Welcome to NexusFi: the best trading community on the planet, with over 150,000 members Sign Up Now for Free
Genuine reviews from real traders, not fake reviews from stealth vendors
Quality education from leading professional traders
We are a friendly, helpful, and positive community
We do not tolerate rude behavior, trolling, or vendors advertising in posts
We are here to help, just let us know what you need
You'll need to register in order to view the content of the threads and start contributing to our community. It's free for basic access, or support us by becoming an Elite Member -- see if you qualify for a discount below.
-- Big Mike, Site Administrator
(If you already have an account, login at the top of the page)
What would happen if BMT switched to 100% pay model
Hello guys,
I don't post that much but here we have an important topic.
My opinion is that members should have to pay at least something, in defense of this our community and all the work BigMike has to do to maintain it like it is, and the respect he deserves for his time and effort.
It's a pitty to find still people even in this thread that take things personally trying to defend their ego instead of just answwering and contributing to a simple discussion poll.
And even cheap but payable services help filter a lot of those posts/people.
Can you help answer these questions from other members on NexusFi?
if you have an IP check on anyway, what do you think about the model that many newspapers choose:
to only allow x views / posts or so per week / month for their "non-elite" while leaving elite as it is?
imo, that would be more of an incentive to join elite because non-elite are
forced to go elite
or wait (I don't know anyone who likes waiting ...)
or try to duplicate and (automatically) be sorted out by the IP check + a nice pop-up to wait or join elite.
Even a $1 payment would make it a real pain for them to keep re-registering.
Some suggestions to ease the pain....
- a tiered pricing model, so Elite stays elite
- potentially grandfathering in existing members with a certain post count or years on the forum if they post infrequently.
Hard to say what the impact of a pay-only model will be. very difficult to predict how people will react.
If you have any questions about the products or services provided, please send me a Private Message or use the futures.io " Ask Me Anything" thread
My view - just do it, nothing to lose. You have far too much to do and too much stress, that has been noticeable for 6-9 months now. No surprise given the other factors you are handling as well, you don't need the the extra hassle involved.
How I would do it - Elite only for a 1 month trial period for $25 gives 30 days read-only access to all content except the download area, tied to the user/email/IP address. At any point during or after the trial the user can pay the extra $75 to gain full Elite membership including posting and access to the download area, or the trial ends. No problem with subsequent same user trials, that is their choice.
My forecast - you get more income not less anyway, simple psychology of commitment, and a huge reduction in hassle.
If I try to put myself in your shoes, the non-paying customers are a positive externality because whatever activity they generate helps you generate more content, increase visitor count and marketable ad click rates, and attract the paying customers.
I think this brings you greater marginal benefit than the marginal downside of any spam that comes along.
Isn't a better solution to spam simply electing more moderators to assist you? I'm pretty sure you can find willing and trustworthy participants to do it on a voluntary and free basis.
I agree with the view that a pay model would discourage a very significant percentage of potential new members, and that has very little to do with price. We all know membership here is worth several times what it costs.
It is a principle of behavioural economics that the very idea of reaching for your wallet, no matter how small the actual payment, will inhibit the transaction. See relevant article in Forbes
With a paid model new non elite content would dry up pretty quickly, provoking at the very least an unpredictable shift in the current balance of the forum ecosystem. The result can be unpredictable, but the impact will be hefty, numbers in the research linked above show.
The question is, is it worth it?
Perhaps nominating more moderators to shoulder some of the grunt work for you could be a short term solution, whilst looking at other options.
This may be a good idea, but I for one have become used to the fact that you can just say something for Mike in your post, and you will know that he will read it.... We are spoiled that way.
Honestly, there is a quality of moderation that takes a personal touch, and it is part of what makes futures.io (formerly BMT) what it is.
Although by osmosis I feel some of Mike's personality, or at least tendencies, have infected the regulars. And as you say, that's exactly what makes this place different
Mike could (would) still get to read every post - unless it was already filtered (=deleted) by a mod.
Don't see why that would restrict anything beyond.
