"Sad Day at TMP (Again)" Topic

Tribble,- it makes me feel enormously well endowed – with knowledge, many thanks for your kind thoughts.

As for being a big man, well perhaps – almost as much as posting a not so veiled attack on the Editor in public, when he asked for thoughts in private?

AP + SJW (interesting initials) – how will people learn if those who know don't spread the joy?

I know, Gwydion, I know – though I had no clue what they now stood for till recently (something else I learnt from TMP, I think) though I'm too old and politically incorrect to qualify, I suspect.

But let's not derail the thread, which I'm sure was not your intention. :-)

Sorry – no. Carry on.

Sad to see the editors go. I admire Bill's sense of duty in offering work to them in the first place, it was a positive gesture to people in need of employment.

But as it was with a fixed purpose – delivery of the TMP upgrade – and Bill seems satisfied he has delivered this, I understand his decision.

I hope the editors can use the things they've learned here in future and hope Bill's work here bears fruit.

But as it was with a fixed purpose – delivery of the TMP upgrade – and Bill seems satisfied he has delivered this, I understand his decision.

No, the editors are not being let go because of the TMP upgrade.

So is this now the much trumpeted TMP4 just that nothing seems to be any different.
What has changed out of interest or is it actually still to happen?

My apologies Bill. I thought you had said you were hiring them to free up your time for TMP 4.

The time coincidence of the changes and them going made me jump to a wrong conclusion.

Sorry.

'What has changed out of interest or is it actually still to happen?'

Less downtime, rules directory and boards for each ruleset plus some bugs eliminated. Think Bill has said that's what he was aiming for regards TMP 4.0 a few times now on various topics about it, and no, not likely any other features – going by what Bill has said. Hope that helps clear it up mashrewba :-)

26th August 2013.

That's the date I originally extended my membership so that Bill could hire staff thus freeing him up to develop TMP4.

It would certainly be useful to have a list of what has been achieved in that time together with a list of the original objectives.

I think this has already been covered here: TMP link

OK, let me try to answer all the questions in your previous post…

"What's the plan?"

The same general plan as before – "TMP 4.1 will be an upgrade for speed, taking advantage of some new developments in the coding language. TMP 4.2 would probably be a major database upgrade (finally!)" – but at a considerably slower pace.

There are at least three years of suggestions already made. Is there a comprehensive list of them? Have they been prioritized? Have any been ruled out because of conflict with other parts of the software?

I think the focus for now should be on fixing the last two bugs, so that we can go from TMP 3.9999 to TMP 4.0.

After that, fix the forum search.

No, I have not made a comprehensive written list of desired features.

Since there has been some level of significant turnover in the past few years, would it not make sense to get inputs from the members now?

Not really, because the tasks outlined above will take me some time, considering my changing workload without supporting staff.

"no point in wasting valuable time and effort over an upgrade no longer wanted."

Didn't stop the creation of new boards for hundreds of rule sets, many of historic interest only, and the 'Starting in…' series of boards, which have led to the further unnecessary fragmentation of the main boards, did it?

I've rarely seen complaints about the loading speed of TMP – it's usually the various bugs, the overnight shut-down (now somewhat reduced), the broken search function etc that seem to prompt the most comments.

So, for example, when you state "TMP 4.1 will be an upgrade for speed, taking advantage of some new developments in the coding language." are you speaking of a block upgrade, or a series of incremental fixes that will be done, and when they are all done, that will be 4.1? If it is just/primarily speed, will it be a binary change (now it is 4.0/now it is 4.1) or will it be a case of OK, we've increased speed by 15% with the last fix. I'm shooting for another 15-20% in my next fix"

What sort of timeline do you think it will be? Since you are the only one with insight to the coding you need to do and your workload, you are the only person that can answer that. So, six months (ballpark) for the first increment of an estimated X%? An 18 month effort to do the binary jump? Or can you even tell right now?

In a perfect world, it would be a series of coding upgrades to various portions of the website. However, due to the interconnectedness of TMP, it will probably be more like one giant bite followed by several smaller bites.

Best guess timeframe? Six months? A year?

I don't even know how much programming time I'll have as of next month.

I'm a basic member, and at 23 years old, probably one of the younger members here.

I have not become a supporting member for 2 reasons (and yes, you can count this as a PM posted publicly):

1. Silly, inconsistent moderating. Ultramodern board and elsewhere.

2. TMP is largely still using technology and aesthetics from before I was born. Seems a bit silly to pay for a site upgrade, when those features are available on FREE forums with a few clicks.

YMMV and the topics on TMP found via google search often provide interesting info/ideas. But this is more a feature of the member base than the site itself.

I have not become a supporting member for 2 reasons (and yes, you can count this as a PM posted publicly):

I accept your position, short-sighted as I might think it is.

But my point about the PMs is that for a site this large, with an active membership in the thousands, where are all the rest of the PMs ("public" or private)?

Bill, I'd be interested to know what you think are the main reasons for the decline in SMs from 1300 in 2012 to 'many hundreds' in 2017, given that other forums (fora?) such as LAF continue to grow in popularity.

Various suggestions have been made, most of which you've either discounted or consider 'not proven', so what are your thoughts on the matter.

where are all the rest of the PMs ("public" or private)?

I haven't bothered because I couldn't add anything to SJW, JJ, Temp.Like Ach et al

You can give advice, even good advice but if it's dismissed, there doesn't seem much point.

I may be alone or there may be 1000s of members who feel the same.

What Ochoin said.

Besides, we basic members are not supposed to use PM anyway.

P.S. If I recall correctly, Katie and AECurtis were among the best members back then. I can't believe they'd drive anyone away.

Pertti, we 'basics' can PM the Editor regardless.

where are all the rest of the PMs ("public" or private)?

I agree with ochoin, in that I have lots to say on the matter, but there just doesn't seem any point when you're just dismissing people's opinions. I imagine I'm not alone in that. Shame.

This is quite funny, actually!

There is literally a crowd in front of Bill's door, coming up one at a time to, respectfully mind you, voice their greivances.

But yet, Bill hears none of it, because no one is knocking privately on the door to his inner sanctum.

I'd say you can't make this up, but I think this scene has been in just about every movie with a Palace/Vatican and a crowd outside…

Oy…as in like VEY!

What Ochoin, Todd, and the others have said.

What Ochoin said.

What was said in the six posts immediately above.

May I join the orderly queue to agree with all of the above?

Bill, I'd be interested to know what you think are the main reasons for the decline in SMs from 1300 in 2012 to 'many hundreds' in 2017, given that other forums (fora?) such as LAF continue to grow in popularity.

Actually, SMs increased after 2012, and only decreased in 2016.

Some of the decline is due to not giving out as many free memberships as we used to (we used to give out 100 memberships at Christmas).

I suspect much of the rest is due to forum bugs.

Besides, we basic members are not supposed to use PM anyway.

Basic Members can always PM a moderator.

P.S. If I recall correctly, Katie and AECurtis were among the best members back then. I can't believe they'd drive anyone away.

TMP even lost advertisers because of AECurtis.

Blaming him for losing advertisers…

words fail me

It is simply a fact. Advertisers told me.

And did they all come back afterwards?

So if indeed this Curtis (I actually have no idea who he is/was -)is to blame for advertisers leaving then they must have come back after he died ,correct??
And since I assume they didn't-what explanation did they give when you talked to them about re-upping ?

I know as an advertiser within my industry if the obstacles to my advertising with a particular media venue are removed, the company seeking my advertising money will always follow-up with me .
What were the results of your follow ups ?

Bill, do you realise what you are saying? On page two of this thread you refused to accept Mike of Black Hat's explanation that he and several others withdrew advertising here because of your actions.

Yet on page three you feel obliged to tell us all that it is simply 'a fact' that the late A E Curtis, who, needless to say cannot now speak for himself, drove unnamed advertisers away.

That does not seem to be a consistent approach, to put it mildly.

Wow, if SMs increased after 2012 to more than 1300 and only fell in 2016 to "many hundreds" that's a pretty catastrophic collapse of support, even allowing for the 100 free memberships inflating the previous figures.

And the various bugs have been a feature of TMP for many years, so it seems odd that so many have voted with their wallets just in the last 12 months.

De mortuis nil nisi bonum dicendum est.

TMP link

I agree with the above and have formed up in the virtual queue.

Bill, there also needs to be a filter on poor taste and I think referencing Allen for losing advertisers is very much in poor taste.

He who can no longer defend himself, is always at fault!

I can see Great and Infamous leaders applying this logic…but from a guy who runs a website about guys who play with toy soldiers?

Yet on page three you feel obliged to tell us all that it is simply 'a fact' that the late A E Curtis, who, needless to say cannot now speak for himself, drove unnamed advertisers away.

Yes, I am telling you that it is a fact.

I would like to bring up the Court of Inquiry summoned by the Margrave of Hesse Cassel after the Battle of Trenton.
All blame was laid on officers who died, starting with Rall. NOT "von" Rall. Just plain Rall.

There. Now we can crosspost to the American Revolution board.

What Ochoin said.

And my reasons for cancelling my supporting membership after being in from whenever it started had nothing to do with forum bugs.

Just out of interest, which advertisers left because Allen Curtis drove them away? Have they come back now he is no longer with us?

My only direct dealing with him was when I asked a question on the Napoleonic Boards and he was very helpful with his reply. And this was despite the fact that my question concerned the use of bricoles by the American artillery during the War of 1812.

Yep, pretty low to blame AEC for losing advertisers, especially as it seems that the rot set in after his death.

In my (granted limited) experience of him, he added value to the site and was generous (albeit forthright) in sharing his considerable knowledge.

As previously noted, did any of said advertisers return to TMP after his departure and, if so, are any prepared to put their head above the parapet and confirm Bill's assertion?

Bill, A E Curtis died in 2014 yet you said this site was growing until 2016 when the number of members and advertisers dropped off.

How can he be blamed for the state TMP is in now unless you are suggesting he drove people away posthumously?

(I'm sorry but I liked Allen and I don't like to see him get the blame like this)

You are conflating two different things. I never said that Allen was responsible for the current state of TMP! I simply said, accurately, that he did drive away a few people (including advertisers).

Allen was famously acerbic. Yes, he was knowledgeable, but if you asked what he considered to be a 'dumb' question, he could be hell on you! So I think it should be no surprise to anyone that he could drive a few people off.

And, yes, I was a friend of Allen's once, too. When his wife was dying, I think I was one of his closest friends. Later, we drifted apart, and after he chose to leave TMP (he was not asked to leave), he became a bitter critic.

I think that y΄all are in so much of a hurry to pile on that you are all losing perspective.

Where did Bill say that the late Mr Curtis caused the current problems TMP is experiencing? He merely said that some advertisers left because of Curtis, which does not mean that the loss was not compensated by new advertisers.

I think there is a lot of good discussion going on here, but the pitchforks and torches need to be put away.

Edit: It seems Bill beat me to the punch.

I have to agree with those above offering advice. It's unfortunate that it is again, as usual, falling on deaf ears.

Where did Bill say that the late Mr Curtis caused the current problems TMP is experiencing? He merely said that some advertisers left because of Curtis, which does not mean that the loss was not compensated by new advertisers.

I'd still be interested to know which advertisers pulled the plug because of Allen Curtis?

Keep the faith, bro!

I think faith is the correct word here. ( Webster definition)
"Firm belief in something for which there is no proof"

unless of course you are encouraging the TMPer's to continue in the religion of their choice .

"All the world is made of faith, and trust, and pixie dust."
J.M. Barrie.

Unfortunately, I no longer believe in Peter Pan.

Yeah, but what about Tinkerbell?

I've been a TMP member since the early 2000s, and a supporting member for a few years. I let my supporting membership expire because for several reasons, many of which have already been mentioned.

My hobby is miniature wargaming, I come here for news, tips, inspiration about the hobby. Everything else detracts from my (limited) time to enjoy the hobby. As TMP's "noise" rose, my interest in supporting the site financially dropped – and many other websites are doing a good job in offering a better, more focused environment. Among the factors that annoyed me over time:

1. the erratic moderating, including the recurring drama of dawghousing, the poor taste in confronting and alienating good-standing members who contributed to the list and the hobby, the silliness of certain boards.
2. I objected to Tango's outsized, compulsive postings, that buried hobby-related threads of much greater interest (to me.)
3. I objected to the proliferation of boards, that makes again very difficult to find and follow interesting threads.
4. I found pathetic that website needs to go offline daily for backup – this is 2016, and all the other websites I visit had fixed this problem by the end of the 20th century. (And yes: TMP look and interface is a relic of the past, but I am less annoyed by it.)
5. No other website I visit seems to suffer by the same, pervasive "bugs".
6. I objected to the hiring of editors with no background in, or understanding of, the hobby – and who suffered bad slips of judgment about what would be appropriate on these boards.
7. The Editor's lack of responsiveness to many suggestions, recommendations, nudges to make improvement.

Bill's site, Bill's rules, some say. Sure. My wallet, my money, I counter. And it is not worth spending it to support TMP in this state of affairs.

An interesting post DestoFante.

I agree with your sentiments and your list.

I would a number 8. Stupid polls which have no connection whatsoever with the hobby. Just look at the list on today's front page.

Barrie's Tinkerbell mended things for the other fairies: hence, a 'tinker'.

I'm pretty sure this thread hasn't mended anything. Indeed, quite the opposite.