Re: ADMIN: An Open Letter to the TECHWR-L Community
Downing, David wrote:
Something like $20/year wouldn't be a big deal, but
$20 a MONTH might be a problem.
Okay, this reprises a figure I tossed out a couple of days ago, with the idea that lurking would be free, but posting and voting (in a new non-profit set up for the purpose) would require annual dues of $20.
Does anyone have a suggestion of how to test the feasiblity of such a fee? That is, I know Deb could post it as a techwr-l poll, but that doesn't really produce statistically valid results, especially where people's pocketbooks are concerned. What I really want to know is how many different individuals typically post in a given year and what percentage of them would actually cough up $20 for the privilege of remaining in the techwr-l community.
I suspect that a lot of people would not pay for the bizarre, insulting, and abusive comments that sometimes get dished out on this list. It would deteriorate into a clique. If I paid $20 and then received nasty replies, I would demand my money back. I am not especially sensitive to nasty replies, frankly, but as we've witnessed, a lot of people are.
Of course, people aren't only paying for the list. As someone else noted, they could be paying for the site. I rarely use the site contents and prefer google's search for the archives to the one used now. Others are the opposite--rarely using the list.
As for feasible cost, I have a programmer friend with whom I was discussing something similar. He's paid $7.00/month for a forum where he gets extremely high caliber help. I asked him to poke around the archives and, by his estimation, the signal to noise ratio wouldn't merit paying money directly. Nor would the various inappropriate comments that are sometimes dished out on the list. Stuff like that simply isn't allowed at the forum to which he subscribes. Plus, there's a moderator on duty to filter out ridiculous responses, as well as ridiculous questions.
I'm still trying to figure this one out. The Rays have explained that they don't even break even taking in 65k in ad revenues. It pays for the basic expenses, but it doesn't pay for their labor, which they've kindly donated lo these many years. IT seems to me that, if that's the case, we need to raise 65k a year, at least, to run this list and maintain/invest in/grow the site.
K
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
ROBOHELP X5: Featuring Word 2003 support, Content Management, Multi-Author
support, PDF and XML support and much more!
TRY IT TODAY at http://www.macromedia.com/go/techwrl
WEBWORKS FINALDRAFT: New! Document review system for Word and FrameMaker
authors. Automatic browser-based drafts with unlimited reviewers. Full
online discussions -- no Web server needed! http://www.webworks.com/techwr-l
---
You are currently subscribed to techwr-l as:
archiver -at- techwr-l -dot- com
To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-techwr-l-obscured -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com
Send administrative questions to ejray -at- raycomm -dot- com -dot- Visit
http://www.raycomm.com/techwhirl/ for more resources and info.
Follow-Ups:
References:
RE: ADMIN: An Open Letter to the TECHWR-L Community: From: Downing, David
Re: ADMIN: An Open Letter to the TECHWR-L Community: From: Dick Margulis
Previous by Author:
Re: A modest proposal; was: Re: ADMIN: An Open Letter to the TECHWR-L Community
Next by Author:
Microsoft pays dear for insults through ignorance
Previous by Thread:
Re: ADMIN: An Open Letter to the TECHWR-L Community
Next by Thread:
Re: ADMIN: An Open Letter to the TECHWR-L Community
Search our Technical Writing Archives & Magazine
Visit TechWhirl's Other Sites
Sponsored Ads