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.
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.
The following user says Thank You to choke35 for this post:
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.
The following 2 users say Thank You to ratfink for this post:
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.
The following user says Thank You to artemiso for this post:
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.
The following 2 users say Thank You to lasecondababele for this post: