I actually kinda do. It’s a neat little badge that I can show off to say that I was around and helped keep this place alive. It’s bragging rights, like shiny cosmetic swords in those free to play games.
Now I’m glad I don’t pay. :smack:
P.S. ThelmaLou, this website is presumably mainly paid for by the newspaper as advertising.
I did pay the first few years. After I’d neglected to one year, I never paid again.
Reasons?
- I’m cheap. I figure this place isn’t going anywhere as long as the Chicago Reader is alive and well.
- As others have said, I don’t see any real benefit in paying. I don’t care about having a “Charter Member” status (I’ve been here since 2001, btw). I see no ads because I have an ad blocker. I don’t care about advertising in Marketplace or anything along those lines.
- If there was a jaw-dropping-I-must-pay benefit, I might reconsider, but…
- Did I already say that I’m cheap?
From a recent thread about advertisements, this post was met with approval:
Also this:
This stands out in my mind because it was, you know, last month. There have been a couple others and, of course, this thread. The **vast **majority of paying members here are cool, but posts and threads like this are enough to remind me that it’s not a club I’m eager to join.
Your contribution will feed a hamster for three months.
Screw the hamster!
[sub]How much would THAT cost?[/sub]
I believe you have to negotiate that with the hamster itself.
Yes: the advertisers.
Ever feel like you should send a check to CBS/ABC/NBC for bringing you your favorite programs?
Me neither.
So given that the SDMB site owners are showing me ads from paid advertisers, why is choosing to put up with those ads (rather than pay a membership fee) somehow morally reprehensible?
I reupped this morning. I wasn’t going to but I basically fell for the daily Subscription Expiring(!)
emails I’ve been getting for the last week. I don’t post much and lurk from time to time and can’t justify it but it’s pretty cheap for Charter.
For the price of a beer at the ballpark, what the hell?
$15 for SDMB over beer at the ballpark? I’m starting to question your priorities…
On what planet does a beer at the baseball game cost $15? I think the most expensive in the country is at Fenway Park where a 12-ounce beer is $7.75.
Personally, I’d opt for the Legal Seafood clam chowder.
jnglmassiv is a Charter Member. He only pays half the $15 subscription price. So, yes, that’s about the same as a beer at the ballpark.
Well I must be a real bad boy. I am a Guest and I don’t see any ads on my home computer. I do see ads when reading on my Android phone at work but they don’t bother me.
I read the SDMB on my desktop at home when not signed in, no ads. I sign in to post and may stay signed in for a day, still no ads. I have never seen the new pop under ads being talked about. I must be taking food right out of the mouths of the little SDMB children!
I don’t see them because I have disallowed all of the tracking cookies, there are 9 currently being used here and I don’t like feeding them. It is nothing personal, I have disabled most of them across the web and some sites are just filthy with the little fuckers. 9 is a fairly low amount compared to the 17 you will get on CNN, and other places have even more. I haven’t found 30 yet, but I have run into sites with tracking cookies in the high 20s. There are often threads about “how does Facebook know…” Because a lot of sites have a Facebook tracking cookie, even if you have never had a Facebook account, you probably still have their tracking cookie, they are watching and know your preferences by what sites you visit, what you shop for, etc.
I can understand Rubicon because it is the main ad provider here. DoubleClick is another ad provider, ChartBeat is some sort of analytic, eXelate has something to do with beacons, and of course Google Analytics because Google is watching you everywhere, Quantcast is more ads, VigLink is following ads in-text ads. The other 2 seem to have dropped off once I signed in.
Every guest who doesn’t pay is still feeding these people, unless they have disabled the tracking cookies. You are paying, maybe not the SDMB, but you are giving access to info that these people have not paid you for.
So tell me again how we are all deadbeats by not paying for membership.
I don’t pay because I don’t get anything out of it and my regular usage doesn’t require it. If there was, for example, a post limit for Guests, then I might pay. Or if paid members could violate the TOS a given number of times before being punished, I’d do that too. I’m not used to paying to access websites and don’t want to start down that road
I only pay because it’s voluntary. If it were required, I’d be outta here.
I’ve never felt the urge to. They don’t really ask, and so it rarely crosses my mind.
Pretty much this. I’m poor and there are things I need more than a title under my username. I lived through pay-to-post, still poor, reading only, and managed just fine. And honestly, I’m here way less often now than I was in the pay-to-post days.
Also: I was genuinely surprised to learn from this thread that this was still a thing. After pay-to-post ended, I sort of figured that membership payments would eventually fade too. I suppose this goes to show how important those “Member” titles are – I (clearly) don’t even notice them.
I pay because Ed Zotti sent me a dead fish with a rose in its mouth, wrapped in a copy of the Reader. It is the Chicago Reader, after all.
So, can members have special protections like being temporarily ban-proof?
I was a Charter Member and lost it by paying a few days late at some point, but at either the normal or reduced cost, the amount of entertainment/education that I get out of the site is beyond worth it if you make a comparison to any other medium. And I’d rather pay than see ads (particularly now that they added the popup), and I feel that it’s dishonest to appreciate the site without paying up or viewing ads.
I think that there’s a Lindybeige video where he complains that most journalists (in the UK) don’t have access to scientific journals, because any organization that buys a subscription has to buy for all members of the organization, from the janitors up. If I was a member of parliament in the UK, I’d just ask what the cost is for the country and put it on the taxpayers bill. Similarly, if the Dope could be run so that it was available without ads to the whole world, I’d get behind whatever proposal it was that allowed it. Some things are worth the cost (particularly if it’s just the cost of a server and a few part time moderators).