My question would be: what is the number of paying customers (not % but actual number) and is that enough to pay a support staff even minimum wage over a year, after website costs are paid? My guess is 'probably not' which makes it a bit of a catch-22. Can't afford to hire support staff that would make the site more appealing to those who would pay for the support staff.

I've spent over 300 dollars on the site myself, and I know many people have at least spent 20 dollars in the past six months or so.

I know many accounts are unpaid, but lots of people have one main paid account and then several freebies. I doubt it's enough to pay someone for work, but it should still matter..

It DOES matter. This site has grown hugely over the last six months and generosity from the users has kept us afloat and allowed us to expand greatly. If it wasn't for people buying paid and permanent accounts, I doubt the site would even still be running given the expansion due to flocking members of other sites.

Every penny matters, but a small amount is still a small amount, and one has to make due with what he can. I do agree with the below poster, though, that it might be more feasible to hire technical help on a needed basis.

I'm not really suggesting hiring 8 hours a day, 5 days a week support staff. I think that's probably too ambitious for a site that has a lot of free accounts. But I don't see it as all or nothing. If Squeaky can only afford to pay a technician for a few hours consult a week, that's better than nothing. A lot of these technical bugs seem (to me) to be things that require sitting down and working out, time that he doesn't always personally have. I think he said that the quickreply issue needed to be "rebuilt" from the ground up. Why not hire a few hours of an expert's time to rebuild that page? They wouldn't be multi-tasking, they'd be paid to focus completely on that a short time. The same goes for a lot of these issues, I'd think. What bothers me is that Squeaky says "I have to deal with business right now." If you're letting people spend $70 on a permanent account, you need to have a better system in place than "business now, bugs later." You need to have somebody working on bugs, even if it's only part-time.

I think that's a good point, but as far as I remember (and this could be a misremembrance), the permanent sales that have been held most recently were held to raise X amount of dollars needed to complete repairs/buy a server/move etc. I don't know that there's a wild profit being made off of people's accounts that do any more than contribute to the basic maintenance of the site. I'm not saying I know what the financial situation is, nor do I think your points are invalid, I just don't know how feasible it is to set aside a budget when we have so few users over all (compared to LJ, for example), and the number of paid accounts is probably very small.

I don't think there's a wild profit either, but I find it difficult to believe that there's no money at all. Even if he has $200 to spare for tech support, that's something. My main problem is that a lot of us bought those accounts when the site was a lot more stable, under the impression that it would continue to be. Now after the code change, using the console clears filters and there's no quickreply. I don't know that I'd have bought an account without quickreply. There are unanswered support requests from three weeks back, some people who haven't been able to post to their journal for weeks. Squeaky was offering to "compensate" people for downtime at one point, why not put that money into hiring part-time tech support? Why not have another account sale or sell more userpics and put that money toward tech support? I don't think anything evil or sneaky is going on here, but there has to be some accountability here if you're going to sell a service. It feels like some of what was paid for at a more stable time is now missing.

There are a number of freelance sites online (Odesk, for one) where Squeaky might be able to find someone to work on a particular issue for a set fee or a set number of hours. It might be worth his while to have a look.

Well, I would love to see some paid support staff, and I've never added up how much money I've spent here but it's in the hundreds of dollars. But I'll tell you this:

Up until I got a new computer last Thursday, I was unable to log into a good quarter of all journals on LiveJournal, and couldn't get past an "adult content" flag no matter what I did, even though I'm 49 years old.

I filed support request after support request at LJ, and a VOLUNTEER answered every one. And yes, I'm a paying customer (perm account) at LJ, just as I am here.

They told me I was not the only one having this problem. They told me they didn't know what was causing it. They gave me endless steps to take to try to resolve it, none of which worked. They finally sent me a list of steps so long and so complicated I didn't even understand half of them, and I've been online since before there was a web, yo.

I posted a response saying I was getting a new computer in a few weeks and I'd just wait and hope it fixed itself that way (it did), and made the comment that I felt that a paying customer's issues being handled exclusively by a volunteer was not good customer service.

Now, yes, LJ does have paid staff, but I'm not sure what you'd have to do to actually get one of them to read your support ticket. The whole support system is based on the free labor of volunteers.

And given that my perm account here cost a tiny fraction of my perm account at LJ, and I find overall the responsiveness of IJ is far superior to that of LJ, I really am not sure this is as much of an issue as the OP does.

Although again, I'd love to see IJ grow to include paid staff, and there are a few bugs I would like to see fixed too... even though I have no idea on this earth what "quickreply" is.

I by no means uphold LJ as the pinnacle of journal sites, but I will say this: I would much prefer getting an acknowledgment that my support request was RECEIVED and an (ultimately fruitless) suggestion, than NO response at all. At least two of my friends submitted support requests three weeks ago and didn't hear a thing back. They would feel a LOT better if someone at least replied to say that they'd been heard.

Then why not check the Support board to see that it was posted?

I think you know that's not what I meant. I meant hearing back from a human that acknowledges that they're AWARE of the issue. Even if they can't fix it yet, knowing that someone read your request and intends to work on it is SOMETHING. Even if the bugs are a mystery to Squeaky, at least give us the courtesy of replying back to acknowledge our concerns. Whatever you think about hiring part-time consultants, paying members deserve five seconds of communication after three weeks of silence.

At least two of my friends submitted support requests three weeks ago and didn't hear a thing back.

I'm actually shocked to hear this. The support board has fallen behind and I just came back from an announced hiatus to see how backed up it has become. I'm still going through several reports myself to make sure users are still having these issues. By the end of tomorrow, every thing should be caught up. I'm sadly just one person.

I commend you for spending so much energy on it. It upsets me that Squeaky wouldn't enlist someone else's help (I KNOW people would help with that for free) to take over it while you were incapacitated, especially if it was announced. That really bugs me.

We have plenty of support volunteers, they just have a life as much as I do. However, we are always looking for more volunteers to help out with the basics. It's as easy as just browsing the board and posting screened responses as you see them. The more you do that, the more recognized and informed you become of the support board, and then it's really easy to get involved with us.

A lot of the requests have been brought up in support, but we just don't have too many experienced individuals. When it comes to site bugs and things I can't duplicate personally, it becomes difficult for me to answer. I'm sure the same is for a lot of people. Sites like LiveJournal I'm sure have immense training. For a lot of these hard to answer ones, I browse a LOT of LJ support communities and study them in-depth to try to provide a solution. Some people just don't know where to look while some aren't as dedicated.

That's sadly the volunteer part. As I mentioned though, we are always looking for active people to participate on the support board and help out. :)

Quickreply is being able to reply to a thread of comments. Since the code change, clicking "reply" takes you to a whole new page that shows only the exact comment you're replying to. A lot of people roleplay here and/or reference older posts in non-roleplay threads when they respond.

I see... I don't roleplay so I had never thought about that issue before. I've seen people comment on it but I just couldn't figure out what it was!

Thanks for the explanation. :)

I'll admit it's especially relevant for roleplay, but even now, if I was in the middle of writing this comment to you and needed to look back at something you'd said, I'd have to click back (and either put my in-progress comment somewhere or hope it stayed C/Ped) or open a duplicate of the page. It's more of an inconvenience than a crippling bug, but I rely on that feature so much that I might have waited to buy a permanent account if I'd known it was going to disappear after the code switch.

I almost always reply from an email so I have no memory of it being different... I always just get the comment and a reply box. I just went over to an actual journal and did what you describe, and then went to LJ and did it as well, and now, literally for the first time, I see what you're describing! Thanks!

LJ can get right on technical issues because it's backed by a corporation with significant capital. They have full-time tech people because they have money. Pots of it. They have money coming in from their corporate overlords, and money coming in from their userbase.

IJ is being run by a guy with a real full-time job. IJ isn't his job. It's what he does in his spare time. The number of people who've purchased accounts is pitifully small, compared to the total number of journals:

* Permanently Insane: 1601 (0.8%)
* Self-committed [paid]: 1240 (0.6%)

That's 2841 accounts who've paid. Out of a total of 237415 accounts.

But wait, what about extra userpics, you ask?

* Permanent Extra Userpics: 323 (0.2%)
* Insane Userpics: 40 (0.0%)

(Source: http://www.insanejournal.com/stats.bml, as of 11:30 p.m. EST June 12 2008.)

Now, as far as hiring someone goes, let's talk numbers: you know all those new site schemes we just got earlier this year? Worksafe and Dramatic? The volunteer who put those together would normally charge at least 2000 dollars for the amount of work that they took. And designers, as I understand it, charge less per hour than techs do.

If you're really into getting bugs fixed? Either volunteer to work on coding, or put out the word that coders are needed. Either that, or persuade large numbers of people to buy paid time (and renew that paid time) so that we have the pots of money it would take to hire support staff.

Final food for thought: I was on LJ back in the day before they introduced invite codes, when it was mostly just Brad running the place, and honestly? If you think IJ is creaky now, you should have been around then. Because IJ as it functions now is still doing pretty good compared to LJ before Brad sold out.

Oh, and a postscript: I have two accounts. Both are permanent, and both have Insane userpics. So I'm invested in IJ and seeing my money used wisely and well. And I trust that Squeaky is doing so, as his time permits him.

Thank you for saying what I was thinking far better than my bumbling attempt up north.

*bows* No problem.

I don't expect an LJ-size staff, as I've said above. But if I've paid as much as I would for an LJ account, I think it's fair to be upset about issues that haven't been even SPOKEN about for weeks.

"If you're really into getting bugs fixed? Either volunteer to work on coding, or put out the word that coders are needed. Either that, or persuade large numbers of people to buy paid time (and renew that paid time) so that we have the pots of money it would take to hire support staff."

So you're basically saying, "Don't complain unless you're willing to magically understand coding." How is that a valid response? I know nothing about these bugs - I pay money so that someone with those qualifications can fix them. If you're arguing that it's too expensive, why not write a post appealing to the community for anyone with qualifications to specifically work on bugs? At the very least, I bet someone would offer a discount, if not volunteer their time completely. Squeaky hasn't even acknowledged the status of these bugs since the first time it happened, let alone appealed for free/discounted help. Why not try these things before deeming them lost causes? The lack of communication is inexcusable.

I'm saying that if things bother you that much, then getting involved is more likely to fix things.

Can't code? Neither can I. But if you want a faster turnaround on the Support requests, then try answering them yourself.* Remember that Squeaky has a life outside of IJ. He can't be everywhere all the time, so if something goes unanswered, maybe he just didn't see it, and someone needs to point it out to him via email or private message. And I have to disagree with you--I think the business aspect of IJ is pretty important. Doesn't do us any good to have a gajillion userpics if there aren't servers to host them on.

You haven't said what the nature of these unanswered tickets are. Are they things that are unique to a particular journal, or are they part of some of the larger site issues/bugs that have already been acknowledged elsewhere and are already being worked on?


----
*I've looked at the Support boards, and I have to say, I am awed by the people who pitch in and help--I can't even figure out where to start.

I have answered support requests on occasion, but I usually know nothing about how to fix the bugs. Also, I do think the business end is important, you're misreading. I don't think it's important to the point of excluding any bug work, especially when a public call for volunteers would likely get more aid.

They're individual bugs. They're not sitewide bugs/inconveniences like quickreply. They're bugs that impair them from posting in their own journal, or posting in communities, etc. Journals that are basically useless at the moment and have been for three weeks without an acknowledgment that someone will help.

Well said!

I was more than happy to wait a few weeks or even months for IJ to fix the one major bug that irritates me and affects my usage of IJ on a daily basis. But nine months later, it still hasn't been fixed. (LJ fixed the same bug well over a year ago, so clearly it's possible.) I finally got my permanent account despite this, but it's a major inconvenience for me.

Overall though, I've found squeaky to be very responsive and quick to fix when it comes to issues that directly affect basic usage function for a lot of people. And he does it with a good attitude and good humor.

I really wish he had won the user spot on LJ's board, so he could have more easily gotten his hands on their updated code and helped to keep it open for use by IJ et al. Probably would have helped a lot when it comes to finding bug fixes.

I bought my permanent account and perm user pics knowing that one guy runs the site in his spare time. I think he does the best as he can and thats all I could ask of him. I have tried a lot of sites and as far as I am concerned IJ is the best lJ clone out there.

I agree that it's the best out there and he does the best HE can (which is why I'm advocating more support staff.) But wouldn't you be frustrated if you couldn't post in your journal at all for three weeks? I personally want a timeline on the sitewide bugs, yes, but I'm more concerned about my friends and others who've been unable to use the site and post in asylum for weeks. I think you would be upset about that too?

I disagree completely. I would leave a long comment but many above have said what I wanted to already.

While I can understand your desire, you can't possibly imagine that the pittance we are paying is allowing more than keeping the site running and catch as catch can fixes. You want more perks, faster work, start paying. Get you friends to pay, get people you don't know to pay. There has to be a better ratio of paid to freeloaders before any sort of paid staff is even a possibility.

I have several perm accounts, extra pix, made a very large lump sum donation and now I need to get an account on yearly so I can support that way as well.

Then forget the paid staff, for a moment. Forget the sitewide bugs, if you like, though I certainly won't. What excuse is there for a paying customer being unable to use a paid or permanent account for three weeks without a SHRED of communication? Because that's what's happened to three of my friends. They can't use the service they're paying for. "Understaffed" is not an excuse for not being able to use a journal AT ALL. Period. My other points are up for debate, but you cannot seriously suggest that it's okay for a paid customer to have their journal rendered unusuable for three weeks without so much as an acknowledgment or an assurance that their journals will be worked on. There is NO excuse for that, however understaffed, however underpaid. NONE. They are being denied the service they paid for and that is unacceptable.

I'm sorry they're having trouble.

I had a 2 week stretch of being unable to use it. I lived and didn't worry too much. I figured it would be dealt with and it was.

It's rather unlike Squeak to say nothing. I haven't experienced that from him, so I can't say. He's very quick to delve into bugs that affect the site so I can only guess your troubles are localised and lower on the priority scale.

Nudge again. That's all I can suggest.

Whether some people tolerate it or not doesn't make it acceptable. My complaining about features is on a different level than being denied service. If you looked at the support requests a few days ago, you'd see pages of unanswered requests, some from weeks ago, because the main volunteer was on an announced hiatus. In their absence, people were unable to use the site at ALL for weeks. I don't care what Squeaky has to do business-wise; there's no excuse for not taking 15 seconds to tell a few people he's going to work as on fixing their journals ASAP. The fact that he didn't do that, that he let it sit them sit there unanswered despite saying "submit a support ticket" countless times in the same period of time, really bothers me. I don't expect him to fix everything ASAP, but I do expect communication. We're paying for that much.

Well, I'm satisfied with the service for the price. I'm sorry you aren't.

You're avoiding my question. I'm asking whether you'd be satisfied if you couldn't use your journal at all and no one replied to your plea for help. I get that your journal's working fine, but what about the people who can't use theirs at all? Are they just dismissed because it's working for you?

Read up. There was a two week or so stretch where it didn't work for me. It sometimes goes missing, but I wait for it and it's back.

I certainly feel I'm getting my 70US worth. Its obvious you don't.

Now if I'd paid 100US + per year and got those outages, yeah I'd be annoyed.

When I signed on I had a good idea of what to expect and actually there have been less outages than I'd expected and the service has been much better than I expected.

I don't know what else to tell you. Your issue may be localised to your journal and in the grand scheme that's not top of any fix list but yours. Keep reminding them. Its not what you want to hear but it's all I can suggest.

I haven't been experiencing the inability to use my journal that is being discussed here, and I realize my issue is a relatively trivial or less serious/urgent one. But I have asked several times about an ETA on being able to receive our own comments in email, in addition to receiving others' replies to us, and there has never been a reply. (Not even one along the lines of "we'll get to that when we finish fixing the bugs which require our urgent attention".)

I thought they were working on the bugs that caused people to be unable to use their journals. It's surprising to me to hear that that hasn't received priority.