What would ditching the "Charter Member" status solve?

Firstly, this isn’t a flame. I post this here while recognizing the provision outlined in the forum subhead that designates the Pit as the place for “other discussion regarding administration of the SDMB”. I apologize if this thread is seen as misplaced.

I wonder, as a matter of personal opinion, if the member designation “Charter Member” isn’t causing more problems than it is worth? Certainly there is a good portion of discussion as to slights and oversights in applying this title that are either a fault of someone or of mere circumstance, which seems to be distracting in general (especially with regard to those situations aided merely by circumstance).

Is this title found by anyone to be of great benefit, in or of itself? Does the title have some sort of worth as far as purposes of collation? What are some noteworthy disadvantages that would arise from the elimination of this title; in other words, are there any Charter Members who would just as soon be a “Member”? I don’t personally care about status with regard to member titles, but it would seem that some do.

I welcome the opinions and input of all posters who are interested in this situation as I try to make sense of this conflict.

I kind of messed up the title. I’d like it to read, “What would ditching the “Charter Member” status solve?”.

I don’t care what the title under my name is so long as I have all the perks of membership offered when I joined up – you know, hamster roasts, a new flamethrower each Christmas, a secret party in Ed Zotti’s basement for every thousand-post landmark, a private goat, the URL for the Mods’ Laugh & Point collection of stupid posts, my…

Whatcha mean, I wasn’t supposed to tell? :smack:

I’d be perfectly happy with just the designation “Member” under my name. I don’t really have a problem with the “Charter Member” thing, but some silly people might draw invidious and unwarranted distinctions, so i think it would probably be better simply to have "Members and Guests.

I haven’t seen any cases where people cared about the title, but I have seen a few where they cared about the 50% discount. Am I missing something?

I’d be ok with making all members "charter member"s as they were before subscription renewal time. I’d be seriously annoyed if I woke up one day and was just a “member” (Now, if I’d failed to renew on time, that’s one thing. But as long as I’m living up to my end of the bargain, I LIKE charter member).


SOMEBODY owes me a goat, dammit!

Yeah, I like the Charter Member, but for me it’s more about the cash. If I woke up with “member” but with discount, okay, fine, but if I had “Charter Member” without the discount - Hamster BBQ party.

Is fixed.

I don’t care about the title, however, I do find it very unfair that late-joiners have to pay more than early-joiners for the rest of their posting career. Joining early doesn’t mean you contribute any more to the discussion than someone who joined later. Many of the brightest community members are regular members. Why should we have to pay more?

I don’t care about charter; I do (mildly) care about the discount. If it would cause all the whiners who weren’t paying attention to SHUT THE FUCK UP, it would be worth it to me to see us all be Members.

Many thanks. And to all of you, as well, for your thoughts—may they continue.

WHAT??You woke up and didn’t have your member??

Why that’s just awful. I don’t have a member, but I bet if I woke up and didn’t have it anymore, well, I’d be…What?They’re not talking about that member?Never mind.

"Emily Litella voice’

Would I still get to put “Charter Member” on my resume?

There is no difference to me as I don’t post all that frequently.

However, having said that let me say this.
When I signed up I was provided with the title Charter Member. That was part of the sign up deal. I wouldn’t like to see the SDMB reneg on their agreement and change my Charter Member to anything else without my agreement.

As long as I keep my end of the bargain they should keep theirs.

Charter Member simply means you paid up during a specific time and have renewed according to the rules.

Charter member means you were among the first to join. Should those who join in the second year of membership be charter members too?

Actually, Charter Member just means that you paid your $4.95 within an arbitrarily-set time-frame in 2004. There are Charter Members who only joined last year, and there are regular Members who joined in 1999 or 2000 who lost their Charter status for being a few days overdue.

And no, i don’t think other people should be called Charter Member. As i said before, i’d be happy enough if we were all just Member.

I was going to send Tuba an email asking for my charter member status back, but I blew it off because they’re always talking about what a money pit this place is. So I figured: “WTF? If an extra $7 can help this place out why not let them keep it?”

If it weren’t for the SDMB my job would be uinbearable. So I figure I owe them at least that much.

Besides, anybody can look at my join date and tell I’ll an old schooler. Not that I care or anything. :wink:

A glitch made me lose the “Charter” from my title last year, and everyone kept telling me to e-mail the mods about it. Really, what the hell difference does it make? Why can’t we all just be “members” and have done with it?

Who really gives a shit?

I like it.

After all, it’s a way to thank/honor those posters who stayed with the SDMB when they went pay-for-play.