Wow, lots to read. I've had a busy day, and the last thing I really WANT to read is a lot of banter back and forth about a web forum, and the proposed changes. But I feel compelled to participate. If I don't participate, I am to blame for letting it happen un-opposed.
On the topic of why
There are really a small number of folks that are posting in this thread. But, I have read all the replies so far, and the objectors to this process far outnumber the supporters. Of those 'supporters', most of them wrote of their skepticism, but they would try it. I only saw a couple with pure support.
Many of us feel that these changes were shoved down our throats, without our input, or consent. When the site slowed, and you learned the equipment was near max capacity, personally, I feel you should have un-done those changes, until the membership was educated and consulted.
On the topic of cost(how much):
I posted earlier about the prices. And the principle of the matter has me concerned. At this time, I'm not going to get too excited about $10 per year. But, based on the proposed scale, I'll be grandfathered in, and only if I pay for 3 years. (more on this later) I could really care less about 10 bucks, even 30 bucks. In reality, we spill more than that each month.
on the topic of changing to a pay site
There are a few basic principles we should understand, and one of them is that not everyone votes. I have seen numbers claiming 35K 'users', with ~14K being active. Out of that number, only how many voted in the pay site poll? (I can't find it right quick) but it was less than 1K. LESS THAN 1K voted! With 92% responding they would leave. 8% said they would stay and pay. I believe that is a significant figure, even if the returns were not very high. Even if the error margin is 20%, that means 3/4 of folks would leave. Wow. Seems foolish to ignore that.
I would gladly sign up to voluntarily contribute. But you darn well better listen to my wants and needs if your going to require me to pay. So far, I don't feel that has been happening.
Advertisers have paid for this site. If the membership plummets (not just drops a bit), you will loose advertiser dollars. Then, those left will be left to pick up the tab? Who will bear the burden of responsibility? The proposed new members, paying $30 or more per year?
I'll bet you a cold beer, you take this site to more than $10/year in this economy, (for ANY member), this site will die within a year.
Very few will join a site for $30+/yr without understanding the full value, and the time required to realize the full value, can be spent on other, free sources, developing them.
Ok, it's later: Is that 10/year for 3 years a one-time shot, or will your fee be locked in based on what it was when you join? I don't know what your current idea is, but your yearly membership should be locked in, for as long as you stay paid up. And, it should be a one-year at a time thing. And, when you bill folks for your 'service', there should be a written contract.
Christopher seems like a nice guy. When I have sent him a PM, he responded quickly. I don't want to make this personal. I'd love to meet him, and buy him a beer, (Chris, you going to be at Spokane this weekend?) I'd like to learn more about what is behind this. I think Christopher is a reasonable guy. Nobody's perfect (I sure am not) and maybe an error was made here or there, not sure, not accusing. But it does seem to me like a reasonable person would choose a different course of action, given the stated objections. I have to wonder if his hand is being forced somehow.
I sure hope this plan works, for the users. I don't expect stuff for free. But, this isn't free. Advertisers pay to advertise here, that means it's not free.
PE
On the topic of why
There are really a small number of folks that are posting in this thread. But, I have read all the replies so far, and the objectors to this process far outnumber the supporters. Of those 'supporters', most of them wrote of their skepticism, but they would try it. I only saw a couple with pure support.
Many of us feel that these changes were shoved down our throats, without our input, or consent. When the site slowed, and you learned the equipment was near max capacity, personally, I feel you should have un-done those changes, until the membership was educated and consulted.
On the topic of cost(how much):
I posted earlier about the prices. And the principle of the matter has me concerned. At this time, I'm not going to get too excited about $10 per year. But, based on the proposed scale, I'll be grandfathered in, and only if I pay for 3 years. (more on this later) I could really care less about 10 bucks, even 30 bucks. In reality, we spill more than that each month.
on the topic of changing to a pay site
There are a few basic principles we should understand, and one of them is that not everyone votes. I have seen numbers claiming 35K 'users', with ~14K being active. Out of that number, only how many voted in the pay site poll? (I can't find it right quick) but it was less than 1K. LESS THAN 1K voted! With 92% responding they would leave. 8% said they would stay and pay. I believe that is a significant figure, even if the returns were not very high. Even if the error margin is 20%, that means 3/4 of folks would leave. Wow. Seems foolish to ignore that.
I would gladly sign up to voluntarily contribute. But you darn well better listen to my wants and needs if your going to require me to pay. So far, I don't feel that has been happening.
Advertisers have paid for this site. If the membership plummets (not just drops a bit), you will loose advertiser dollars. Then, those left will be left to pick up the tab? Who will bear the burden of responsibility? The proposed new members, paying $30 or more per year?
I'll bet you a cold beer, you take this site to more than $10/year in this economy, (for ANY member), this site will die within a year.
Very few will join a site for $30+/yr without understanding the full value, and the time required to realize the full value, can be spent on other, free sources, developing them.
Ok, it's later: Is that 10/year for 3 years a one-time shot, or will your fee be locked in based on what it was when you join? I don't know what your current idea is, but your yearly membership should be locked in, for as long as you stay paid up. And, it should be a one-year at a time thing. And, when you bill folks for your 'service', there should be a written contract.
Christopher seems like a nice guy. When I have sent him a PM, he responded quickly. I don't want to make this personal. I'd love to meet him, and buy him a beer, (Chris, you going to be at Spokane this weekend?) I'd like to learn more about what is behind this. I think Christopher is a reasonable guy. Nobody's perfect (I sure am not) and maybe an error was made here or there, not sure, not accusing. But it does seem to me like a reasonable person would choose a different course of action, given the stated objections. I have to wonder if his hand is being forced somehow.
I sure hope this plan works, for the users. I don't expect stuff for free. But, this isn't free. Advertisers pay to advertise here, that means it's not free.
PE
