- Admin
- #1
Paraphrasing from a question in the Bristol forum.
@tpm asked why he could only have 5 attachments and questioned the size of the uploads when the cost of storage is relatively cheap.
Firstly thanks for the feedback @tpm
I completely understand your frustration about the image limits, and it’s genuinely useful to hear how members feel about this.
I'd love to lift all restrictions, but the reality is that running and maintaining the forum involves significant and rising costs. Whilst basic cloud storage is relatively cheap, it’s not just about storing a static image. Every upload triggers multiple processes: real-time scanning for malware, compression, thumbnail generation, backups, CDN distribution for global access, and DDoS/spam protection. These hidden backend costs add up quickly, especially as we scale.
The subscription tiers aren’t just paying for image hosting; they’re crucial for keeping the entire forum secure, stable, and ad-free long-term. Costs for server resources, security updates, moderation tools, and technical support have all risen sharply. Even with subs, we’re prioritising keeping membership affordable whilst ensuring the platform doesn’t become unsustainable.
You’re absolutely right about modern photo resolutions – and that’s part of the challenge. A single 4K still can be 5-10MB uncompressed; multiply that by hundreds of users, and it impacts performance and bandwidth bills significantly faster than lower-res video frames.
We’re constantly reviewing this balance and exploring optimisations. In the meantime, we’ve kept free access viable whilst offering subs as a way for keen members to support the community and get extra perks. We’ll take your points on board for future reviews of the tiers.
Cheers for your understanding and for supporting the forum.
Aviador
@tpm asked why he could only have 5 attachments and questioned the size of the uploads when the cost of storage is relatively cheap.
Firstly thanks for the feedback @tpm
I completely understand your frustration about the image limits, and it’s genuinely useful to hear how members feel about this.
I'd love to lift all restrictions, but the reality is that running and maintaining the forum involves significant and rising costs. Whilst basic cloud storage is relatively cheap, it’s not just about storing a static image. Every upload triggers multiple processes: real-time scanning for malware, compression, thumbnail generation, backups, CDN distribution for global access, and DDoS/spam protection. These hidden backend costs add up quickly, especially as we scale.
The subscription tiers aren’t just paying for image hosting; they’re crucial for keeping the entire forum secure, stable, and ad-free long-term. Costs for server resources, security updates, moderation tools, and technical support have all risen sharply. Even with subs, we’re prioritising keeping membership affordable whilst ensuring the platform doesn’t become unsustainable.
You’re absolutely right about modern photo resolutions – and that’s part of the challenge. A single 4K still can be 5-10MB uncompressed; multiply that by hundreds of users, and it impacts performance and bandwidth bills significantly faster than lower-res video frames.
We’re constantly reviewing this balance and exploring optimisations. In the meantime, we’ve kept free access viable whilst offering subs as a way for keen members to support the community and get extra perks. We’ll take your points on board for future reviews of the tiers.
Cheers for your understanding and for supporting the forum.
Aviador
