InstantForum.NET v2.9.0SQLServerCentralhttp://www.sqlservercentral.com/Forums/notifications@sqlservercentral.comWed, 22 May 2013 14:59:14 GMT20http://www.sqlservercentral.com/Forums/Topic1312770-4-1.aspxFair enough. I wouldn't use FB myself, and wasn't aware of LI, but I'm asking for all of them. Lots of people use OpenID on other sites, especially non-MS focused people, of which we have a fair number (especially devs).Thu, 11 Oct 2012 09:58:50 GMTSteve Jones - SSC Editorhttp://www.sqlservercentral.com/Forums/Topic1312770-4-1.aspxI think LI or FB makes more sense than OpenId personally. At least in the areas I wander in, OpenId tends not to be supported or is supported along with FB and LI. Ask.SQLServerCentral.Com is the only site I use OpenId on personally. LI or FB just seems more painless.Thu, 11 Oct 2012 02:03:28 GMTtimothyawisemanhttp://www.sqlservercentral.com/Forums/Topic1312770-4-1.aspxFair points. We were trying to get OpenID to work, but adding a LI/FB/TW might make sense.Tue, 09 Oct 2012 11:07:15 GMTSteve Jones - SSC Editorhttp://www.sqlservercentral.com/Forums/Topic1312770-4-1.aspxI have to 2nd the sentiments of Ben and the OP. I don't use FB but that may be a nice middle ground. It may not result in more traffic but it makes sharing much easier. There are many times that a fine article on here recommends a good practice or way of accomplishing a task. I attempt to share it with co-workers or colleagues only to but up against the registration issue. Then I have to go digging to find another article that makes the same recommendation. I should be able to email or IM a link to someone and be done with it.Thu, 04 Oct 2012 07:56:53 GMTScott D. Jacobsonhttp://www.sqlservercentral.com/Forums/Topic1312770-4-1.aspxI know this is an old one but maybe allowing users to log in with Facebook or LinkedIn would be a happy middle ground - most people have one of these accounts already and those who can't be bothered to register a new system with a new password could simply log in with an email address and password they already have and you'd still be able to track info on who's reading articles.This is a nuisance to me as I sometimes forward useful articles to colleagues who, although are in tech services, are not database people and refuse to join yet another forum so I have to copy and paste the articles into a word doc and email it to them so that they can benefit from the info.Thu, 04 Oct 2012 06:35:20 GMTBenWardhttp://www.sqlservercentral.com/Forums/Topic1312770-4-1.aspxYour vote is needed.I agree that registration is a pain, but it's also part of the "cost" of many sites.If you think passwords are a pain, then you're doing it wrong. Go get Password Safe or KeePass and store your passwords (and use different ones all over).Thu, 14 Jun 2012 15:47:59 GMTSteve Jones - SSC Editorhttp://www.sqlservercentral.com/Forums/Topic1312770-4-1.aspxRegistration is a pain!There are many times when I have wanted to read an article on a site, but gave up when it asked for registration. Every new site needs a new password, and every new site wants to send its spam.My vote is that this site should be open for reading, but need registration if you want to follow a thread, do a post, etc.Thu, 14 Jun 2012 03:04:53 GMTEdVassiehttp://www.sqlservercentral.com/Forums/Topic1312770-4-1.aspxYeah I would think you might get a couple dozen more page loads in a month span. Not even a drop in the bucket for a site with as much traffic as this one.Wed, 13 Jun 2012 07:33:56 GMTSean Langehttp://www.sqlservercentral.com/Forums/Topic1312770-4-1.aspxWe have turned it off a few times, for months, to test what happens. It hasn't really resulted in more traffic for us.Tue, 12 Jun 2012 15:49:24 GMTSteve Jones - SSC Editorhttp://www.sqlservercentral.com/Forums/Topic1312770-4-1.aspxIt seems that it would be nearly impossible to have an idea of how many potential readers you don't get because they don't want to register. I know that from time to time I will point my wife to a post or an article but she can't view them and has never bothered to register. She works as a development PM so her depth of knowledge about sql does need to be very deep, but she does need some level of understanding.Of course you have reasons to enforce it just as people have reservations about registering. I am usually able to figure out a way around it but it would be nice.Tue, 12 Jun 2012 15:22:55 GMTSean Langehttp://www.sqlservercentral.com/Forums/Topic1312770-4-1.aspxWe've done this on and off.I appreciate many people don't want to register. We have found pros and cons for registration, and are currently forcing it to read articles.That may change, and your opinion is noted, but thousands of people don't object. It's debatable that those who do are significant in number or notTue, 12 Jun 2012 15:18:16 GMTSteve Jones - SSC Editorhttp://www.sqlservercentral.com/Forums/Topic1312770-4-1.aspxI would humbly suggest it would be beneficial to not require registration for merely reading articles. I know that registration is swift and simple, but it is still a barrier for some. Earlier today, I referred someone on [url=http://stackoverflow.com/questions/10919577/displaying-the-correct-condition-found-in-where-clause/10919954#comment14271932_10919954]Stack Exchange[/url] to an article I had written myself and published on this site, and his response was that he did not want to register and so couldn't read it. I have also, occassionally, found this annoying when trying to show an article to colleagues when at their computer since they didn't always have accounts and I didn't want to log in with my account on their machine. Removing the need to register would encourage browsing and remove this barrier.Thu, 07 Jun 2012 14:06:58 GMTtimothyawiseman