Sciforums down again - longer this time

[stryder]

This was a couple of years ago but I tracked down one of the owners (I think) to a company and my impression was that they were in Israel. I was trying to see if they were interested in selling the forum since they weren't doing much with it (other than running it into the ground).

The guy I was talking to seemed to be delusional about how "intellectual" the site was and how well it was being run. His ears did perk up when I bought up buying it but I was just trying to see how interested they were in the site (since they weren't doing much with it).

I think I tracked this guy down on Linkedin along with his company. I really just wanted to turn it into more of this kind of a forum (little moderation, more two way discussion). In my opinion the fatal flaw with that forum is James, R, Tiassa and to a lesser extend Bells. In other words the moderators.

I don't see any great financial value in that forum other than the Google clicks and the generated ads. I think you could get more traffic starting over and within a year you would be much better off that way.

Well I've sent a query via email to the webmaster (via an old account I use to report issues), although I'm not entirely sure it will be read. (It's likely the Host company change their PHP version and shutdown any "at risk" sites from running on depreciated versions, that might also effect them receiving email.)

If I hear back and depending on what price, I'll see what can be done. (I'll also have to look at rebooting development here too, although I'll likely have to incorporate and look at actually getting some staff etc.) We'll see what happens.

[Kornee]

Five days of darkness at SF now. A certain level of emigration by despairing citizens is likely underway.

[C C]

This thread already shows up on Google via a "Sciforums down" search.

But nada for DuckDuckGo, since the latter doesn't even acknowledge that Scivillage exists, apart from secondary mention of it on other websites (like web traffic statistics).

[stryder]

This thread already shows up on Google via a "Sciforums down" search.

But nada for DuckDuckGo, since the latter doesn't even acknowledge that Scivillage exists, apart from secondary mention of it on other websites (like web traffic statistics).

Just looking into that, it appears that bing.com doesn't have scivillage indexed which in turn means that DuckDuckGo doesn't either. I'll look into seeing if that can be fixed.

Edit:

Apparently Bing delisted the site for some benign reason. I've attempted to get it reindexed, however considering that it's probably just automated algorithm flagging it because of some customisation they don't like, there isn't much I can do currently. If it remains delisted, I'll block all bots associated with Bings algorithm as this website isn't funded via earning anything online, so it's no skin off my back.

[Kornee]

Eight days dark at SF. This is shaping up to looking like permanency. No weeping from me if so. It degenerated to becoming a leftist PC lunatic asylum. IMO.

[C C]

Apparently having seen the light with respect to SF's downfall, Pasture Timmy (AKA cluelusshusbund) is arguably the first one to move back to The Science Forum after many years of absence.

Any of the lost tribes that have not already been there for some time will probably likewise migrate to TSF. At least those who can still remember that board enough to distinguish it from the one that ends in dot-org and the one that is plural, in a search.

Note that it lacks security protocol just like SF, so one's browser may block it or feature a warning. Why the lot prefers sites that have been loosened from the moorings and set adrift, to a secure one like this with an owner presence... Well, why bother to ponder what has no rationality.

Clueluss was one was of the first to sign-up here back in 2014, and then disappeared circa a year later or less.

[stryder]

Well I've sent a query via email to the webmaster (via an old account I use to report issues), although I'm not entirely sure it will be read.  (It's likely the Host company change their PHP version and shutdown any "at risk" sites from running on depreciated versions, that might also effect them receiving email.)

If I hear back and depending on what price, I'll see what can be done. (I'll also have to look at rebooting development here too, although I'll likely have to incorporate and look at actually getting some staff etc.)  We'll see what happens.

Update to that:
The email bounced, which means the address was likely of someone no longer employed to do the role or the actual company that took over sciforums back in the day is defunct.

[Seattle]

Well I've sent a query via email to the webmaster (via an old account I use to report issues), although I'm not entirely sure it will be read.  (It's likely the Host company change their PHP version and shutdown any "at risk" sites from running on depreciated versions, that might also effect them receiving email.)

If I hear back and depending on what price, I'll see what can be done. (I'll also have to look at rebooting development here too, although I'll likely have to incorporate and look at actually getting some staff etc.)  We'll see what happens.

Update to that:
The email bounced, which means the address was likely of someone no longer employed to do the role or the actual company that took over sciforums back in the day is defunct.

Bratislav Dukic was the contact that I had. He and his partner have owned and managed the site for 10 years or so.
https://www.linkedin.com/in/bratislav-dukic-a127454b/

 

[Kornee]

Looks like SF has done a Lazarus and hath risen from the dead! Currently though, the most recent of Recent Posts dates from Oct 09. Let's see how this all goes.
PS - Still marked by Firefox as using unsafe http protocol. So evidently no radical makeover has been under way to explain the long downtime.

[Kornee]

And now, an official explanation: http://www.sciforums.com/find-new/48431368/posts

"Dear SciForum users,

The server infrastructure has been exposed to a DDoS attack early last week, and after the hosting company reacted and isolated affected IP's, while doing some routine inspection, they detected some difficulties with public server equipment that had been replaced ASAP.

However, we also got informed that some server components got replaced afterward, so it required more time to resolve the issue and the downtime lasted longer than usual. Now all services are up and running again! We implemented some new security measures to prevent this from happening in the future. We apologize for the inconvenience.

Thank you for understanding,

SciForums Staff"

So there - officially anyway - everything is back to 'normal' at SF.