These questions seem to be to hard for you to answer so let me try this one. What are the legal ramification for CR if I am paying for facts and for that mater would the people who provided the incorrect information be named as co-defendants?
Boy, you’re all over the place with this, aren’t you? Still trying to evade the issue, huh?
This is a message board that requires funds to pay for web hosts, software, and so forth. Apparently, it benefits us. We contribute to it, and we benefit from it. If we didn’t, there wouldn’t be so many who are willing to pay the subscription, now would there?
And even if we didn’t benefit from it, the Chicago Reader can still ask for subscriptions. Doesn’t mean that they’ll get any, but they can ask.
I can ask that you pay me $50 to see an exclusive photo of my cat Virgil (he’s fabulous and orange) on my website. You can decide that it isn’t worth $50 to see a picture of Virgil.
I can also ask you to pay me $50 to post a picture of your cat on my site. And, once again, you can refuse. See how nicely that works?
Fine. You think they are doing something wrong. So don’t pay the subscription. But don’t say that they have no right to do whatever they want to with the service they are providing. Because obviously, they do.
Did the board sign a contract with you, promising you accuracy? If not, then you take your chances with the accuracy of the information on this board.
What? What are you smoking, anyway?
He’s asking for answers from anonymous yahoos on a message board. He gets what he gets. Unless the Straight Dope has a CONTRACT promising that all answers in GQ will be accurate, I don’t think he has an expectation of 100% accuracy. The Chicago Reader has asked him to pay $5 to post on their message board, so they can afford to keep the message board going. He gets to decide whether or not the information on the board is accurate enough, is worth it to him, or whatever.
I’m sorry, but if you don’t like those terms, don’t pay the $5. Let everyone else decide whether or not they want to pay the $5. It’s their call to make. They have a right to refuse. Chicago Reader can do whatever the hell they like with their message board. And the information on the Internet is not free.
First you’re going to have to present a legally binding contract with the CR asserting that they promise to deliver accurate information.
Barring that, you’ve got nothin’, bub.
Why haven’t you been banned? You discount everybody’s concerns without any substantive basis, and it goes on and on and on and on
Where did I say “they have no right to do what ever they want”? Can you tell in what post did I say “They have no right”? Which post number did I say this?
If this was a service I would have an expectation of accuracy, it’s not a service it’s a discussion. And in a “free” and open discussion you get what you get. In a paid service as you are saying this will be then I want accuracy otherwise it’s not a service it’s a discussion
Can you tell me what “The staight Dope” is? Isn’t giving factual answers part of what General Questions is all about? Cecil Adams has a reputation for telling it as it is, facts, am I right? If I am correct then this means some thing! I have been lured here to learn the truth. This is a service so I expect facts.
If you are going to spout of about having “The Straight Dope” and you want me to pay to get “The Straight Dope” then there is an expectation of accuracy don’t you agree?
Please describe my bannable offense.
What? Where do you get this from? I have my own concerns and suggestions and I’m not dismissing a lot of the suggestions here. All I’ve been trying to point out is that the CR is not obligated to run this message board for free, and that the information on the Internet is not free.
And yes, I do think that Mr. Parsecs does indeed have nothing to indicate that the CR will be sued for potentially incorrect information in GQ. Do you seriously think he can prove that indeed, the CR will promise for that $5 subscription fee to provide accurate information? (And that they will make themselves legally obligated to provide accurate information for five bucks?) You seriously think that this will be the case?
When someone say we have “The Straight Dope” we answer factual question with factual answers come here and pay us for these answers. Then there is an expectation of accuracy. If I advertised that I was a dietary consultant and I say I can answer diet related questions, now I advertise and you come and paid me a visit and I charged you for what I know would you expect me to be accurate as possible?
Nuf said.
Using caps!
Well, then what are you bleating about? You’ve already agreed that they can do whatever they want. That they are not obligated to provide this message board for free. Why are we even having this discussion at all?
Sigh.
Please quote the part in the user agreement (or whatever it’s called) where accuracy is promised.
Please show in Ed’s statement at the beginning of this thread where he promises to be responsible for providing accurate information on the board as soon as it goes to a subscription service. Please copy and paste the passage where he promises this.
Please copy and paste the statement where Cecil Adams promises that everyone who signs up for the subscription service on the Straight Dope will always be accurate. Please show me where this legally binding statement resides on this site.
First off, m’dear, I’m not asking you to pay anything. Whether you pay or not has absolutely zero percent impact on my life.
I’d just like you to show me the where the Straight Dope promises that any yahoo who shells over $5 will provide accurate information in GQ. How can they possibly guarantee this? Where do you get the idea that they will promise this?
Please. Show me where they promise this. If they don’t promise this or even hint at it, why do you assume that it’ll be so?
I loved this one
Absolutely 100% no they will not. In which case cut “The Straight Dope” nonsense and admit GQ’s factual answer means nothing. They should also drop the facade of “Fighting Ignorance” when they don’t always get it right themselves.
I saw somewhere the max would work out to four cents per day. So if you post twice per day, and get your two-cents worth in each time, you come out no worse than even.
12 parsecs and SwingWing: I suspect that you’re both whooshing me. Right?
Give me a break. :rolleyes:
At this point, seing how much has already been discussed and knowing full well how long the debate about paid accounts has gone on, I shall only say that I personally have far too much invested inthe SDMB to leave it now.
My greatest concern is how it may affect future membership. I never do anything online that costs money, and the only reason I choose to stay here is because I’ve been here ofr three years and have many friends here.
That cannot be said of others.
Nevertheless. What must be done is done for the best, I suppose.
Let’s hope it keeps the gerbils running.
I agree, you’ve said enough. But you evidently haven’t read enough. In ATMB there is the service agreement posted by Ed Zotti. That name should ring a bell. Read on, for I have conveniently bolded the relevant portions for your quick perusal:
Does that answer your question sufficiently? The Chicago Reader, in its Master-like wisdom, put forth a disclaimer that absolves them of the responsibility for providing accurate information. All users agree to this by signing on and the disclaimer is posted in an easy-to-find place.
Now if you wanna get into an argument about whether you should be required to pay for an online conversation, go for it, but your “accuracy” argument ain’t cutting ice.
It is now obvious, with money on the line and the illogical rants in this thread, that the SDMB’s promote ignorance and ban members whom try to do otherwise …
So you, on your own, can determine the one basic rule, who is a jerk? Specifically, outline the parameters of this single rule.
Then cut “TSD” BS. And for that matter also drop GQ if your not going to be accurate then don’t go mentioning that you have “TSD”. If it’s wrong it ain’t “The Straight Dope” it’s rumour and inuendo not fact. And I’ll have to agree with you it’s a discussion not a service.
What is the date on that agreement? Is this the same agreement we will have to accept once I have paid? Seems stiff to consider that I’ll be asked to believe “TSD” when I’m paying but not when I’m agreeing to thier terms. What is it about this that you find difficult to understand…If it’s free I have no problems with accuracy. If I’m paying then I damn well do.
I’m in, IF we can get the old look back, as an option. The new layout has caused me to more or less completely stop visiting. If I could have the old layout, I’d pay $50 for the boards.
See title.
I don’t think this is gonna go well. Don’t construe any of this as whining, just a different perspective.
I’ve paid $25 for membership + custom title + platinum membership on another popular message board, so it’s not that I’m averse to paying for discussion, of both the humorous and enlightening varieties. But over there, they have 28000+ paying members most of whom aren’t going anywhere, and daily content galore. I can easily imagine paying :5bux: to join up here only to see the board spiral into a desolate wasteland within a month. I suppose you could hope the reduced fee for the first month will induce alot of posters to buy in early, thus raising confidence in the success of the subscription board, I guess you’ll see if that works out.
Also, at the board where I payed to join, the fee is a one-time thing (so long as you can keep your head and avoid the frequent bannings.) SDMB is asking $15 per year, which seems like quite a bit. Apparently, ars-technica boards require $25/yr, but also give perks like webhosting. SDMB simply doesn’t have alot of content or bonus features, such as to warrant that price. Again, people may value the board higher or lower than others do, and perhaps the price will prove good value for some, but it will deter alot of people.
One final concern is that the most useful forum here, GQ, thrives only because of the vast numbers of people with access to it, with a wide pool of knowledge and experience ready to answer a broad array of questions. The regulars of the various discussions forums, the ones who’ve made all the friends here, are likely to be the ones to stay on. What GQ needs to function well is that guy who almost never posts, but happens to know some obscure factoid about turtle shells or professional bowling or widget factories.
Anyways, I hope it works out for you all, I know there are some positives associated with this too, maybe all will be for the best. This is the strategy you guys are pursuing, and of course running the servers isn’t free, you weighed all the options and came up with this as your solution. Perhaps it’ll prove successful, perhaps not, it’s your board and your venture. Good luck, SDMB, I wish you all the best!