Like everyone, I have received numerous comments on the new website. Interestingly, though, most of the comments I receive are positive. There are numerous corrections and suggestions, but they mostly are in a positive light. My personal comments are the same. There need to be corrections and increased functionality, but my load times for each web page are fairly reasonable, given the content. I was not able to attend board meetings when a new website was approved, but I understand there was considerable support for the project. The old website had limited functionality, and to "move to the next level", a significant upgrade was necessary. i.e. a risk. The old website was a good resource for members but did not have much appeal to the outside world - at least in my opinion and from comments I received. I was comfortable with the old website while an SM. I used it daily, and the functionality made it easy to handle SM duties. I have observed younger individuals using the web. I noted that they use the web much differently than I do. The new website takes advantage of the way younger individuals use the web. My SM replacement said it best - that the old website was the window for the membership to view amateur radio, while the new website was the window to the world. That being said, I have seen intense animosity towards Fathom. There apparently were some contract issues of which I am not privy. There were monies paid to Fathom, of which many on the board seem to feel were excessive for the product delivered. Still, they seem to have some value, as our CEO and Chief IS officer have both indicated that there are two projects that need to be outsourced to them at this time. It appears that our CEO is taking a two-tiered approach to the website 1) handling problems and functionality issues through a Bugzilla ticket system and 2) wishing to add new functionality to the website. I do not see why both approaches could not be accomplished at the same time. If we waited until all bugs and functionality issues were completed, we would most likely be looking at a new web overhaul. I do not want my comments to be construed as micromanagement. That is the last thing this web project needs. There have been numerous comments about load times and time-outs. From what I understand, we are using the Rackspace cloud. From what I have read, they are one of the best cloud servers available. I am unclear as to where the internet problems lie. I assume that in our contract with them, there are metrics they guarantee, with transactions per second, page load times, etc. Have there been website audits to see if they are performing at the level that they should? If not, there are third parties that do audits, and will notify if performance goes down below a set point. Additionally, I assume they have multiple internet access points, should one go down. They advertise 24/7 "fanatical" support. When I saw that ARRL was looking to take the servers "in house", I was a bit concerned. It appears that this was done to have more control over the system, and address load times, as reported by those on the board. I read that John Bloom felt that this would be an improvement, but have metrics been done with the ARRL HQ internet service? Could it handle the load that the ARRL website gets from day to day? Would there be a 24/7 call system to correct problems? What if the internet service provider goes down? Is there power backup beyond the usual UPS's? I guess the main question would be whether a loss of the website overnight or a few days (during an ice storm) would be considered a significant problem. In short, ARRL is in the business of promoting Amateur Radio, not being an expert on all things related to the internet. As a Vice Director, I am not privy to all the details of the web project, nor do I expect my comments to be taken seriously. However, I see the web project was taken over personally by our CEO. Despite frustration with internal and external pressures, he has done due diligence in evaluating ways to correct current problems while moving the project forward. It is time that we come together as a board family and give him the support he needs to be successful! '73 de JIM N2ZZ ARRL Vice Director Roanoke Division ARRL, the national association for Amateur RadioT -----Original Message----- From: Cliff Ahrens [mailto:cliff.ahrens@gmail.com] Sent: Saturday, December 11, 2010 10:50 PM To: arrl-odv Subject: RE: ARRL Website Complaint.... Given the number of complaints about the Web server response time, and the increased usage of the Web site and ARRL store during the holiday season, should staff consider a temporary increase of the amount of server space being rented in the Rackspace cloud. As Dave noted, the 2011 Plan recommended to the Board by staff and the A&F committee includes purchasing 4 in-house Web servers at an approximate cost of $6,000, with a projected implementation at the end of the 1st Qtr 2011. The increased rental cost at Rackspace would be a short-term fix, pending the move to in-house servers. And maybe that move could be expedited as well. Cliff K0CA