Shouldn't ENWorld be ".com"?

Yair

Community Supporter
ENWorld has gradually shifted over the past few years from being a fan-run news and community site to a support base for the ENWorld Store, EN Publishing, and recently - the ENGameStore. As near as I can tell, the only thing that now sets it apart from a company's website is the vibrant messageboards community leftover from its past days.
In the "news" reporting, company-affiliated products and news get extensive coverage. To the right is a banner to "support ENWorld", the *only* banner I can't minimize. I just want to see the *true* site news there - articles, reviews, posts... news from the ENWorld community, not the ENWorld buisness. "Site" news are all about what new products the site now carries. New reviews contain links to purchase from the company store. Press releases contain links to purchase only through the site.

Given all this, I seriously suggest changing the site's address to ".com". It is no longer a non-profit community, it is a company site.

I admit I don't particularly like ENWorld as a buisness. Perhaps this is why all of this is leaving a bitter taste in my mouth. :(
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Yair said:
ENWorld has gradually shifted over the past few years from being a fan-run news and community site to a support base for the ENWorld Store, EN Publishing, and recently - the ENGameStore. As near as I can tell, the only thing that now sets it apart from a company's website is the vibrant messageboards community leftover from its past days.

Well, there's another thing that sets it apart - as I understand it, the owners aren't making a business of this. A while back, Morrus tried that, and decided to stop. He's made no announcement that he's changed that policy. It isn't like a place with this much traffic comes cheap, and if the proceeds go to supporting the site, I see no problem. Is it not better to have the place be self-sustaining, rather than requiring huge fund-raising drives?

In the "news" reporting, company-affiliated products and news get extensive coverage. To the right is a banner to "support ENWorld", the *only* banner I can't minimize. I just want to see the *true* site news there - articles, reviews, posts... news from the ENWorld community, not the ENWorld buisness.

This may be a fair complaint. But a product is a product,. Sure, company affiliated products get a lot of coverage. But don't non-affiliated products also get a lot of coverage? Do you have a measure of the affiliated products getting disproportionately more coverage?

"Site" news are all about what new products the site now carries. New reviews contain links to purchase from the company store. Press releases contain links to purchase only through the site.

Links are a problem? There's a problem in making it easy for gamers to find and aquire gaming materials?

Given all this, I seriously suggest changing the site's address to ".com". It is no longer a non-profit community, it is a company site.

Unless you can verify where the money is going, you are in no position to make that accusation. Selling and profit are not synonymous.
 

Actually, I thought the old ".com" ".net" ".org" classifications no longer apply, and haven't for about five years now, have they? network solutions dropped that policy, unless I was misinformed, or they don't enforce it in any way.

Morrus also no longer runs the site as a "profitable venture" - meaning it's not non-profit legally, never has been, but AFAIK he's not contributing to his income in any meaningful way with any proceeds from ENWorld the site. (Setting up a multinational non-profit organization is a very difficult thing, and unless you're collecting money for starving or homeless people, not worth the pain, btw. :)) He's got a day job, same as most of us.

I'm not going to speak for him, and he knows the whole situation behind-scenes whereas I don't, but he's said in another thread that he thinks of the new Gamestore as "a way to ensure ENWorld's long-term viability." Make of that what you will.
 

*chuckles* I can remember a time when the librarians would say in their "how to do research" lectures, "You can almost always assume that a '.org' is a reliable source for your research."

... ENWorld was a .com before, wasn't it? Or am I totally off/misremembering that?
 

Henry said:
Actually, I thought the old ".com" ".net" ".org" classifications no longer apply, and haven't for about five years now, have they? network solutions dropped that policy, unless I was misinformed, or they don't enforce it in any way.

Correct, not sure for how long exactly, but the old guidelines of what was supposed to go in .org, .com, .net are not really followed anymore. The Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) says that .orgs are unrestricted.
 

Queen_Dopplepopolis said:
*chuckles* I can remember a time when the librarians would say in their "how to do research" lectures, "You can almost always assume that a '.org' is a reliable source for your research."

Now it's more along the lines of "Don't trust what you find on the internet..."
I have a huge list of websites that give horrendously inaccurate information, but look in all respects to be reliable and research worthy. :(
 

My personal website is tonylaw.org. I got it because .com was taken. It was offered as an alternative by BuyDomains.com. So, yeah, I think the ".org's are only for non-profits" policy has stopped.
 


Umbran said:
Well, there's another thing that sets it apart - as I understand it, the owners aren't making a business of this. A while back, Morrus tried that, and decided to stop. He's made no announcement that he's changed that policy. It isn't like a place with this much traffic comes cheap, and if the proceeds go to supporting the site, I see no problem. Is it not better to have the place be self-sustaining, rather than requiring huge fund-raising drives?
No, it's better for a non-profit organization to support itself by donations for its purpose rather than by operating a buisness with the intention of not making a lot of money out of said buisness. Otherwise, the buisness tends to overshadow and divert the focus from the organization's original goals.
The last time when ENWorld needed money the industry and the community donated what was needed to support and indeed improve it. That's the model I think is right for a non-profit organization. And frankly, if the community *does not* drum up the money to support itself, then maybe it's time for it to downsize itself. (I don't see that remotely happening to ENWorld.)

I understand that Morrus is just trying to make this place viable, so he wouldn't lose money on it and won't need to constantly worry over its upkeep and future. But although I haven't noticed a straight decleration from him on this issue, I have seen over the past years more and more emphasis being put on the buisness of ENWorld at the expense of its content. I don't believe this is an intentional, sharp change in policy. It's a gradual shift.
At the risk of misquoting Morrus,

Morrus said:
This policy is nothing more than an attempt to drive traffic towards your new sales site, as an artificial way to compensate for late entry into a market with 4 large-scale competitors, and several smaller ones.


Errr... yes. Was that supposed to be some kind of insightful revelation?

I've already mentioned that this is a change in emphasis for EN World. This site is taking a new direction, although not as vastly different as some people in this thread would have you believe.
At the risk of falling into "some people" category, I believe the change in emphasis is precisely to make ENWorld more of a buisness and less of a fan-sponsored community.

This may be a fair complaint. But a product is a product,. Sure, company affiliated products get a lot of coverage. But don't non-affiliated products also get a lot of coverage? Do you have a measure of the affiliated products getting disproportionately more coverage?
ENWord's news reports non-affiliated product releases fairly and often with enthsiasm, I am not claiming otherwise. But the excessive company spiel detracts from the quality of the news reports as a whole. It is once again putting buisness interests ahead of the site's original goals (one of which was news coverage).

Links are a problem? There's a problem in making it easy for gamers to find and aquire gaming materials?
The links aren't there to help gamers find and acquire gaming materials, they are there to drive traffic towards ENWorld's retail avenues to increase revenues. To claim otherwise is an insult to the reader's intelligence.
It's like saying the emails I constantly get regarding XXX-enlarging medicine are sent in good faith out of an honest desire to aid the sender's fellow men. Riiiiighhhht.

Unless you can verify where the money is going, you are in no position to make that accusation. Selling and profit are not synonymous.
There are many d20 publishers who have day jobs and whose buisness goals are no higher than breaking even. Are their companies non-profit organizations?
I am not at all privy to ENWorld's financial structure. But I do know the site actively encourages me to support ENWorld by purchasing ENPublishing products and shopping at ENWorld's online "subsidiaries". To me this suggests ENWorld makes a profit out of those buisness transactions, and hence that it is de facto a buisness.
I realize ENWorld is not geared up to maximize the profits from these channeles, instead only using them to be more viable. But that doesn't make it any less of a buisness, it just means it has a different goal than maximizing profits. (Perhaps "maximizing ENWorld's content of cool stuff while maintaining viability"? Just a guess.)


All of that aside, it seems .org is no longer enforced as a non-profit designation, making this whole post no more than an excercise in futility :eek:
 


Remove ads

Top