# PAY-PER-POST?!?!?!?!?! **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [November 10, 2001, 1:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pay-per-post/92557 "2001-11-10T01:28:33Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 10
**Author:** ![yosemite](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/3ab097/32.png) [@yosemite](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/yosemite)\ **Post date:** [November 12, 2001, 2:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pay-per-post/92557/181 "2001-11-12T02:31:02Z")
I am perfectly willing to pay my $20, but I do like the idea of at least _trying_ the PayPal donation idea for a while, like someone else has mentioned. Just _trying_ it. I’d pony up my $20 donation right off. So would a lot of us. Others would pay $10. Some would pay $15. or $1. Some would pay nothing. But I think the odds are decent that enough income would be generated through donations (especially of the board let people know when they were in need). I think it’s worth a shot! I _really_ hope they consider this option first. If it doesn’t work, go to the pay-to-post. ---
**Author:** ![Guinastasia](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/guinastasia/32/5751_2.png) [@Guinastasia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Guinastasia)\ **Post date:** [November 12, 2001, 2:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pay-per-post/92557/182 "2001-11-12T02:51:49Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by lucwarm \* > \*\*I agree with the guy who said that Lynn’s say-so ain’t gonna cut it anymore. > > As a lawyer, I believe that many courts would take a dim view of a contract that said: “You pay us $20 for services, and we have the right to deny you those services at any time for any reason or no reason at all.” > > I used to lurk on an internet chess site, and people would be occasionally banned for using computers to aid their play. IIRC, those people had their membership fee refunded, pro rata. > > (standard disclaimer about legal advice) \*\* Exactly. Not only that, you’re gonna get some really NASTY people-I say it’ll be even harder to ban people. The higher ups and the ones in charge of the board won’t want to alienate potential customers-they’ll lose revenue. ---
**Author:** ![Essured](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/278dde/32.png) [@Essured](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Essured)\ **Post date:** [November 12, 2001, 3:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pay-per-post/92557/183 "2001-11-12T03:02:29Z")
I agree that there is probably no other option. I also agree with all those that worry about how the nature of the board may change for the worse. I agree that $20 is my upper limit, as a gamble, until I find out what the board is like once PTP is standard. My problem is that USD 20 is a lot more money in other countries… Having people check in from other countries is part of the fun, in my view. How about a smaller fee, i.e USD 10. Yes, most people would be prepared to pay that much, therefore more people should stay with the SDMB. I believe that more money overall would be generated if the fee was USD 10, as opposed to USD 50. I hope the Powers That Be keep in mind that the initial payment will be a bit of a gamble, as none of us know how the nature of the board will be changed. Perhaps USD 10 for the first year, with USD 20 for the second year and for all subsequent years, or 5 years for USD 50 ? Just my AUD .02 cents worth ! 😃 ---
**Author:** ![Lynn\_Bodoni](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/e47c2d/32.png) [@Lynn\_Bodoni](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lynn_Bodoni)\ **Post date:** [November 12, 2001, 3:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pay-per-post/92557/184 "2001-11-12T03:06:31Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by lucwarm \* > \*\*I agree with the guy who said that Lynn’s say-so ain’t gonna cut it anymore. > > As a lawyer, I believe that many courts would take a dim view of a contract that said: “You pay us $20 for services, and we have the right to deny you those services at any time for any reason or no reason at all.” > > I used to lurk on an internet chess site, and people would be occasionally banned for using computers to aid their play. IIRC, those people had their membership fee refunded, pro rata. > > (standard disclaimer about legal advice) \*\* Actually, I usually DO have a better reason than “I just don’t like him or her”, it’s just that I’m tired of explaining my reasons to the TMs. No matter what my reason, there’s gonna be SOME people who just don’t like it for one reason or another. I do have to explain to TubaDiva and Ed if they request it. However, nearly all of the time they don’t request it. I’d damn well better have a good explanation if they DO ask for one, though. ---
**Author:** ![Essured](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/278dde/32.png) [@Essured](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Essured)\ **Post date:** [November 12, 2001, 3:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pay-per-post/92557/185 "2001-11-12T03:54:19Z")
I have seen in various threads that the donation option has been discounted. I would be very appreciative if somebody could explain why this wouldn’t work, or point me to a thread that already has the explanation Thanks ---
**Author:** ![MoodIndigo1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e8c25b/32.png) [@MoodIndigo1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MoodIndigo1)\ **Post date:** [November 12, 2001, 4:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pay-per-post/92557/186 "2001-11-12T04:05:09Z")
I agree with matt and yosemitebabe, as well as a few other posters, with the idea of some sort of system of donations. Perhaps one could take the donations idea one step further and ask those who are willing to **pledge** an amount of money in order to keep these boards open to everyone do so. I’m sure that there would be some way to keep it honest, and set safeguards. Could we at least not try this for one year and see the results, instead of imposing a set fee and alienating a number of regular posters or discouraging the influx of new members? ---
**Author:** ![Shayna](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/shayna/32/17976_2.png) [@Shayna](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shayna)\ **Post date:** [November 12, 2001, 4:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pay-per-post/92557/187 "2001-11-12T04:09:36Z")
**Goo** : [Click here](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?postid=942576#post942576) to see where **Ed Zotti** says: > [@](#): > > Guys, we’re seriously impressed (and touched) that you’re willing to pony up nearly five grand toward a new server - and yes, $8K is pretty much what we’re thinking it’s going to cost. But we have to decline for a variety of reasons, the foremost in my mind being that **as a for-profit entity we just feel weird accepting donations**. We would also have the somewhat ticklish problem of trying to collect on all those pledges, plus the fact that this might not be a permanent solution - we’ll probably have to upgrade the comm lines next, and that runs into a pretty steep monthly charge. So we’d be taking money from people without necessarily being able to deliver top quality service. (bolding mine) ---
**Author:** ![Fred](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/db5fbb/32.png) [@Fred](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fred)\ **Post date:** [November 12, 2001, 4:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pay-per-post/92557/188 "2001-11-12T04:35:24Z")
Different situation, **Shayna**. That was almost a year ago, and I believe that mandatory pay to post was not being discussed. I would hope that the Chicago Reader would tolerate “feeling weird” in order to prevent the loss of thousands of SDMB posters. If there is a more contemporary discussion of the Donation idea, I would welcome a link. ---
**Author:** ![Koxinga](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/4af34b/32.png) [@Koxinga](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Koxinga)\ **Post date:** [November 12, 2001, 4:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pay-per-post/92557/189 "2001-11-12T04:48:58Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Sam Stone \* > You need a certain critical mass of posters and messages before people find it worth their while to check in regularly. What invariably happens when a fee structure is introduced is that you immediately lose at least 60-80% of your posters. A few hard-core people would pay. But then they’d find that there aren’t that many active discussions any more, so they start checking in less often. The cycle feeds on itself, and soon the board is dead. Then comes membership renewal time, and even the hard-core posters start to fade away. What did I tell you? Sam Stone has made an excellent summary of negative [network externalities](http://economics.about.com/library/weekly/aa030198.htm). I think we have a Harvard case study in the making here. **What about making the SDMB a non-profit entity?** That way, the board could (A) accept donations without qualms–hey, it works for Jesse–(B) get certain protections in the tax realm, and © alleviate the sneaking suspicion that many of us are getting here, namely that the suits at the Reader are drooling over the huge customer base the SDMB and are scheming to turn it into some kind of cash cow. OK, I’ll state my own position: I’ll contribute a “suggested donation” of $20 if and only if the SDMB turns itself into a non-profit. Otherwise . . . see ya, wouldn’t want to be ya. I’ll be at [About.com](http://About.com) if anybody needs me. ---
**Author:** ![Shayna](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/shayna/32/17976_2.png) [@Shayna](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shayna)\ **Post date:** [November 12, 2001, 4:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pay-per-post/92557/190 "2001-11-12T04:51:06Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by thegrimspectreofreddeath \* > > Different situation, **Shayna**. That was almost a year ago, and I believe that mandatory pay to post was not being discussed. I would hope that the Chicago Reader would tolerate “feeling weird” in order to prevent the loss of thousands of SDMB posters. > > If there is a more contemporary discussion of the Donation idea, I would welcome a link. > [@](#): > > _Originally posted by Ed Zotti, 11-08-01_ ( [http://boards.straightdope.com/survey/survey.html](http://boards.straightdope.com/survey/survey.html) ) > > \*\*We appreciate the offers of donations but don’t feel this is a long term solution. \*\* Is that recent enough? ---
**Author:** ![Civil\_Defense](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/ccd318/32.png) [@Civil\_Defense](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Civil_Defense)\ **Post date:** [November 12, 2001, 4:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pay-per-post/92557/191 "2001-11-12T04:55:14Z")
I think the flaw with making the SDMB an entirely non-profit entity would mean that funding from the Reader would be cut completely. FWIU, the administration is not charging subscription fees to fund the entire project, just to make up for what the Reader itself **won’t** fund. Without the support of the Reader, we’d also be faced with basic connection fees, the necessity of hiring new support personnel, and housing and storage. ---
**Author:** ![Fred](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/db5fbb/32.png) [@Fred](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fred)\ **Post date:** [November 12, 2001, 4:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pay-per-post/92557/192 "2001-11-12T04:55:51Z")
Well, if that’s the most recent you have, I guess it will have to do 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![Shayna](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/shayna/32/17976_2.png) [@Shayna](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shayna)\ **Post date:** [November 12, 2001, 5:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pay-per-post/92557/193 "2001-11-12T05:01:07Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by thegrimspectreofreddeath \* > > \*\*Well, if that’s the most recent you have, I guess it will have to do 🙂 \*\* 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![Koxinga](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/4af34b/32.png) [@Koxinga](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Koxinga)\ **Post date:** [November 12, 2001, 5:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pay-per-post/92557/194 "2001-11-12T05:14:32Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Civil Defense \* > I think the flaw with making the SDMB an entirely non-profit entity would mean that funding from the Reader would be cut completely. Why couldn’t the Reader make a large corporate donation? I believe that they could even keep their corporate logo on the board by virtue of their status as a major “benefactor”. Or am I wrong here? ---
**Author:** ![Civil\_Defense](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/ccd318/32.png) [@Civil\_Defense](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Civil_Defense)\ **Post date:** [November 12, 2001, 6:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pay-per-post/92557/195 "2001-11-12T06:48:39Z")
> [@](#): > > Why couldn’t the Reader make a large corporate donation? I believe that they could even keep their corporate logo on the board by virtue of their status as a major “benefactor”. Or am I wrong here? Erm, then why bother separating them into a different entity if they’re just going to invest their money right back into the SDMB? What’s the difference in the funding as it is now as compared to a corporate donation? Sounds like more trouble than it’s worth. ---
**Author:** ![Koxinga](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/4af34b/32.png) [@Koxinga](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Koxinga)\ **Post date:** [November 12, 2001, 7:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pay-per-post/92557/196 "2001-11-12T07:00:48Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Civil Defense \* > \*\* > > > [@](#): > > > > Why couldn’t the Reader make a large corporate donation? I believe that they could even keep their corporate logo on the board by virtue of their status as a major “benefactor”. Or am I wrong here? > > Erm, then why bother separating them into a different entity if they’re just going to invest their money right back into the SDMB? What’s the difference in the funding as it is now as compared to a corporate donation? Sounds like more trouble than it’s worth. \*\* Umm . . . err . . . I thought I explained that? > [@](#): > > That way, the board could (A) accept donations without qualms–hey, it works for Jesse–(B) get certain protections in the tax realm, and © alleviate the sneaking suspicion that many of us are getting here, namely that the suits at the Reader are drooling over the huge customer base the SDMB and are scheming to turn it into some kind of cash cow. To state the last point more directly: it appears that quite a few of us would prefer making a non-mandatory donation rather than a mandatory payment on our credit cards. Doubly so if we can be assured that the money is actually going to support the SDMB rather than into the Reader’s unrelated SG&A. Along the same lines, why isn’t Ronald McDonald House officially part of McDonalds? (OK, I’m assuming here that it isn’t, but you see my point . . .) ---
**Author:** ![Civil\_Defense](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/ccd318/32.png) [@Civil\_Defense](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Civil_Defense)\ **Post date:** [November 12, 2001, 7:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pay-per-post/92557/197 "2001-11-12T07:04:10Z")
> [@](#): > > Along the same lines, why isn’t Ronald McDonald House officially part of McDonalds? (OK, I’m assuming here that it isn’t, but you see my point . . .) From the website: > [@](#): > > McDonald’s Corporation provides free goods and services **covering 100 percent of the general and administrative costs** for the global RMHC office so every dollar donated to RMHC can better serve children. [sub]bolding mine[/sub] I fail to see your point if your assertation wsa incorrect. ---
**Author:** ![PhiloVance](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/e19adc/32.png) [@PhiloVance](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PhiloVance)\ **Post date:** [November 12, 2001, 7:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pay-per-post/92557/198 "2001-11-12T07:07:00Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Civil Defense \* > \*\* > > > [@](#): > > > > (as Kyberkineticist was - look it up) > > Did a few searches- no results. Link? \*\* Correct spelling is **Kyberneticist** [Heres one link from GQ](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?threadid=45052) ---
**Author:** ![Civil\_Defense](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/ccd318/32.png) [@Civil\_Defense](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Civil_Defense)\ **Post date:** [November 12, 2001, 7:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pay-per-post/92557/199 "2001-11-12T07:13:24Z")
What was his last posting before he was banned? With 1324 posts, one random observation isn’t going to tell one way or another what his fault was. ---
**Author:** ![dtaylor404](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/bc79bd/32.png) [@dtaylor404](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dtaylor404)\ **Post date:** [November 12, 2001, 7:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pay-per-post/92557/200 "2001-11-12T07:18:52Z")
If everyone who CAN’T see the further information is using Netscape, it’s probably a table tag issue. MSIE will display the content of a table even if it’s missing its end tag \. Netscape won’t display the table at all, or any hint that there _is_ one, unless the end tag is present. Now, back to the pool… [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pay-per-post/92557.md?page=9) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pay-per-post/92557.md?page=11)