• 0

Looking for a good Chat solution for a non-profit website. Suggestions?


Question

Hello.

I know of a non-profit ministry organization that is wanting to add a good chat solution to their website, ideally a solution that is flexible and powerful, but that is reasonably simple to implement into their website. Currently, the chat solution would need to very reliably handle at least 200-300 chat participants at one time, but it would need to be able to handle possibly even a couple thousand chat participants in the next year or two.

The chat solution needs to be more along the lines of IRC, where everyone is seeing the messages that are posted by default. It would be nice if one also has the option of sending private, direct messages to the moderators or other key people behind the scenes if there is a message that you do not want everyone to see. I am not sure of the importance of whether "guests" are allowed and/or a log-in of some type is required. The chat solution will be used for live, real-time conversations during live broadcasted events which are currently using Livestream for the broadcasts. Livestream has its own chat solution, but the non-profit ministry organization is looking for a better chat solution to integrate into their website for use during their live broadcasted events.

This could be a service offered by a company that could be integrated into their website or simply chat software installed onto their server to run on the website.

As far as cost, a free or low-cost solution would be nice, but it would be worth for them to pay a bit of money if there was a particularly good solution or two that was better than the free/low-cost options.

Thank you in advance for any suggestions or feedback.

-JayZJay

9 answers to this question

Recommended Posts

  • 0

Are you looking for chat rooms like IRC, or one-on-one chat like any instant messenger? What would the chat service be used for (i.e. what features are required)?

  • 0

Why not just use one of the already running IRC networks such as freenode etc and put a java based webchat on the site that connects to that room?

  • 0

Light IRC is a flash based chat application that can be integrated into the website and would allow those with higher tech knowledge to break out into a desktop application. IRC is not the easiest chat system in the world but it can easily accomplish what you are trying to achieve - although I think 1000 - 2000 different people offering their opinions at the same time would just drown the experience altogether.

You might be able to find a more modern / superior system in terms of usability but it would be hard to find a more "battle" tested chat system.

  • 0

@tim_s, thanks for the feedback. Light IRC might be a good solution to consider. That said, being Flash based isn't ideal from the stand-point of Flash crashing, but I'll pass on the suggestion for further consideration. Again, thanks.

  • 0

@tim_s, thanks for the feedback. Light IRC might be a good solution to consider. That said, being Flash based isn't ideal from the stand-point of Flash crashing, but I'll pass on the suggestion for further consideration. Again, thanks.

You have to remember that Flash is not doing anything other then sending text to the IRC server and displaying text received from the IRC server. Flash is more than able and I have not experienced any major Flash issues - that would be down to the user to insure their personal computer is functioning, which would be true of any client side programming language.

To understand possibilities that exist outside of the above solution we would need to know,

1: What level of Tech competence do you expect from your users / looking to support?

2: Does it have to be integrated into the website?

I imagine on some level you would rather a 3rd party support this and thus creating an official IRC channel and linking to a 3rd party provider maybe the solution.

  • 0

@tim_s, to answer your questions...

1) There is no way to know the tech level of people that would be joining the chat. There are literally people from the UK, Pakistan, Philippines, and countless other countries popping in and out all the time. Anybody from any location around the world could join in and benefit if they can understand spoken and/or written English. That said, in my experience, there are a few that are more technical like you and I, but the majority are not very technical or are very average, technically speaking. As a result, whatever chat solution is implemented needs to be reasonably simple for any visitor to the site.

2) Yes, I believe that there is definitely a desire to have the chat solution integrated into the website. That is the way it has been over the last couple of years and despite increasing growth and site improvements, I believe they want chat to continue to be integrated, probably for simplicity for the participants/visitors/users as much as anything (rather than have a separate window of some sort). When one visits the live stream/broadcast page on the site, there is the video "window" in/on the page and the integrated chat functionality right there on the page next to the video "window".

  • 0

2) Yes, I believe that there is definitely a desire to have the chat solution integrated into the website. That is the way it has been over the last couple of years and despite increasing growth and site improvements, I believe they want chat to continue to be integrated, probably for simplicity for the participants/visitors/users as much as anything (rather than have a separate window of some sort).

Well you are left with 2 choices,

1: Hosting software to handle the chat I.e. ran on your web server and support is handled on your side. Limitations being the hardware / technical experience / quality of software and cost.

2: Which might be another argument for IRC: Integrate an IRC Client (example: Light IRC which is Flash based) but the "heavy" lifting is done on a 3rd party IRC server.

The benefits of IRC is that is it a standard and very popular and thus you can switch to different providers while maintaining the core service look and feel. Keeps the whole thing cheap and simple, of-course you may want to investigate more commercial software alternatives.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • I'm not unblocking my camera for this crapola. Sorry, Google.
    • Ummmm that is what is it supposed to do. Just turn if off in settings if you do not want it analyzing your open tabs. Chrome does the same thing with Gemini. Sarfari will do the samething after Apple's AI and even more so with the release of their 27 versions that is now powered by Googles LLM/ML models. Understanding why it is doing it and how it can help you vs jumping to some conspiracy theroy is a much better approach. As long as it can be turned off, all is good. Yes the default should be off but the a lot of people would never discover these features.
    • Just another reason (aside from many others) not to use Edge. Firefox 153.0b5 DEx64 has a similar feature added recently in prior builds that I will turn off at some point when I get around to it. It's the new "Something looks suspicious" page that pops up here and there. It cleverly hides itself between web pages that I've actually visited; as a result, you know, of selecting a web page and telling the browser where to go. The interesting thing is that it does not produce these warnings from pages that I, as the only intelligent user of the browser in my system, have ever directed the browser to open! What seems to be happening is that the browser looks at all the goofy ad links on a web page I do actually open and selects one that "looks suspicious" and then creates the "something looks suspicious" web page, which is neatly inserted, as mentioned, between web pages my RB ("real brain") has directed the browser to load in a session. The thing is, I usually look at links I am considering to follow before I ask the browser to load them, and in cases I have noticed where the link does indeed look suspicious, most of the time I will choose to not follow the link at all. Doesn't everyone do this or something similar? I am picky about what I voluntarily load... (I don't like links that start off fine, with a site designaiton that seems normal enough but then is followed by indecipherable alphanumeric strings many, many lines long, etc. I tend to reject those because they look suspicious. They may not be, but I don't care... I'll stay with Firefox, of course, if for no other reason than they usually let you turn off the junk you don't like. And because it isn't Edge... But at some point Microsoft will come to realize that putting your bookmarks on the left side is a Good Thing for a lot of people, just as Microsoft discovered when it had the bright idea of nailing the Windows taskbar to the bottom of the screen, when for decades Microsoft browsers had left that placement up to the user. They have finally reversed the obscenity of that decision. Finally.
    • Google was using the old CATPCHAs data to train their LLMs. What is the say they won't use this camera data of users to train their LLM? these companies need some strict regulations!
  • Recent Achievements

    • One Year In
      BA the Curmudgeon earned a badge
      One Year In
    • Conversation Starter
      rosiecharles earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • First Post
      KMilenkoski1202 earned a badge
      First Post
    • First Post
      carols23 earned a badge
      First Post
    • One Month Later
      Tom Willson earned a badge
      One Month Later
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      513
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      258
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      151
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      94
    5. 5
      macoman
      66
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!