# Will the SDMB eventually ask members to pay?
**URL:** https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-the-sdmb-eventually-ask-members-to-pay/130957
**Category:** About This Message Board
**Created:** [October 5, 2002, 9:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-the-sdmb-eventually-ask-members-to-pay/130957 "2002-10-05T09:49:13Z")
**Posts on this page:** 14
**Page:** 1
### Author:  [@Snugglebear](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Snugglebear)
#### Post date: [October 5, 2002, 9:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-the-sdmb-eventually-ask-members-to-pay/130957/1 "2002-10-05T09:49:13Z")
I’ve heard a rumor from another member that the straight dope has toyed around with the idea to charge members a membership fee. I personally would pay a membership fee.
Also I appologise if I am posting something that has been ran into the ground. I’m just curiouse.
---
### Author:  [@Joe\_Mahma](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Joe_Mahma)
#### Post date: [October 5, 2002, 10:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-the-sdmb-eventually-ask-members-to-pay/130957/2 "2002-10-05T10:42:15Z")
I hate to actually admit it, but I’d pay. I would rather not, but would if I had to. If there was a fee, though, I’d expect them to add extra servers or upgrade the speed of their net connection- whatever it would take to get the hamsters to do their job right.
---
### Author:  [@John\_Kentzel-Griffin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Kentzel-Griffin)
#### Post date: [October 5, 2002, 10:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-the-sdmb-eventually-ask-members-to-pay/130957/3 "2002-10-05T10:47:48Z")
Since this is a question About This Message Board, I’ll move this to About This Message Board forum.
Off to ATMB.
**DrMatrix** - General Questions Moderator
---
### Author:  [@TheLoadedDog](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TheLoadedDog)
#### Post date: [October 5, 2002, 11:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-the-sdmb-eventually-ask-members-to-pay/130957/4 "2002-10-05T11:15:29Z")
It has been run into the ground to a certain extent, but you’re new here (welcome), so that’s cool.
ARGUMENTS FOR A PAID BOARD:
-_The Chicago Reader_ is a commercial entity, not a charity. We don’t have a right to expect this free service.
-A paid board would enable the _Reader_ to give the hamsters some amphetamines, or whatever it takes.
-It would discourage trolls, wankers, and summer vacation kiddies from bothering us.
ARGUMENTS AGAINST A PAID BOARD:
-Some people just can’t afford it, give it a low priority in their household budgeting, or refuse to pay on principle.
-See above. Whilst some of us would be willing to pay for the enjoyment we currently get from the boards, if many posters (including many much loved, high profile ones) are no longer here, then it won’t be the same SDMB. It may be a big problem, or it may not. We will be paying for something unknown.
-The SDMB provides publicity for the _Reader_. It is cited, and linked to. Some argue that this alone is worth keeping it as is.
---
### Author:  [@Some\_Guy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Some_Guy)
#### Post date: [October 5, 2002, 1:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-the-sdmb-eventually-ask-members-to-pay/130957/5 "2002-10-05T13:41:47Z")
Also: in a pay system, the number of new members and people “just experimenting” with the board would drop dramatically. We’d get much less new blood, which could be a problem in the long run.
Even though that’s an argument against, I’m actually in favor of a paid structure - but something reasonable, with the intent to break even, rather than an attempt to make big bucks off of it.
---
### Author:  [@AZCowboy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AZCowboy)
#### Post date: [October 5, 2002, 2:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-the-sdmb-eventually-ask-members-to-pay/130957/6 "2002-10-05T14:15:00Z")
What about a pay system that only charges for posting, not browsing (or lurking)?
[ul]
[li]Provide a waiver where the first 100 posts are free.[/li][li]Charge a penny or two per post for post 101 through something like post 5,000.[/li][li] Hi Opal![/li][li]Folks with over 5,000 posts are considered SDMB _emeritus_ and get a free ride.[/li][/ul]
I haven’t done the math to figure out whether that would generate sufficient funding to purchase the necessary amphetamines, but it seems to be a structure that would address the drawbacks already mentioned.
I personally hate the concept of paying for the SDMB. But, the reality is that the hamsters are stretched too thin, and I think I could bear the concept for better performance.
---
### Author:  [@xash](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/xash)
#### Post date: [October 5, 2002, 4:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-the-sdmb-eventually-ask-members-to-pay/130957/7 "2002-10-05T16:19:09Z")
> [@](#):
>
> \*Originally posted by AZCowboy \*
> **What about a pay system that only charges for posting, not browsing (or lurking)?**
**AZ** , i don’t see people wanting to pay to answer your questions… what i mean is… i spend a lot of my time in GQ… where most people make a huge effort to answer your questions with well researched replies. i don’t see them additionally wanting to pay to answer your questions. this would defeat the whole purpose of the GQ forum.
that aside, this topic has been discussed in detail on the ATMB… i don’t know what search terms would bring up the old threads, but maybe you could try a search for “charge” “fees” “payment” “membership” etc. 3 letter words don’t work in the search, so searching for “pay” won’t help.
perhaps someone could come along and link to one of the longer discussions on this topic.
---
### Author:  [@xash](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/xash)
#### Post date: [October 5, 2002, 4:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-the-sdmb-eventually-ask-members-to-pay/130957/8 "2002-10-05T16:30:51Z")
ok, i’ll come along and post a link…
here’s the mother of all discussions on this topic…
[http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=98127](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=98127)
it’s 5 pages long.
---
### Author:  [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)
#### Post date: [October 5, 2002, 8:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-the-sdmb-eventually-ask-members-to-pay/130957/9 "2002-10-05T20:17:09Z")
That thread was from last November, and while it’s worthwhile reading, here’s a[more current discussion](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=136799) of those issues to post to if you’re interested.
---
### Author:  [@Savaka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Savaka)
#### Post date: [October 7, 2002, 6:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-the-sdmb-eventually-ask-members-to-pay/130957/10 "2002-10-07T06:22:08Z")
OK. I’ve read the short thread and part of the longer one. The pay-to-post idea seems to be universally acknowledged as a board killer.
I see people have suggested fund drives à la NPR, which was also my suggestion. This idea was rejected by several posters on the grounds that, being a commercial entity, the Chicago Reader cannot accept donations. But this seems like a semantic problem to me. What if we just didn’t call them “donations”?
If the Reader were to set up a sliding scale for annual membership, based on the honor system, I’m guessing they’d raise enough to break even, if not turn a small profit. (I recently read a thread from 2000 or 2001 in which roughly $5000 in pledges was raised in relatively short order, which was within striking distance of the cost of a new server at the time.) This would allow people to donate as much as they could afford, even if that’s nothing, and so would not drive down traffic, but would still hopefully generate enough revenue to keep the board from becoming a financial drain on the Reader.
What’s wrong with this?
---
### Author:  [@reprise](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/reprise)
#### Post date: [October 7, 2002, 6:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-the-sdmb-eventually-ask-members-to-pay/130957/11 "2002-10-07T06:35:31Z")
Heck, we’ve even had people offer to physically drop off an anonymous donation of the equipment needed if the CR will give us the specifications.
The bottom line is that the CR doesn’t want to do anything which compromises its options.
If the CR accepts a donation of money or equipment for the dedicated purpose of providing the SDMB with a new server, there are going to be a lot of pissed off people if the CR decides a month later that SDMB maintenance is consuming too much of \*\*Jerrythetechgod/b]'s valuable time and that it is no longer viable for the CR to support the messageboard.
We have recently been advised that there **is** a plan in the works which may allow members to contribute to the financial welfare of the board (I’m sure someone else can find the thread faster than I can), so I guess we’re all just going to have to wait until the powers that be decide to share the details of the plan with us.
---
### Author:  [@reprise](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/reprise)
#### Post date: [October 7, 2002, 6:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-the-sdmb-eventually-ask-members-to-pay/130957/12 "2002-10-07T06:36:58Z")
I really **will** learn to close vBulletin tags one day.
---
### Author:  [@xash](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/xash)
#### Post date: [October 14, 2002, 6:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-the-sdmb-eventually-ask-members-to-pay/130957/14 "2002-10-14T06:59:09Z")
> [@](#):
>
> \*Originally posted by tractorbeemer \*
> \*\*I’d say if those over 5000 posts aren’t paying something is wrong. They get 50 times the benefit of your 101 posters. \*\*
Not necessarily, **tractorbeemer**.
Assume a scenario in which said 5000 post poster answered 5000 of your/others’ questions in GQ (or wherever). The benefit, as i see it, is to the person who asked the question, **NOT** to the person who answered it.
---
### Author:  [@Some\_Guy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Some_Guy)
#### Post date: [October 14, 2002, 11:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-the-sdmb-eventually-ask-members-to-pay/130957/15 "2002-10-14T11:32:14Z")
Actually, \*_tractorbeemer_ is right -maybe not exactly correct in his numbers, but he’s right that creating a special priveleged class of posters, based on post count, would just cause the same idiotic mumbling we already have about “the Clique”[supTM[/sup] to be magnified a thousandfold. Worse yet, the idiotic mumblers would actually be right for the first time, since there really would be a class of posters with more clout than your average newbie. Not good, as they say.