SCN: logo ideas

[Rod Clark]

> > - we have not become expert at deploying volunteers to maximum advantage.
> 
> I disagree here, from my vantage point. We've brought on some very capable topic
> editors and they are all gung-ho for SCN. They do a remarkable job.

Patrick, 

   The content of the 3,000 or more items in the Community menus
is about six months out of date in general. It's been that long
since any serious, comprehensive editorial research has been
done to dig out what is going on on the Web in the city and in
western Washington. You and your people have basically dabbled
at a few items per week, it seems to me. Each editor should be
researching dozens of likely items a day, to keep the SCN
directory from becoming less and less relevant to what is
happening this year in the region. (This doesn't mean that most
of the sites researched should be added to the directory.)

   Another six months of the current level of editorial neglect
will probably make the site out-of-date enough that people will
start not to view it as a good current directory.


> > - we do not, in my opinion, constitute one of the easiest ways to get local,
> > public-minded content onto the Web.
> 
> I don't believe it is any harder than any other site. It's not too bad.
> [...]

   Nonprofits have been voting with their feet on this. SCN has
been losing hosted nonprofits at a high rate this year. The
board's goal for 2001 was an increase of 75 hosted sites.
Instead we have had a net loss of about 50. That's a difference,
between expectations and reality, of about 125 nonprofit orgs.
SCN has lowered its service levels repeatedly this year, and has
done almost nothing really significant to stay current in Web
hosting.

   Adding 75 nonprofit sites looked entirely reasonable and
practical at the beginning of 2001, based on results from 2000.
But instead, Information Provider coordination was discontinued,
we have had generally hostile and bad user service, and have
suffered many service cuts with no prior notice given to the
IPs.

   All or almost all of the service reductions have been chalked
up to security. You know, it's really easy to become more secure
by cutting services. Any wingnut with a Unix manual can do that.
What's necessary for SCN, or any ISP, to do is to maintain that
same level of security while offering the many and varied good
and useful new and old services that people want and need. Every
successful ISP has to do that well enough. Consistently taking
the easy way out on this issue has led SCN down the primrose
path.

   Web hosting was the only remaining service that was still on
the upswing in 2000. Now, looking at the decline of this one
last service that was doing pretty well until Operations took it
over and shut out the non-technical people that had made it work
in a reasonable way, I think SCN might have about another six
months left under its current administration before some other
organization in the Seattle area supplants it entirely for
nonprofit Web hosting.

Rod Clark

* * * * * * * * * * * * * *  From the Listowner  * * * * * * * * * * * *
.	To unsubscribe from this list, send a message to:
majordomo at scn.org		In the body of the message, type:
unsubscribe scn
==== Messages posted on this list are also available on the web at: ====
* * * * * * *     http://www.scn.org/volunteers/scn-l/     * * * * * * *