I have just been assuming that they are saying “we can’t do it” because that forestalls a lot of the complaints about “But I only missed the deadline by 2 hours/didn’t get the email/was in a foreign country” etc. I have additionally been assuming that it’s absolutely not true, because the idea that there is some kind of magical database that cannot be altered by human hands is a little bit ridiculous. I’m sure that if TPTB wanted to, they could rework the Charter Member database so that people could be moved back into it, or whatever. But the policy is that once you’re out, you’re out. I understand, but saying that it is physically impossible and beyond the ken of human understanding to be able to reinstate a Charter Member seems… silly. 
I’d say it’s you who are conflating two separate concepts here. We could manually change tags to say “Charter Member,” but that’s not the same thing as charter membership. Charter membership comes along with the half price deal and also keeps one in the charter membership database. TubaDiva said: “I can’t move someone back into the Charter Member database and make it stick.” That’s true. As I understand it, the next time those folks renewed, they’d lose their Charter Member tags again and we’d have to go back and manually change the tags again. It might or might not be practical to set up a different system, but under the current system that’s how it is.
So yes, we can change the tags, but we can’t put someone back into the charter membership database and make it stick with the system configured as it currently is.
It was pretty short, wasn’t it?
You’re ignoring the most important point. **99% of “Charter Members” just want their titles. THAT IS NOT DIFFICULT FOR YOU TO DO. **But you *choose *not to do that for nonsensical reasons, thus pissing off a bunch of your hardcore base.
The fact that you admit it would be easy to provide “CM” as a title for your customers does you little service.
Yes, it didn’t take long for the wagons to circle.
I love this: If nobody answers for a few minutes, that proves we’re lying; and if we do answer, then we’re circling the wagons. 
Since the OP has been answered, I’ll go ahead and close the thread. Feel free to start a new one if you want to discuss this further.
**Gfactor **
Moderator
ETA: Apparently **leander **has something to add here. I’ll reopen the thread for him.
Oh fuck, never mind. You and Tuba are not going to actually answer the question, so what’s the point of repeating it?
But for posterity’s sake: If your customers want to retain their TITLE “Charter Member” can you please provide them this service?
Either I am wooshed here, or I just found some great Irony.
alterego, Wat’s YOUR real name BTW?
Let’s be clear:
Anyone who wants the title “Charter Member” and who pays for that privilege should be given the title of “Charter Member”. It’s not that hard.
If you don’t allow that you are simply playing God to a bunch of people who are your most dedicated customer base. That’s not very bright.
So far as I am aware, the question has never been asked before. We’ve always assumed that “Charter Membership” meant the title, the lower fee, and the rights and privileges thereunto pertaining. We (mods and admins) have no power over the fees &c. We can do a title change. We will start discussion amongst the mods over whether we’d want to.
There would be some logisitical and procedural questions to overcome (for instance, how to verify that someone WAS indeed a legit “Charter Member”) but let us discuss and see what we come up with.
FTR, I just want to make clear that my prior post in this thread should not be taken as support of leander’s position, here. I have no problem with the policy that you only get to keep CM status as long as you keep renewing on time.
Thank you. I appreciate your considering that.
Well, no. Possibly, you could argue that: Anyone who HAD the title “Charter Member” but lost it due to late payment, who continues to pay full membership price, should be given the title of “Charter Member.” I see no justification whatsoever for someone who joins up today for the first time and pays membership dues and wants “Charter Member” title.
In the past, our perception has certainly been that people who lose “Charter Member” status are concerned about the loss of the status – lower fees, etc – and not just the title. I’m not sure whether you do indeed speak for 99% of those who have lost the status. The complaints we’ve received have always been about the loss of status, not just the loss of title. So far as I can remember, this is the first time that anyone has suggested restoring the title (but not the status.) That’s undoubtedly why there was confusion about what you were asking and what we were saying.
And, please, saying things like “fuck it” and “playing God” and calling us “not very bright” doesn’t help your argument any. If anything, I tend to turn away from arguments that resort to such.
And, if our discussion should be against you, it’s not “playing God” or being “not very bright” to not want to take on more work. I don’t know how many people there are who have lost status but would like the title; I don’t know how difficult it will be to confirm that they had that status but lost it; and I don’t know how often that title change will need to be redone (possibly every year at subscription renewal? ) The result of that discussion could be that this is a great deal of work on the part of the mods/admins, and that would be good reason to reject the concept… and will have nothing to do with “not being very bright” or “playing God.” If it goes that way, it will have to do with us mods/admins being unpaid volunteer positions who are already way overworked.
Meanwhile, let’s please put things on hold for a few days for the mods to discuss.
Let me just say that, if this Board decides to allow people who stomp their feet about a title get to keep that title, despite having failed to do what is required to earn the title, I shall never again pay for a membership here, and would have to seriously reconsider posting here.
When Pay-to-Play was instituted, I, who had participated for some years, decided not to Pay. I was of the opinion it was not something that should be done. I understood that, implicit in my decision was the fact that I would never be able to be called a “Charter Member”, even though I certainly would otherwise have qualified. When I finally gave in and paid up, I didn’t stomp my little feetsies and complain that I should be called a “Charter Member” on the basis of my join date, or some other reason. I accepted that I had not done what a “Charter Member” needed to do.
There are Charter Members here who have faithfully done the things Charter Members need to do to maintain that title. If they are to be joined by the wannabes, the foot-stompers, the temper-tantrum throwers (leander, I’m looking at you here as an example), that diminishes their efforts, and, inherently changes forever the nature of the title to which they are entitled. It also, arguably violates the contract entered into with them to provide the “Charter Membership” on certain terms in perpetuity. Even if it’s not a legally binding promise, it certainly is a morally binding promise, I would hope.
I don’t know what percentage of Charter Members I represent, but I’d just like to point out that I don’t agree with your point or your estimated percentages.
Yes. On the whole, I like being here (though I also belong to one of the boards that split off from here), and I like being able to pay half-fare. The title isn’t that important to me.
All they failed to do was pay bang on time. This is the type of poster I believe Dex is referring back for discussion.
I’ve got some sympathy with late payers who lose the charter title. If I don’t pay my electricity bill by the due date I get a reminder giving me seven days to pay. If I still don’t cough up, the company gives seven days notice of disconnection. My service is not removed at the first available opportunity. I get fourteen days grace. Furthermore, I get letters rather than emails that could find their way into my spam folder. I am not, of course, suggesting that the SD sends letters to people who have failed to renew on time but, when pay to post first arrived, it might have been better to offer a period of grace whereby a poster could reinstate himself/herself as a Charter Member by paying within seven or 14 days.
It seem like your situation was more of a personal choice than a late payment.
No horse in this contest.
This was done for, I think, the first two years of pay to post, if not longer.
Which, of course, got us used to that being how it worked.
In any case, as I indicated in the other thread on the topic, having the title “Charter Member” is irrationally important to me for no obvious reason, and I will happily pay $15 a year for it (along with not seeing ads, being able to search, etc.).
But I’m very grumpy about the way the situation was handled.
If this board lets people stomp their feet and threaten financial dis-incentives if they do not get their way, then I will…well, I probably won’t actually do anything.
Yes, I’m sorry, it did kind of come off that way. Wasn’t meant that way, was just a sense of despair at the idea that the vast majority of Charter Members getting jobbed in order to placate whinging people. 