Milovana.com

*waves her hand in the air* OHH OHH PICK ME PICK ME!

sissy jasmine wrote:*waves her hand in the air* OHH OHH PICK ME PICK ME!

*runs away* noooo I am a good girl!

sissy jasmine wrote:*runs away* noooo I am a good girl!

*chases after Jasmine whipping random pieces of furniture to illicit a loud cracking noise*

So that's it?

Ronin took his ball and went home?




i am le sad

Nope, just taking the time to do my research before replying. Some of the points made were good ones, so I'm following up. Just waiting for some time to do so.

There has been an upswing, mostly related to a single server crash that a lot of issues were found (Database crash, server at storage limit, etc). For the most part when chat crashes, it's because there's enough people active enough, that the server runs out of memory. When it happens because of this, it's a matter of one of the four people who can fix it, noticing and issueing a single command on a command line to fix it. Chat itself sits on a fairly small seperate server, which were there slightly more memory it'd not be an issue, then again, that'd raise costs.

I find this hard to believe - going back thru the history of just one of the myriad threads relating to chat outages, bugs, and issues, there have been a multitude of issues, both before, and after the "one instance" of a server crash that you mention.

There's really a lot to this comment, so I'm going to break it down.

You're correct in that both server costs aren't cheap and that there is only one person footing the bill (Seraph0x)
I can't agree it's a drain on resources. I can conservatively estimate the costs related to chat are under 5% of the cost of running the site or less. Does it force the site to keep mods? No, the chat could be unmoderated. Given all the mods are volunteers, it's not like it's an expense, nor with the exception of Milovana Team members, are any of the chat mods, moderators on the forums.
As for other features and ongoing projects, those are all being done by Seraph0x himself, and given he has a real job and this isn't a pay site, it is behoove of us to be patient. If it were easy and simple, it'd probably be done by now. And moreover if you're bringing up resource comments, new features like that mean more server resources needed, and more potential issues to deal with

Of course it's a drain on resources - how can you say it's not? You may feel it's not a large one - but as you've so eloquently put it yourself - you're not the one having to fix, maintain, or otherwise absorb the impact of the drain, so from your perspective, perhaps it's not. 5% of what, exactly? 5% of 5,000 per month is a pretty healthy amount, IMO. If I were losing a healthy 5% of my expenditure with no return on investment, I'd be concerned. It also has indirect drains - downtime, maintenance time, upgrade time, etc - all are drains on resources - of which, apparently, there are precious few. If there are truly only four people who can command-line reboot the chat, and the majority of the time allocated to fixing any types of problems are absorbed by dealing with chat issues, it's indirectly affecting every other project that *isn't* getting done.

There are other sites that have better chatrooms, that are more stable, and more user friendly than this one. You cannot disagree with this, if you've spent any time at all on the internet. Does it work, yes. Does it work well? Arguable. It serves a vital role, but it has no aesthetics to speak of - it doesn't tie into the site theme at all. It crashes on average, once per week. Your argument is akin to arguing that a plate glass window can stop a bullet. Yes, it can, but it's not exactly the best option, is it?

To my knowledge, there's no one currently developing chat. I helped initially setup the chat server (the backend), and at that point we chose an open-source browser based client to put on the site for chat. Given chat is currently XMPP based, there are lots of features that could exist were there someone actively working on it. You're correct that the browser based client doesn't have a lot of features in it. However it does allow us to chat with one another, the critical feature. It in addition also lets us be able to connect from devices without flash (a feature the previous chat lacked). If you don't like the looks of chat aesthetically I'd suggest choosing a different xmpp client to use, there's dozens of them, and our chat supports any of them being able to connect.

Great - so, there's no active development of the chat system, meaning there are no regular updates, bug fixes, improvements, or any other work being done to improve a flawed system.

While the rest of your points I can understand your view some and see their merits, I can't remotely agree with this one. While we don't often have lots of people in chat, chat has had almost 7,000 unique visitors to it, since we switched chat systems. That's over 20% of the total Milovana user base, has used this chat system at one point or another. And given that this chat hasn't existed for the life of the site, and there's plenty of dormant usernames, that may well mean a better percentage of current active users have.

This is just a numbers argument. You talk about 7,000 unique visitors - first, a person can come up with raw statistics to justify any standpoint. Show me proof, we can go from there. Now, what we can absolutely prove without a doubt, is that the number of active, *registered* users is a small percentage of the overall site visitors - many of whom are unregistered, meaning that the vast majority of site traffic is accessed by people who have no interest in features like the forum, and chatroom. Okay - so, we break down the number further, accounting only for registered visitors. The site has less than 500 registered users at any given time, with minor variations to this on particularly busy days. Of those average users, how many visit the chat? 10 percent? Less? So - how is it really being utilized? Answer - by a relatively small, close-knit demographic who uses it as much for personal conversation as much as it's used for site-related topics. At it's busiest, I've seen maybe 25 people in at a given time - and this was when there was an active topic that had been pre-advertised, and had multiple participants. My point - and this illustrates it - is that if there was more of this type of activity, the chatroom would be utilized more often, and by more people. It would only drive traffic on the site - there is *no* downside, short of crashing the server that can't sustain the load.

What I will agree with, is there isn't "scenes" in public very often. This is most likely due to a few factors. First of all, that there's not a lot of dom/mes on the site in general, much less in chat. Secondly the dom/mes there are already have submissives, and so play in private with them instead of public, or got tired of their scenes being interrupted by people begging to join or be their subs or the unwanted PMs they got when they did play out in public a lot. I know personally of 4-5 people that no longer play in public because of this.

I'm not talking about scenes - people can do whatever scenes they like in private - that's none of anybodys' business. What I'm talking about is inviting people here for active conversational topics, like how politics affect sites like this - professional services - interest in BDSM/kink. Things like this, that garner a genuine interest, and foster a better understanding of what we're participating in.

Lastly, is chat perfect? Nope. Is chat a needed feature this site would die without? No. Is chat a nice feature, that plenty would miss? Yes.

I don't disagree. But if you're going to have something, shouldn't it work? Shouldn't it look good?

Here's the bottom line, and the only real reason I suspect the chat hasn't been killed off years ago. Every site on the internet has a value. The value is calculated by multiple features - ie, content, traffic, features, etc. Does the site have a gallery? Does the site have a forum? Does the site have a chatroom? Each feature adds value to the site - so it's not entirely true that it's not a money generating issue - it is. It's a build-on-investment. I'd bet my left arm that the site Administrator knows this, and has actively been doing his best to create something of actual monetary value. Why? For any number of reasons - but the biggest one is, it's a hard asset. If he ever decides to sell the site, the advertising value alone of a site with the kind of traffic that the tease-pages generate is huge. And how does that make the tease authors feel? I'm not one of them - but, if I had put my hard work into creating something for the site, and then find out, even indirectly, that my actions had directly led to a massive cash-cow for another person, I'd feel a bit put-out.

Then why don't you hold these discussions?

Chat is there. Hell the forum is there.

Heck, log onto chat *right now* and discuss it!

if you wanna be really meta, talk about chat in chat

The chat room is utilized every day, provided it is up, by a fair number of people. So I'm not sure how it could be utilized more often. Could more traffic be generated? Sure. Would more traffic equate to more active use of chat? Not necessarily.

How does chat not tie into the theme of the site? This is what Milo is about (taken directly from the about page):

Milovana is a free online community, dedicated to the safe, sane and consensual exploration of sexual technique and technology in fun and interactive ways. A safe haven for all denominations of human sexuality. Milovana is the Serbian word for mistress and is also used there as a first name. We first went online on July 21st, 2006 and officially celebrate our anniversary each year on the name day for "Milovana": July 18th.

The chat room expands upon this by being a safe haven to discuss any subject. Topics are not advertised because we want people to feel free to discuss any topic they want and usually a pretty broad range of topics is covered every day. Yes this is a chat room on a kink site, but we are not robots that only think about kink. People have other interests outside of that and should be free to discuss them.

Sure other sites have chat rooms that look better and are more stable. Those chat rooms are also probably much more expensive to set up and maintain. What makes or breaks a chat room isn't the way it looks, or the features it has or what topics are discussed in it but the people that use it. Quite frankly I don't care what the chat room looks like. If I want to go see something pretty I can go to the art museum or browse tumblr. Chat is about the people and connections between them.

ronin wrote:*snip*

Ulterior motive much?

You know, it's pretty amazing what you can glean from a persons style of debate and argument. It really can be a very distinct attribute. What I see here, is a very familiar writing style and what seems like a one track form of argument.

However, everything is not always what it seems.

I also find it very interesting that you choose to lay your argument firmly at Turtle's feet, choking off the the numerous users who have made positive testimonial about the chat.

Ulterior? How? I thought it was pretty much out there - I think the chat sucks, I like the site, and I'd like to see what the thoughts are on the current system and see if theres any plans on fixing or upgrading it.

Laying it at Turtles feet? Yeah, maybe. I didn't realize that's how it came across - he was the one that responded with actual information rather than nonsensical drivel or opinions. I appreciated that so he got more of a response from me than other comments did. I'm not interested in slinging mud, I'm interested in knowing the reasons for why things are the way they are.

I guess I don't understand the rest of your post?

ronin wrote:Ulterior?

*nods* Mhm. Ulterior. *nods*

ronin wrote: Laying it at Turtles feet? Yeah, maybe. I didn't realize that's how it came across - he was the one that responded with actual information rather than nonsensical drivel or opinions.

Ahhh so the opinions of those that actually make use of the chat aren't relevant. I see.

Because surely the opinions of the people that actually use the chat feature should be taken into account?

Oh and as for nonsensical drivel, I've just had a read through the thread and it all seems to make perfect sense to me. Do try and keep up dear chap, I know it can be hard to take these things on board when they don't line up with your particular view, but it's for the best in the long run.

ronin wrote: I'm not interested in slinging mud, I'm interested in knowing the reasons for why things are the way they are.

Really? Well I'm sorry if I'm gasping for breath trying to believe you there (was that too tenuous a link? ) but there we are. The reasons for the chat being the way it is have been explained, and debated, in the past. As you well know.

ronin wrote: I guess I don't understand the rest of your post?

I'm sure you don't. I'm sure you don't.

Spoiler: show

Actually, that's a lie. I know, that you, know exactly what I'm on about.

Spoiler: show

Oh...And now you know, that I know, that you know, exactly what I'm on about.

"nonsensical drivel and opinions"

that certainly encapsulates every word you wrote.

This isn't just JAQing off on your part, there appears to me a deeper motivation. You've literally brushed off every single point where people said "This is volunteer. If you would like something, actually go through with it".

There is nothing stopping you from accomplishing the things you've proposed the chat can be used for. Everything else you complain about the chat (Interface, etc) would literally make it an even bigger drain on resources for the site.

Tashi wrote: There is nothing stopping you from accomplishing the things you've proposed the chat can be used for. Everything else you complain about the chat (Interface, etc) would literally make it an even bigger drain on resources for the site.

/thread.