I agree and I am one of those that is willing to spend the money for a dedicated host shared with other vloggers that will host our content. The point of it making money or being self-sustaining is not my goal. I never said I wanted a free server. Blip already gives me that.
The simple fact is that I am not willing to spend my money on a venture that Blip and Ourmedia already provide for free. I dont have the time nor desire to put into something like that. Back to the original question, if there is a group of people here that would be interested in pooling their money together to get a server to host videos, count me in. If not...no skin off my nose. David http://www.taoofdavid.com --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "Clint Sharp" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I'd be happy to dance. There are currently thousands of hosting options > from thousands of providers who make it their business to maximize the > amount of people you can fit onto one server. Those people are not the > people on this list. I suggest you check them out. > > Vlog hosting needs two things, servers and bandwidth. A "collective" or a > shared hosting resource of vloggers is never going to be able to compete > with people who's business it is to make a profit doing this. You are not > going to be able to rent a server from anyone, delve it up between a bunch > of high-bandwidth users and make it economically feasible. The best option > is to be in the hosting business, in which you divide up hosting resources > between high bandwidth users and low-bandwidth users. Combining a group of > unprofitable users is unprofitable, no matter how you do the math. Much > better to let the companies whose business it is combine users who, while > they may be allocated hundreds of gigabytes a month of transfer, don't use > it, with users who do. > > There are two options in the vlog hosting world, and I don't see a need for > a third. There are people who want to host their vlogs for free, and thus > they make a tradeoff in terms of service, and there are those who are > willing to pay. I'm all for free services, and I happily recommend them to > people who don't really care whether their users can access their videos. > There are also paid options, which cost a mimimal amount a month (honestly, > if you can't afford $120/yr, you can't afford the camera and the computer to > vlog either, probably). I recommend the paid options to most people. Who > wants to invest the time and effort to create a middle option when the > second option is already so cheap? > > Clint > > > > On 2/18/06, David Howell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > First off...*I* never asked a question. Learn reading skills. > > > > Second. My conversations take place in person where I can see a > > persons eyes. I trust about 1% of what I read online. > > > > Last. I really dont care about being part of some vlog collective. The > > original concept was for some people to group funds together for a > > server that would host videos. > > > > Care to dance a little more? > > > > David > > http://www.taoofdavid.com > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
