From: John Crowley (JohnCR@starwave.com)

The problems over the last 10 months are directly attributable to the amount of traffic on the site. A year ago we had 20,000 users on a good day, now we have between 50-100,000 on any given day. More users, unfortunately, translates to more jerks.

I did not select the original hosts, Jim Jenks did. This is not to criticize Jim's choices,. or the hosts themselves, it's just to say that I was working with a group that was not mine. After a few months I realized that this was a less-than-ideal group, and I made the move to institute the new hosts were currently have. Regarding gag warnings, they are not necessary. Profanity is not an issue where there is a grey area, either you have used it or not. Use it, and you will be gagged. I have left that up to the host's discretion. If they want to warn, fine. If not, they don't have to.

Other people clearly disagree with you. The volume of email I have received since instituting the new hosts indicates that most people think there has been a marked improvement in the tone in the room. Literally, hundreds of positive emails. You are right, I did select the people as hosts who "marketed" themselves to me. However, I prefer to look at it as "the people who made a serious effort to get my attention regarding their interest in hosting." I ask you this: Where was I supposed to get these people? From observing the chat room for hours on end? I am an editor, not a babysitter, and frankly, that's what most chat room administration is, babysitting. I cannot, nor can the site, afford to waste time in the chat room. These people made a series of inquiries -- some over months of time -- before I selected them. I corresponded with them through email, talked on the phone, found out about their occupations, where they live, hours they are on, and many other things. It was not throwing darts at a board, despite the fact that it appears to you that it was nothing more than a popularity contest. And like you said, in the scheme of things the chat room is pretty unimportant. So much so, in fact, that I have given serious consideration to eliminating the room, at best opening it up once a week, after races for a few hours.

NASCAR is concerned that it's a discredit to the site because of what goes on in there, and our hit totals no longer need the boost that the room provided. I've spent far too much time as it is administrating this rather strange and bizarre social subculture, and what I have found out about it tells me that it is trivial, in terms of its importance, and relevance, to the site. I am unsure about how these people "profited" from their "sucking up." To be honest, there is nothing very pleasureable about being a host, except the fact that you can be sure the room will be free of obscenity and depravity while you are there. Otherwise, you are the target of user anger, cannot chat in a normal anonymous fashion, have to answer redundant questions, etc., etc. They are performing a service, for absolutely nothing. Nothing. If there is profit or gain in there somewhere, I've yet to recognize it. Resentment, that's like jealousy, often rooted in insecurity. I don't think that's an issue that relates to administration of the site. Again, I'm sorry if you feel that way, specially if it relates to me somehow, but as a longtime member of the media, I'm used to people being angry, or resentful. Not that I'm insensitive to it, but I've just dealt with so much of it, most of it misplaced and off base, that I have to take it with a grain of salt. Like I said, shutting down the room is not out of the question at all.

People on the Starwave payroll are far too valuable to be spending time as chat hosts. Frankly, the people here are some of the best and brightest that the Web has to offer. That's why we are the No. 1 multimedia firm on the planet, why NASCAR, the NFL, the NBA, ESPN, among others, are our Web partners. Hosts HAVE to be users, it's just that simple. Have I noticed a dropoff? No. I wouldn't know Adam from Eve in the room. I have no interest in chatting on a computer. I prefer my interpersonal communication to be direct. Regulars? Who defines what a "regular" is? You? I need a more authoritative source. So we've lost a few "regulars." I can't be too worried about the small picture. When our numbers have more than tripled from a year ago at this time, I can't say that the loss of users in the chat room, of all places, is a big issue right now. Nor is it expected to be anytime soon. It's my experience that most chat room people never go to the rest of the site, as the answers to the questions they ask in there are readily available on places like our Home Page. That's pretty sad, if you ask me. Don't apologize for being honest. I have thick skin, and I do pay attention to all site comments, positive and negative. But I think you are taking this a little personally, and I think you have to understand there are some limitations that exist that may never be solved. They will just have to be lived with. If not, we kill the room and, voila, all the problems are solved, aren't they?

But I don't think that's what you want, nor do the other users in the room. And that is why, despite the constant headache that the room has become, we will continue to let it live on the site. Like I said up top, these answers probably won't satisfy you, but I hope they will serve as some sort of an explanation for some of the decisions that have been made regarding the room. Thanks for your interest in the site. I hope it continues to serve your racing interests. We do work very hard, not only to satisfy NASCAR, but to satisfy users. I hope in some ways, we achieve that goal.


John Crowley
NASCAR Online

GeoCities.com