Is the forum worth a reasonable monthly or yearly fee?

[Angel]

LESS THAN 20.



*sigh*

And yet, upwards of 70 browsing AT ALL TIMES.

I feel your pain Carrie, but give people a chance to get set up on PayPal.

 

[LarryMullen's POPAngel]

I voted yes, even though I really hope that it doesn't come to that. I love this place dearly, and would hate to see it go under. I'm going to donate what I can, even being unemployed at the moment, so if I can do it, then I think everyone else can chip in and do the same to save something we all love. Even a few bucks here and there would be greatly appreciated.

I liked someone's suggestion about all of the inactive accounts. If we deleted them, would that increase space and drive down the cost even by a tiny bit? Anything to conserve and make it a little less pricey, I'm just guessing here, I know nothing about computers (just ask Sicy, lol).

WE CAN DO IT PEOPLE!!!

 

[Bonochick]

Okay...seriously now...

I just ate some beef jerky...this little bag of beef jerky...that cost $3.49.

I just bought a magazine for $3.50 the other day.

If I skip those two things that I really didn't/don't need, that's $7 right there (okay, minus a penny...I don't want technical people jumpin' on my back... ).

If people really love this place, you can find a way to spare some cash.

 

[RavenStar]

I dont remember the last time I bought something I didnt need.

 

[Bonochick]

I dont remember the last time I bought something I didnt need.

EVERYBODY buys stuff they don't need.

 

[Elvis]

I liked someone's suggestion about all of the inactive accounts. If we deleted them, would that increase space and drive down the cost even by a tiny bit? Anything to conserve and make it a little less pricey, I'm just guessing here, I know nothing about computers (just ask Sicy, lol).

Inactive accounts DO NOT affect bandwidth or space... they just sit there. lol.

 

[RavenStar]

I cant afford to buy things I dont need. My allowance goes into my musical education.

Elvis, do the Alter-egos effect bandwith?

 

[Elvis]

I cant afford to buy things I dont need. My allowance goes into my musical education.

Elvis, do the Alter-egos effect bandwith?

No... just the normal wear and tear.. and use of the forums is what causes the use of bandwidth... there is no simple solution to cutting bandwidth for a site this busy.

 

[Bonochick]

I cant afford to buy things I dont need. My allowance goes into my musical education.

Elvis, do the Alter-egos effect bandwith?

Do you own any CD's? CD's are something you don't NEED. But we spend money on things like that because we enjoy them. There are many things people have that they don't actually need. Want and need are two different things.

I don't NEED Interference...but I want it very badly, and would be willing to spend money on it. I thought a lot of others felt the same way.

 

[unforgettableFOXfire]

I think interference is worth the money, yes, I voted yes because thats what the question asked.

However, to give you some idea of my financial status, I have $20 left to my name that has to last me until my birthday/christmas, thats not enough for a year of service here and would leave me utterly destitute and isolated from the world. I need to get a bass guitar and the otherwise necessary accessories for said guitar so that my cousin and myself can start up a band once Im done school. I need to find a job, I know, and Im trying, but to be quite honest my money isnt even spent on trivial crap, I spend it when Im out with my friends, and Ive had all of maybe $200 to use over the course of the past year and a half, so its spread very very thin already - if you want to be nitty gritty about it, thats an average of about $5 a month, granted that most of it was spent on the Hamilton show (~$100 for that trip when all was said and done) and the Our Lady Peace concert I went to ($30), the rest on pizza w/ my buddies. Sure, I could give up the remaining shred of some form of social life for interference, but I need more time away from the computer not less. At this point, youd be losing me if we were to go pay at the begining of september. But I guess thats just how itd haveta be. Not a big loss Im sure. Believe me I think that $3 a month or $24 a year is worth it, most definitely, but at this point I cant afford it.

 

[martha]

I voted yes, but I don't think that those who can't/won't pay should be excluded. That would drastically cut down on the membership and diversity that make Interference so wonderful and special.

I'm terribly disappointed to see the browbeating and heavy-handedness in this thread. Some people cannot afford it. Deal with that fact. Making them feel bad about it won't make them able to pay; it will just make them feel bad and leave. Or is that the reason behind the cutting remarks?

If it does come to this, I think only Elvis and Sicy should have access to the list of people who pony up and those who don't. We are seeing what may happen if that information is available to others.

 

[HelloAngel]

I'm more than aware of all of that, Martha. And currently Elvis and those of us who are busting our asses on this site day in and day out, who are pooling our resources day in and day out for this site and generally consider Interference as a second job are aware of the number of donations.

I have no idea who has donated. Elvis has that information only.

None of us are rich here. And I am more than aware that many cannot afford it. We are appealing to those who possibly can.

Either way, Interference will close if monetary needs are not met. And laying out Plan B is what I've spent my day doing with Elvis.

 

[Elvis]

I voted yes, but I don't think that those who can't/won't pay should be excluded. That would drastically cut down on the membership and diversity that make Interference so wonderful and special.
....
If it does come to this, I think only Elvis and Sicy should have access to the list of people who pony up and those who don't. We are seeing what may happen if that information is available to others.

I don't want anyone to be excluded for financial reasons, thus why I opted to try the donations as a first attempt to support the site. I even set a goal to carry us through the year (or what I think will).

I'm the only one that has access to that list right now. $$$ amounts will not made public.

 

[Elvis]

awwww

SOMEONE... just donated $2...

Why am I pointing out this specific donation?

Because it's thoughtful and pro-active doantions like this, that can/would make a difference if more people made them.

$20, $30, and $50, etc. donations aren't bad either but every lil bit helps!

Thanks to those that have donated so far, or plan to.

Joel

 

[meegannie]

Like dizzy, I voted for no, but am leaning towards yes. At the moment, I can't afford it, but possibly in September (after my raise), I will be able to.

 

[Hewson]

Hopefully a reasonable plan B will develop. How many of us would have just clicked the site off when prompted to pay $24 the first time you visited? I'm certain I would have just said no thanks and moved on to another site. Having spent 18 months here I have a different outlook, but I assume making it a pay site will likely result in few to no new members, along with the loss of a fair percentage of current members. I think the current Paypal fundraiser will heat up and hopefully end up being enough to support a year, but its clearly a short term solution...not too many people will likely do it each year.
Some other revenue stream needs to be found...I don't know where...yearly auctions of U2 memorabilia (assuming there was any way to get hold of such items considering this site is not the official band site)...just thinking out loud.
Anyway, hopefully someone with a greater knowledge of internet revenues than me (That's pretty much everyone) can come up with a decent idea.

 

[pax]

Elvis is right. If even *half* our members donated 2.00--less than a lunch!--we'd be well over our goal.

If you really value the diversity and openness of Interference, donate, even if it's only a dollar or two. Then we can stop talking about subscriptions and such, and Interference will be the same crazy place it's always been.

 

[Diemen]

I voted yes, because to me the site is worth a reasonable amount. However, one of the reasons this site is worth that much to me is because of the diversity, which I'm almost positive wouldn't be here if interference had started out as a pay site. I agree with Hewson, had this been a paysite when I first visited, I probably would've said no thanks and moved on. Another potential problem: what if one of our regulars who can afford it now finds themselves out of a job for an extended period of time later down the road, then what - they can no longer be a member cause they can't fork out the dough?

Maybe you could set up a voluntary subscription program, you might be surprised by the response you get (so says the optimist in me ). Allow new people to join without any payments, but also allow for a subscription. Maybe give paying members a couple more benefits, but allow the members themselves to make the decision. Maybe send out a friendly email every few months to non-paying members specifying how their money will help interference continue to grow and improve, etc, etc. As you see, a lot of people here agree that the site is worth it, so I think you would be able to get a good subscription base from that. And the donation option has only been up for how long and it's already raised around $550.

Keep it voluntary . I don't mind sending some of my money to Elvis so he can keep this site going strong, but I don't like the idea of being forced to send money just so I can stick around. It's too prohibitive and will undoubtedly cut the size of the interference community significantly and also discourage a lot of newcomers from joining in, I fear.

 

[daisybean]

I think that a small fee is reasonable. Although I don't think that people should be forced to pay to join...like Paxetaurora said have a "supporting member" type status.

 

[Zoomerang96]

ya know, i agree with skeek on this one.

i dont have alot of money either, and i know it would cost little to contribute AND i am very grateful for this place.

however...

everything must come to and end, and if it came down to it, i dont think i could justify spending money on an internet forum. it just doesnt seem right. that money could go somewhere else, higher on a priority list for me.

in fact, i think if came down to it, personally, that would be a great incentive for me to become less dependant of spending so much time on the internet.

my 2 cents.

so i guess, the short answer would be, "no."

 

[mikal]

Deathbear pretty much stole the words out of my mouth. I do like this place, but I'd never pay for it. I'd find a different forum.

 

[Elvis]

I'm not going to mention names... but some INCREDIBLY nice member has donated in the name of another member, one that has stated he/she can't afford to donate. That's SO cool.

 

[BAW]

Yes, I would be willing to pay, it's not a problem for me. I would hate to see Interference end because of money. I spend ALOT of time here and don't mind paying for the the privilege.

 

[Basstrap]

I said yes, though I wouldn't be able to if I don't hurry up and get a credit card!

I as well do not like "snail mail"

 

[deep]

I agree with what Martha said. I think it is wrong to chastise other members. The young members (ages 11-18 or so ) don?t even have credit cards and cannot pay. Sure, some of their parents might do it for them. Also, not everybody?s experience is the same, some of us as teenagers had a lot of pocket money, some have little, to none.

I made a donation in Ravenstar?s name. I appreciate her contributions. I lurk occasionally. I very rarely post. I could live just fine without interference. I think most of you would. However, I think it is very generous for Joel to donate so much of his time and money for others enjoyment.

 

[kobayashi]

i interference

hello. i do realize i am a frequent user of this site and have not yet paid. that is because my credit card was maxed. it has been paid down and i should be donating by weeks end.

i think there is a pretty good track record of pay-for services on the web and their lack of success. i see no reason why interference would be any different. if there were to be a mandatory payment from the outset of membership new member numbers would plummet. i am glad to see most here agree.

a voluntary payment at the time of joining would be beneficial in at least some cases.

most of the veterans and well known members here are adamant that it is definetely worth a small, reasonable fee. there are also some who agree but simply can't pay it. we realize and understand this because we have, over varied time frames, come to know and appreciate one another(for the most part). the fact is a fair number of members spend large portions of their days at interference. it's a part of thier life.

would a scalable pay rate be possible? could a new member be asked to pay a certain amount when their posts per day gets over a set number for a set period of time?

like Paxetaurora said have a "supporting member" type status.

i disagree with this idea. there are those who will seize on this to create a sort of tiered society-those who help and those who don't. maybe give paying individuals some other benefit but not within a member status. something so public is sure to create rifts. especially for new members who chose not to donate.

i just hope those of us who are veterans can come to some sort of a consensus on this so that elvis can move forward with confidence

 

[melon]

What I fear is that if you make it a pay site, you will kill the newbies and, as us old timers go on with our lives, this place will have no fresh blood.

On more legal tones, though, a donation is fine and is also tax-exempt, but then if you make mandatory fees, you also become a taxable entity, who, if the wrong person comes across this site, may pursue you for tax evasion if Interference.com is not organized as a business. In addition, this is a forum on a private, trademarked entity: U2. This forum, as it stands, certainly falls under fair use, but, again, the minute you start charging mandatory fees, fair use no longer applies. Again, if the wrong person comes across this place, you will have to deal with royalties, and I doubt that Vivendi Universal will be cheap for a place with such large traffic.

It is certainly none of my business as to how this place is organized, but you may find that charging fees may give you more than you bargain. I suggest, for you own sake, that you continue your donation campaign and stay away from the mandatory fees.

Melon

 

[ABEL]

I know most here say they would donate rather than see a yearly fee, and a lot of us can't afford to donate right now, but I was thinking...

What if the paid membership is only $1 per year for each registered name? Right now, with 7,157 members, at only ONE DOLLAR per member, this would be $7,157 per year. Now I know I'm not good at math, but would this not be a possible solution? I know we can ALL afford a minimal $1 per year registration fee, or whatever you want to call it.

 

[melon]

What if the paid membership is only $1 per year for each registered name?

Even at $1.00, a required fee is taxable income, and, hence, opens the Pandora's Box I describe above.

If anyone, however, has any other legal thoughts, please mention them.

Melon

 

[ABEL]

Even at $1.00, a required fee is taxable income, and, hence, opens the Pandora's Box I describe above.

If anyone, however, has any other legal thoughts, please mention them.

Melon

I didn't see your post melon...looks like we posted them about the same time...I hadn't thought about the tax and legal jargon