I don't know what to think of that idea. It's still free for now, but without joining you can no longer see photos. They state it is the last step before going to subscription only. I've had trouble with them in the past when I kept relaying the information about the bad Grizzly bandsaw I got, after someone asked for advice about Grizzly quality or Grizzly bandsaws. I sent an email to Grizzly telling them about the censorship on that site supporting them. I was quickly banned for 6 months for not being friendly. So wondering if Grizzly is pulling some of it's financial backing, or they just want to charge for someone to get advice from others? It's their decision of course, but it's now one less place for me to visit.
Doesn't strike me as a good idea, but I then voted with my feet from that forum years ago. Whoever is running the place gets to make the rules they like, we either stay or go.
I got banned from there, too several years ago. I don't remember why—clearly something I said. Ken Salazar was still heavily involved and we'd had a good relationship from the Pond days, but he didn't offer any help.
To be honest, it wasn't an equivalent replacement for the Pond that WC has turned out to be. And WC has actually turned out to be the gold standard in the long term. I don't miss the Pond. Frankly, while we all managed to work within Wayne's (Miller) strictures, it wasn't nearly as friendly as here.
The Internet (no big surprise) isn't free to operate. Servers and software cost money. Some places have sponsors in the background, like the forums run by some of the trade magazines; some rely on what you might call "voluntary subscription," with members donating to keep the place going (WoodCentral is supported not by Ellis' [non-existent] vast fortune from his editing years, but by your collective contributions). Some places find a required subscription model necessary.
Nor are decisions on forum rules without tradeoffs. Ellis established simple rules for behavior here, amounting to "let's be civil." I've been moderating here for some years, and, by and large, y'all are great. I've/we've* seen the occasional rude member and the occasional slanging match between members, and it's been necessary to decide when rudeness or argumentation crosses a line from gauche to unacceptable. Some people are just curmudgeons, but their intentions are good; others act from more complicated motivations. Some folks, when chastised, have re-evaluated their behavior and changed it; it's a delight to see those members now making solid contributions to our conversations. Others refuse to change and get quite defensive about it. And, sure, this is America: they have the right to be rude, and we (and I hope I speak here not just for the moderators, but for everyone) have the right to say, "but not here."
We like to think we've created a welcoming place to talk woodworking (and wander into other topics), and I am knocked out, as a moderator, by how well this community does - not just behavior, but collective maintenance of good order, by which I mean members politely calling out people who step over the line, often before Ellis or one of the moderators even know it's going on. And, many times, when a spam message shows up on one of the boards, I'll hear from a member that it's there, so I can go smite it.
It's not always easy walking that fine line - Ellis and I have had multiple conversations over the years about whether and how to clamp down on a particular thread or member. I understand the attractions of the sharp, strong line that Sawmill Creek has chosen to draw, but I would not want to moderate there.
I wish the folks at Sawmill Creek well. I probably won't sign on for a subscription; my income is fixed and only so large (see above about non-existent fortunes). But I don't envy them having had to make that decision.
This is just another in a long line of maneuvers by the owner of SMC (can't remember his name) to squeeze money out of his participants. I left when he packaged all of the photos posted on SMC on a DVD and sold them for profit, including a lot of mine. He never asked my permission or gave any notice that he was going to sell my photos. His "Terms of Use" were very loosely worded and arguable gave him the right to do it, but I didn't think so and still don't. Next he required payment of a membership fee to view photos posted on the site. Now he's moving it to pay-for-membership site only. I wish him good luck, but I haven't been on board there for years and I certainly don't plan to join up and pay the membership freight now . WC is the friendliest and most helpful site on the net IMHO. I've very happy here.
I don't know (or care) how it is now, but back when I was allowed access, the quickest way to get jumped on was to make any sort of disparaging remark about Festool. That'd get you flamed for days.
I have never had a problem with SMC. Yes, there have been the usual squabbles with the usual trolls - same guys seem to pop up everywhere. And yes, there have been members banned. The reasons appear to vary. But, by-and-large, it is a great forum with a great bunch of members. There are a number of members sharing SMC and WoodCentral.
I think that some are making too big a deal of the money thing. The owner funds the website out of his pocket. In the past he has paid for this via adverts. However, he reports that many members now use adblocks, and the funding is drying up. Whether he could run it more efficiently or not is another issue - I believe he could do it differently, and have said so - but what he is asking as a subscription (currently $6 p.a.) is a drop in the ocean for everyone. If you cannot afford this amount, then how do you afford to do woodworking?
If you go to the "home" page (top of box on the upper left) and scroll to the bottom of the page, you can join me in arranging a regular monthly contribution to WoodCentral via PayPal that's steady, regular and painless.
Plenty of places to find friendly people who offer advice for free. Facebook pages are the major place for that. I'm surprised Grizzly isn't stepping up more to fund SMC. Where else can the president of a company come on and squash comments about their product? Personally, it's not the amount, it's the censorship that keeps me away. I make money with my woodworking, that's how I can afford it.
I was going to avoid this discussion but for Dick's comment. I have quit two Forums, one not woodworking where I had been a major technical contributor and the other woodworking. In both cases the trigger was the same. A response to a contribution left little doubt that the Forum was run primarily for the benefit of the Forum ruler and not the Forum participants. I am uninterested in supporting this business model.
I put a lot of effort into some technical posts, one coming on crown molding for example. I do so to benefit the Forum participants. I sure as hell don't do it to burnish whatever my image is as a woodworker. If the Forum Ruler makes money off my work, I am conditionally fine with that arrangement. The condition is that the Ruler does not impede the exchange of accurate information to participants. If the free exchange of accurate information on a Forum is impeded for financial gain of the Ruler, I'm gone. I don't like being used for free.
I don' t know how Ellis does what he does, but he does it well. He has passed on numerous opportunities to run me off. I expect he must be the extreme opposite of insecure, whatever word that is.
For example: Awhile back I analyzed the composition of the "proprietary" LV steel, using a blade I bought and not the one given to me by LV. From there it was a straightforward matter to find the manufacturer and product ID. The properties of this steel, as provided by the manufacturer, would be of interest to the technically inclined woodworker, just as they are to knife customers. These properties would confirm that this is a kick ass steel for chisels.
For a while I was under a NDA from LV. Had the steel been discussed in this situation I would have been legally bound to not disclose. But I wasn't. LV was not excited about the possibility of disclosure. I could have gotten a note from Ellis not to attempt disclosure on WC. I was favorably impressed I didn't. (I did get a note from Rob with reasons for not disclosing. Given all Rob does for the woodworking community I decided to not disclose. Important, I decided, not a Forum Ruler issuing a decree to protect cash flow).
All of Ellis's decrees come across as so reasonable that they are enthusiastically accepted by me as least.
I was a firm believer in SMC and turned over 200 pens for the Freedom Pen project. I quit when I was ripped a new one for sending a pen to a local wounded soldier while she was home on leave. I was informed in no uncertain terms ALL pens were to be sent through them. I must have missed the reason for the pens.
>>>If you go to the "home" page (top of box on the upper left) and scroll to the bottom of the page, you can join me in arranging a regular monthly contribution to WoodCentral via PayPal that's steady, regular and painless.
That's what I do too. I believe in supporting any non-profit forum or organization I'm associated with, spend time at, or benefit from in any way. If everyone did that none of these non-commercially sponsored forums would be in trouble today.
This thread got me to thinking what is the best, from a users perspective, model for a Forum. I think the best model could be that of a publication where the Forum owner/manager functions as an editor, or hires someone to perform this function. This model could be why I like WC. Ellis runs it where his role is editor. A publication doesn't reject stories that are unfavorable to advertisers, if the story is true and beneficial to the subscribers, for example. Nor does a publication have a lot of rules and procedures. The more I think about it the more I see WoodCentral as a publication with editorials, news, cartoons (whoops those were banned )current events, advertising, etc.
The CEO Forum model is to run a Forum like a business. Maximize profits and manage accordingly.
)current events, advertising, etc.