here, cluttering up this board for us pure CAG-mericans![/quote]

QFT! Don't let this turn into Gamefags
 
[quote name='GrimNecroWizard']QFT! Don't let this turn into Gamefags[/QUOTE]


I'm still surprised at how many more lurkers I meet at big sales than I do actual CAG posters. It may be a good idea to have people at least post something or whatever before getting into the deals threads, but I'm afraid that would lead to alot more spam.
 
[quote name='RelentlessRolento']I'm still surprised at how many more lurkers I meet at big sales than I do actual CAG posters. It may be a good idea to have people at least post something or whatever before getting into the deals threads, but I'm afraid that would lead to alot more spam.[/quote]
Maybe there could be some way Cheapy or a mod can tell if a user is just lurking and doesn't even try to contribute then they could PM the person and tell them then kick 'em out. And if someone spams, they get banned. I know it's hard to posts video game deals because when they happen it's usually already up and it would be hard to contribute that way...But atleast like help people out in other forums and answer questions ect.
 
[quote name='GrimNecroWizard']Maybe there could be some way Cheapy or a mod can tell if a user is just lurking and doesn't even try to contribute then they could PM the person and tell them then kick 'em out.[/QUOTE]

The site would lose 4/5 of its members, easily.

And most people don't care about the other forums since they probably frequent other game forums for news / boards and only come here for the deals.
 
What does it matter if people lurk? Maybe they have nothing relevant to say. The people who want to participate, do participate. The people who don't want to participate just enjoy the deals and don't bother the rest of us.

Maybe there's a good reason as to why lurkers are a problem that I'm missing though.
 
I will through my 2 cents in.

  1. Fewer items on the front page. If a story is over a week old it doesn't need to be there.
  2. More new stories or items on the front page. With the traffic Cag has maybe a fellow video game blog would like to pay a sponsership for story of the weeks spots. Get them to provide the quality content and get some cash out of their advertising budgets, it seems most media companies seem to own one video game blog nowadays.
  3. Do we need all the latest postings for each area? I believe one or two sections highlighting the most popular or most viewed items would be more realistic. I know several of us come here daily religously, but the casual visitor who could easily bring more traffic doesn't hit the site all the time. Possibly a section for most popular in last 24 hours, 3 days, etc.
  4. When it comes to advertising the front page is loaded. I know it pays the bills, but perhaps more focus on the ones that work the best with the rest push to the background. I sure everyone doesn't remember to shop through the store links, so maybe google ads, a few key sponsers (amazon, Play-asia), and a large visual banner shop the cag store links to support cag. I may be wrong but my experience on online advertising is the top 3-4 end up being 90% of you money and focusing on them just increases the oppurtunity of better returns. Plus focusing on a few enables you to leverage the value of being a sponser to new potential sponsers.
  5. How about a single database lookup for trade-ins? I kicked one around in between clients last year. Basically allowing everyone to seach a single game and retrieve the last quoted trade in prices and who posted the quote.
I am sure some of these items have been said and maybe tried. Just thought since Daphatty opened the door. I know how tough it can be to continue to grow and improve a site, while maintaining whats already there. The site I work with gets about 80 million hits a year and I find the challange being trying to make the radical changes needed to move forward without pissing off the current customer base.
 
I'd rather have lurkers than flamers and trolls that post meaningless crap and irrelevant comments.
I'm still for the idea of more groups. If there were different groups we could join with private forums, that would rock. I'm sure that would cause some problems though, and would be difficult to moderate/handle.
 
[quote name='Lieutenant Dan']Call me greedy, but I would like to see CAG not reach out to non-members. Pretty soon every douchebag and his douchebag friends are going to be on here, cluttering up this board for us pure CAG-mericans![/QUOTE]

A stretch, but I just want all the 0 through 10-post people gone.

Oh, and people who haven't visited in over 6 ms or 1 yr.
 
[quote name='kjauburn']
[*]How about a single database lookup for trade-ins? I kicked one around in between clients last year. Basically allowing everyone to seach a single game and retrieve the last quoted trade in prices and who posted the quote. [/QUOTE]

CAGwiki already does this.
 
[quote name='Michaellvortega']It's better they don't post, do we really need MORE assholes?[/QUOTE]

That's the most truthful statement I've read all day.

Think about it - this site is chock-full of assholes as it is. That'd only get worse if people had a post quota before they could get the deals.
 
[quote name='Lieutenant Dan']What does it matter if people lurk? Maybe they have nothing relevant to say. The people who want to participate, do participate. The people who don't want to participate just enjoy the deals and don't bother the rest of us.

Maybe there's a good reason as to why lurkers are a problem that I'm missing though.[/quote]I agree there, if they don't bother us, then it shouldn't matter (although eliminating posters with less than 10 for 6 months isn't a bad idea either). I been posting on Gamefaqs for 4 years now and well every time I hit the Wii board someone is either A)Saying the VC Sucks because prices are too high, B)My Wii can't get on the internet, C) Some stupid Wii question which has been answered before 6.02X10^23 times, or D) Some PS3 troll. We don't need this at CAG. What I enjoy about CAG is we are a small community that I know the posters because we are so small. Also we usually only have one topic for things which actually leads to some interesting discussion for a change, not the crap on other boards. More people would only send this board to hell.

As for the front page, please put when Cheapy makes a new your man in japan post, I am very interested in them and I rarely visit that forum because well there are no updates. Also don't make such an emphasis on the CAG cast, just make note of when it's out with a link. I already subscribe through itunes so this is not useful for me. Also put a link to the CAG Wiki up there.
 
if the emphasis of the site is to now get onto the front page of digg, then we should make sure the servers are prepared for it.
 
[quote name='xmrblondex']if the emphasis of the site is to now get onto the front page of digg, then we should make sure the servers are prepared for it.[/quote]
Or just dump Digg from crosslinking to us. It's the Slashdot effect, though smaller.

Still sucks.
 
80x15-digg-badge-2.gif
80x15-digg-badge-2.gif
80x15-digg-badge-2.gif
80x15-digg-badge-2.gif
80x15-digg-badge-2.gif
80x15-digg-badge-2.gif

80x15-digg-badge-2.gif
....I don't know what you guys are talking about....
80x15-digg-badge-2.gif

80x15-digg-badge-2.gif
80x15-digg-badge-2.gif
80x15-digg-badge-2.gif
80x15-digg-badge-2.gif
80x15-digg-badge-2.gif
80x15-digg-badge-2.gif
 
Get off Digg's nutz. I don't see the benefit of linking to us if our site can't even handle it. I know you plan on getting new servers, but I say stop whoring yourself out on Digg until they are in place.
 
Was the server down today?
I thought that the server can handle a digging to articles on the front page, but not the forums.

Oh, and actually the digg effect is larger than the slashdot effect.
 
[quote name='CheapyD']Was the server down today?
I thought that the server can handle a digging to articles on the front page, but not the forums.[/QUOTE]
Yes. The server was down. I'm not sure about the front page thing, but it would be nice if all the links on Digg led to the front page.
 
[quote name='Moxio']A stretch, but I just want all the 0 through 10-post people gone.

Oh, and people who haven't visited in over 6 ms or 1 yr.[/quote]

But then you'd have to get rid of a possible return by said users. I know its a rare occassion, and just happened recently, but there is still hope.
 
Cheapy where does the spike in traffic seem to cause the most issues? Actual available bandwidth, web server, or the db server. If its the db server maybe a scaled down page with fewer queries for digg links would help without draining funds. By the looks of the front page you probably have at least 6-8 queries hitting the db server everytime its requested. You could have scaled down layout for potential high traffic diggs with maybe a single query to pull the actually articles...
 
The front page is a completely static html page, except for pulling the latest message board posts via javascript.

Currently, CAG runs a single (powerful) dedicated server.
Early this year, I want to have (at least) one dedicated web server and one dedicated db server.
 
[quote name='CheapyD']The front page is a completely static html page, except for pulling the latest message board posts via javascript.

Currently, CAG runs a single (powerful) dedicated server.
Early this year, I want to have (at least) one dedicated web server and one dedicated db server.[/quote]

Damn that must be a fun page to keep up with. Isn't the javascript calling external.php actually doing a lookup in your forums db for the latest post returning a result set to be parsed for display? I was just assuming since it was called 6 times it was wrapping a db call each time, if so a rewrite to a single query could save you some performance going from 6 calls to a single call on each request for the homepage. Was again I am just making some assumptions from seeing the frontend.

However little performance increases can add up quickly especially on the top requested pages, along with some sql tweaking for the top requested queries. Your google analytics should help point you in the direction with the top requested pages and some of the average request times for each. There are several more powerful tools that can help from a site analysis and individual campaign analysis, but probably wouldn't be worth the cash unless you used and abuse the trials for the information...
 
[quote name='jollydwarf']I'm not really sure I want CAG to "improve" at all. Not only does the 'garage gamer' aesthetic give it some of its charm, it keeps it from expanding past a certain level of popularity. Now, granted, I'm sure that's kind of the point of CheapyD making this website his full-time gig, but if its audience expands past a certain point, won't it become counterproductive for most of us, i.e. people that can't hit it twenty-five times a day? Most really good deals are already of the 'blink and miss it' variety.

What will invariably happen at a certain point, I think, is that the visitors/users will become of such a number that no one is consistently getting in on good deals online, and the knowledge of "B&M" deals will make the competition too fierce. At this point, people will get fed up with constantly missing out on deals, only reading post after post of "Dead" or "OOS" or "Sold out--that was fast." So, yeah, the site can "improve" and expand its registered user base, but there is that 'point of inflection' to be considered.

P.S. More popular also means more trolls to fend off. Maybe for some of you, I am one of them, but that's your grave misconception, not mine.[/QUOTE]


I actually agree with JollyDwarf, for once.

As much as I enjoy and appreciate CAG, it kinda sucks that basically every online deal is impossible to get in on because there are thousands of lurkers buying as many of each item as the site allows them.

B&M deals are getting harder to get in on as well.

However, I completely understand and don't hold this against Cheapy or the CAG community. It's just an obvious effect of having a really great idea and presenting it very well.

Oh well.
 
[quote name='jimfoley16']I actually agree with JollyDwarf, for once.

As much as I enjoy and appreciate CAG, it kinda sucks that basically every online deal is impossible to get in on because there are thousands of lurkers buying as many of each item as the site allows them.

B&M deals are getting harder to get in on as well.

However, I completely understand and don't hold this against Cheapy or the CAG community. It's just an obvious effect of having a really great idea and presenting it very well.

Oh well.[/QUOTE]


:lol: it's a double edged sword we all hate and love. I just get mixed feelings when I see CAG show up on www.QJ.net or some other big blog and it's on deals going down. But, like everyone has been implying, there's no real answer to this.
 
[quote name='CheapyD']The front page is a completely static html page, except for pulling the latest message board posts via javascript.

Currently, CAG runs a single (powerful) dedicated server.
Early this year, I want to have (at least) one dedicated web server and one dedicated db server.[/quote]
With all the traffic that CAG seems to be getting, I'd recommend two load-balanced dedicated web servers and a dedicated SQL server. With the load-balanced web servers, it should be able to handle the load much better when we're crosslinked to digg and other sites like it.
 
[quote name='CheapyD']The front page area is going to be completely re-done, most likely with a new CMS (content managment system) behind it.

If you only want to see deals, you will have that option.[/quote]

Excellent. Mox-n-sox is dead on about the need for a new logo too.

You could run a contest to design a new logo for the front page for CAG. Nothing too flashy, but something other than "Cheap Ass Gamer" written in bold on the front page at the top. Maybe you could even get WSB to enter a sketch or two.

I also liked the CAG columnist idea. Having a few editorials added to the front page would be interesting, and help to expand CAG into new areas.

I'm also still waiting on the CheapyD and Wombat action figures to go into production.
 
[quote name='shrike4242']With all the traffic that CAG seems to be getting, I'd recommend two load-balanced dedicated web servers and a dedicated SQL server. With the load-balanced web servers, it should be able to handle the load much better when we're crosslinked to digg and other sites like it.[/quote]

Shrike how about we pass on the load balance and have a seperate dns for each server. One dns for the incoming traffic and a second less known dns for Cager's who are in the know. ;)

Of course once you start talking multiple servers, burstable T1, etc you really are better off finding a data center and buying your own equipment. I would have to double check my invoices but we are paying a little over $600 per cabinet right now with a burstable T1 to 10.

Considering the site is free alot of people out there that might need to just suck it up.
 
a forum dedicated to babes. pictures of babes. babes, me and javeryh in a hot tub kissing the babes and drinking the booze.
 
[quote name='kjauburn']
  1. How about a single database lookup for trade-ins? I kicked one around in between clients last year. Basically allowing everyone to seach a single game and retrieve the last quoted trade in prices and who posted the quote.
[/QUOTE]

This is a great idea. It would require a fair amount of work, but the result would be worth the effort.

There is money in this, and I'd rather CAG benefit from it than the retailers, but I haven't thought of the best way to earn it. Perhaps a lala model, but it is difficult to prevent people from going offsite (except with PM/tradelist policing).
 
[quote name='RelentlessRolento']:lol: it's a double edged sword we all hate and love. I just get mixed feelings when I see CAG show up on www.QJ.net or some other big blog and it's on deals going down. But, like everyone has been implying, there's no real answer to this.[/QUOTE]

Amen.
 
So we're putting rumors on the front page now, in an attempt to "be the first" to break some kind of gaming news story?

Or are we just digging for attention, at this point?
 
[quote name='Roufuss']So we're putting rumors on the front page now, in an attempt to "be the first" to break some kind of gaming news story?

Or are we just digging for attention, at this point?[/QUOTE]

If we're attempting to be digg whores, this has got to stop. Unless it's generating a calculatable return on the site, get rid of it. The buttsecks fiends destroy a website faster than you can create new content.

The goal is to be the best at what we do, not be the most popular to visit.

COUGH*Kotaku*COUGH
 
I applaud the GS/Rhino post, and its exactly what we should be doing: utilizing our user resources to their fullest potential. The difference between us and Joystiq/Kotaku/etc is that we have a very strong forum community, and they don't.

Rumor or not, this is something that they couldn't have come up with, AND it relates to deals and shopping. It's a perfect fit for the front page, and it was correctly labeled as a rumor.

This is a step in the right direction.
 
[quote name='evilmax17']I applaud the GS/Rhino post, and its exactly what we should be doing: utilizing our user resources to their fullest potential. The difference between us and Joystiq/Kotaku/etc is that we have a very strong forum community, and they don't.

Rumor or not, this is something that they couldn't have come up with, AND it relates to deals and shopping. It's a perfect fit for the front page, and it was correctly labeled as a rumor.

This is a step in the right direction.[/QUOTE]

I agree, and if Cheapy hadn't already front-paged it, I was going to.
 
I just thought of something.

Is it possible to limit features for new users? I'm pretty sure it's possible. The most important limit I think should be, like, a minimum of 50 posts to create a new thread. It would stop spammers with 1 post from creating those annoying (and now exponentially more in quantity) threads with spam links and new morons from creating porn threads (*cough* happened a couple days ago).
 
[quote name='Moxio']I just thought of something.

Is it possible to limit features for new users? I'm pretty sure it's possible. The most important limit I think should be, like, a minimum of 50 posts to create a new thread. It would stop spammers with 1 post from creating those annoying (and now exponentially more in quantity) threads with spam links and new morons from creating porn threads (*cough* happened a couple days ago).[/quote]

That's a great idea.

Also, I agree with evilmax17's post. That is the sort of thing CAG needs more of on the front page, not digg or CAGcasts IMO.
 
[quote name='Moxio']I just thought of something.

Is it possible to limit features for new users? I'm pretty sure it's possible. The most important limit I think should be, like, a minimum of 50 posts to create a new thread. It would stop spammers with 1 post from creating those annoying (and now exponentially more in quantity) threads with spam links and new morons from creating porn threads (*cough* happened a couple days ago).[/quote]
Wow, you read my mind. I just came in here to post that, as it happened again. Maybe restricting CAG Newbies from posting new threads? i don't know, but the mods do a good job here - when i saw the one from today it was gone within minutes. Kudos to the mod team here though:applause:
 
[quote name='Moxio']I just thought of something.

Is it possible to limit features for new users? I'm pretty sure it's possible. The most important limit I think should be, like, a minimum of 50 posts to create a new thread. It would stop spammers with 1 post from creating those annoying (and now exponentially more in quantity) threads with spam links and new morons from creating porn threads (*cough* happened a couple days ago).[/QUOTE]
I'd vote against this...what if this newbie had the deal of the year, but because he couldn't post it here, took it over to FW or SD to be raped to hell and back before we ever caught wind of it?

Also, if you create a minimum, then you'd have even more issues, either with people making padded junk posts, or just saying the hell with it and not posting at all - which circles back to the original point.

Nay.
 
[quote name='WhipSmartBanky']I'd vote against this...what if this newbie had the deal of the year, but because he couldn't post it here, took it over to FW or SD to be raped to hell and back before we ever caught wind of it?

Also, if you create a minimum, then you'd have even more issues, either with people making padded junk posts, or just saying the hell with it and not posting at all - which circles back to the original point.

Nay.[/QUOTE]

Agreed.

I've seen lots of awesome deals posted by people with under 50 posts.
 
[quote name='WhipSmartBanky']I'd vote against this...what if this newbie had the deal of the year, but because he couldn't post it here, took it over to FW or SD to be raped to hell and back before we ever caught wind of it?

Also, if you create a minimum, then you'd have even more issues, either with people making padded junk posts, or just saying the hell with it and not posting at all - which circles back to the original point.

Nay.[/QUOTE]

Honestly I can't think of another way to stop these sudden outbursts of new members making either spam threads or extremely NSFW threads. Apparently what we've been doing hasn't been enough, and these spam threads are probably not going to stop.

A "deal of the year" will make it to FatWallet or SlickDeals no matter what, just like major deals do. They just happen to... drift off to other forums somehow. And it's not like Kotaku or Joystiq taking the popular deals from CAG helps matters either. Deals can and will be stolen no matter what, less of membership costs or post requirements for seeing the Deals section.

Either way, a 20-, 10-, or even 5- post requirement really couldn't hurt.
 
I disagree with you WSB.

How many newbies have had a deal of the year? Even if they took it to FW or SD, it is pretty obvious a lot of CAGS visit those places and would report any deals they see.

And the point about fearing padded junk posts? Come on, that's all the OTT and Off-Topic forum is about for the most part. If junk posts were a problem the Off-Topic forum would have had to been shut down years ago.
 
I think a minimum amount of posts for newbies before being able to create a thread is a good thing too. I think that there should be an option, however, that if they do have a good deal to share, they can just PM a mod with the deal who can then in turn switch on that user's ability to create threads.

This way if someone wants to create a new thread before they reach their post amount, the thread will go through a mod first, and if it's valid then that poster has just earned the right to post threads.

I don't think it should be a lot of posts, maybe 10 or so, but enough to where they should know better than to create useless threads.
 
[quote name='GuyWithGun']I think a minimum amount of posts for newbies before being able to create a thread is a good thing too. I think that there should be an option, however, that if they do have a good deal to share, they can just PM a mod with the deal who can then in turn switch on that user's ability to create threads.

This way if someone wants to create a new thread before they reach their post amount, the thread will go through a mod first, and if it's valid then that poster has just earned the right to post threads.

I don't think it should be a lot of posts, maybe 10 or so, but enough to where they should know better than to create useless threads.[/QUOTE]

That actually might be a good idea.
 
I think my main change that I'd like to see would be some sort of Save Draft type feature when you are posting. There have been waaay too many times when I've been writing a long post and forget to copy and paste it into Word or something, and I hit the Submit Reply button and lose everything I wrote because CAG logged me out.

That's the thing I hate the most. Especially if I'm making a point and am really typing fast and putting a lot of thought and concentration into the post, then just hit Submit Reply out of habit, and a split second later think, "Oh shit, it's probably logged me out." And then I try and highlight and Copy as much as I can in that second or two before the Login page loads.

I know a Save Draft feature would probably be hell on the server, but it would only have to be saved for 30 seconds while the user logs back on and finds the topic again.

Or instead of a Save Draft, maybe there's a way that the content could be PMed to the user so that it's not lost.

Or automatically posted after a certain amount of time, then the user can log in to the forums again, find his/her post and push the Edit button to finish up.

Or even a timer that warns you when there is only 1 minute left and reminds you to save your content or prematurely post it before it's lost.

Something so that I don't have to try and remember everything I just wrote, because it just never sounds as good when you try to rewrite it from memory.

(And yes, I copied and pasted this all into Word so that I wouldn't lose it :) )
(And it was a good thing too, because I was logged out)




And in reference an idea mentioned on Page 1:

I don't think the PM when someone quotes you is a bad idea either. I know I feel kind of bad if someone asks me a question or comments on something and I don't reply because I didn't see it. You should probably make an option to turn this off too.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top