Is it progressive, liberal, democratic to

[boston bean]

Charge people who can't donate $42 dollars in one lump sum yearly to DU more money for full access to DU.

In essence penalizing someone who can't afford $42 dollars upfront?

For instance, those who can come up with $5 dollars per month vs. a $42 lump sum are punished and end up paying $18 dollars more a year ($60/yr) for the full access to DU that others paid only $42 for?

ETA ($60/yr)

[SidDithers]

1. Unrec...nt

Sid

[boston bean]

2. why sid?? nt

[Autumn]

3. Rec because sid unrecd it

I believe in balance in the universe.:rofl:

[boston bean]

5. As good a reason as any I guess. I've done the same thing myself in the past... nt

[SidDithers]

4. 'Cause it's a push poll...

and it's approximately the 437th thread about DU's funding model that has been started today.

Sid

[boston bean]

6. How is this a push poll? It's a simple question.

In my mind, it's not progressive, but regressive, as I thought most of us would believe.

[Bluenorthwest]

24. That is not what a push poll is in the US, Sid...

Now I'm reccing in your honor. You should go read up on push polling, and learn that a simple question is not a push poll.

[emilyg]

42. Then I'll REC.

[amyrose2712]

7. Is there more cost when taking out monthly fees?

[boston bean]

10. I pay an extra dollar to donate when I donate through Pay Pal to DU, so I don't think it's a cost DU

has to deal with. I pay it.

So maybe you could add another dollar in. It would be $6 dollars per month.

[amyrose2712]

17. True. Just a thought.

[JoePhilly]

8. My sense would be that you get charged less for making a longer term commitment.

Stephanie Miller does the same thing with her podcast ...

You can select $7.95 for one month ... or, if you buy a full year in advance, its only $4.95 a month.

This is not a new pricing model by any stretch.

If you buy a house up front with cash, you avoid the finance charges.

I suspect that the DU guys are trying to make it easier for them to predict, and maintain, their cash flow.

I've seen a number of folks point out that DU will make some money on the year log front, some on monthly, some on Ads, and I see a fair amount for discussion about ways for those who can donate more to do so.

Bottom line ... I doubt skinner and the others who run DU are planning to get rich from this business model. I think they are just trying to find a way to make the financial aspects of doing this more manageable.

[Name removed]

9. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[apocalypsehow]

11. I'm still curious as to what is meant by "full access to DU." Everyone, regardless if they give zip

or donate a million dollars are going to have the same exact amount of "access" to DU3.

[boston bean]

12. not true. there will be features and other privileges non-donors will not be able to

participate in.

[SidDithers]

15. Just like now...nt

Sid

[boston bean]

16. no, not just like now. the cost to be able to participate has gone up exponentially.

[apocalypsehow]

19. Okay, fine: please list for me these features and privileges. Thank you. n/t.

[boston bean]

22. you will have to ask Skinner for that answer. It's a tightly held secret.

Suffice it to know there will be a difference in the use/access of DU for subscribers v non subscribers. I think that is clear.

And I wonder why that makes such a huge difference to the question being asked.

Should someone be gouged because they can't cough up $42 bucks in one shot?

[apocalypsehow]

23. In other words, you can't name one. "I think that is clear"...Really? Yet you can't name one.

Curious way to back up an assertion.

"Should someone be gouged because they can't cough up $42 bucks in one shot?"

Then don't donate.

[boston bean]

25. I can't name one, because Skinner hasn't named them. Although he has stated, quite clearly

there will be features and privileges for becoming a subscriber.

Then don't donate? No, it's don't subscribe....

[apocalypsehow]

31. Well, I'm sure much of this will be "tweaked" as there has been a good deal of feedback on the

matter. Hopefully we can get a clearer picture soon of just what is and is not included in a "subscription," though it was my understanding, and I could have misread it, that there would actually be more access regardless of donor or "subscriber" status.

In any event, I hope it works out for everyone. This isn't about me hoping this drives any poster away from DU or anything like that.

[quaker bill]

13. It is progressive, liberal, and democratic

to charge reasonable fees for services delivered. It is also progressive, liberal, and democratic to choose whether or not you care to purchase them.

[Rabblevox]

21. +1

[boston bean]

28. It's not a matter of caring to purchase them.

It's a matter of charging more for the same service to those who can't afford a lump sum payment.

That was the question of the poll. Can you answer it?

[MineralMan]

29. And, if you cannot afford to pay, you can still participate in all

the important features of DU. Frankly, the only important features of DU are the forums and the posts therein. If you can post in the forums, you are participating in DU. The rest is fluff.

[pintobean]

14. Unrec

[Coyote_Bandit]

18. Some premium for

the uncertainty and processing expense of monthly payments is appropriate - but the mark-up here is significant. Those who can afford the upfront expense get a year of membership for $42. Everybody else pays a pretty steep premium.

But, hey, it is not my website. I don't pay the bills or make the rules. I'm not the one taking the chance that this fee schedule might actually backfire and result in decreased participation and support.

I'm just a long-term unemployed schmuck who can't afford $42 up front - and who will not pay that kind of mark-up for the privilege of making a monthly payment. Thanks, but no thanks. Perhaps when I have $42 to spare I'll throw it DUs way .

I do find the membership rates curious and I'd love to know how they were formulated.

[boston bean]

20. We pay the to process it through Pay Pal. I get charged an additional dollar each time I donate.

So there is no processing fee assessed to DU, I, you, we pay for that.

So in essence, those who can't pay all upfront will pay another $11 dollars more a year.

That's a point I hadn't taken into consideration. Thanks for pointing it out.

[MineralMan]

32. You can send a check to DU. Now, that does cost $0.45, or will

when this is going on, but a check for $42.00 means that the cost is about 1%. It's a quantity discount, you see. If I buy individual rolls of toilet paper, for example, the cost per roll is considerably higher than if I buy 48 rolls at Costco. I choose to buy the Costco package. Others choose to buy their rolls of toilet paper in smaller quantities and pay the higher price.

Since participating in DU can be done without paying anything, the point is moot, really. Features? None of them have to do with the ability to express your opinion here. :shrug:

[Kali]

37. well this is one of the problems with being poor

you are stuck buying small packages of things for higher prices. rarely can you acquire goods in bulk like wealthier consumers. It is a continual jab at your finances. You have a budget and to balance weekly purchases you pay much more per amount for virtually EVERYTHING - toilet paper, soap, coffee, flour, meat, hell even aspirin. I think the point is that when you use the word "choice" some people don't really have the choice like you might think they do.

I agree the site access is the same pay or not, but I do see the point some are trying to make about both the stratification of users (probably not as bad as will be imagined) and the offense of people telling you you are too cheap to pay or go start your own site or that one can choose to not pay. No that isn't really choice.

[MineralMan]

39. I would never say anything about someone who could not pay

to post here. You are correct that the discrepancy in price for a single unit and a larger volume purchase can be a problem. However, in my example, I was discussing something that most people feel is a necessary item. Posting on DU costs nothing. The donation, or fee, or whatever you want to call it only buys you some features on the forum. It has absolutely nothing to do with the ability to express your views. So, it is a luxury, really, not a necessity.

As for the toilet paper example, that's a budgetary issue. The wise person will put a small amount of money aside and buy the quantity packaging. By doing so, that person will have the savings to use for other items he or she would not otherwise have been able to buy. It takes planning, to be sure, but is a wise move. The same is true for all necessary staples required for a typical person. They are always less expensive when purchased in quantity. It's not easy, when you're operating close to the edge, but it's worthwhile trying to figure out a way to do it, even if it takes a considerable time to save enough for the first quantity purchase. I didn't say it was easy. It's doable, though.

As for the stratification of users, I'm in favor of eliminating all visible evidence of DU member's status as a donor or non-donor. That would eliminate the opportunity to judge people on that basis. As for myself, I pay no attention to any poster's status in that regard. It's irrelevant to me. A poster who posts logically, clearly, and with evidence of thought is far more valuable than one who pays large sums to support DU and posts nonsense. I don't think I've seen even a dozen posts where someone has commented on anyone's star or lack of same in my time her, and I spend a lot of time here. It's a non issue, I think. Anyone who would do so is too rude and insensitive to pay attention to anyhow.

This is a political discussion forum. It is the quality of the discussion that matters. Nothing else is as important.

[Kali]

41. I think the problem is the inability of many to see that edge and how many are on it.

helpful advice to put a few pennies away for things is ok for children or inexperienced young adults but it comes across as condescending to those people who are indeed on or near the edge.

They know these things, they are reminded of them every single purchase they make (or are unable to make). Not trying to argue too much here - you come across as very reasonable and sensible most of the time I have read your posts, and I am sure you do not mean to come across that way. It can be very difficult to comprehend being in a financial situation where you have NO money to put aside for anything.

[Name removed]

33. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[laundry_queen]

34. I guess they'll find out

Whether $42 is a price the market can bear - although most business people do consumer surveys in advance to figure that one out.

[fishwax]

26. I'd vote N/A

because I don't think it's inherently either progressive or non-progressive to offer a discount on a one-year subscription.

Personally, I'd rather stick with the fund drives, though. I think over the years the fund drives have brought a sense of community to DU. I also think the fact that people can be acknowledged as supporters for a relatively small donation has been good. People could feel like they were buying into/investing in the community. The subscription model doesn't offer quite the same sensibility. How it will effect the actual dynamics of the community, I suppose, remains to be seen.

[MineralMan]

27. Oh, for pity's sake!

Don't pay. Post anyway. This whole business is getting out of hand.

[SidDithers]

35. +1...

it really is as simple as that, isn't it.

Sid

[MineralMan]

36. I really don't mind if people are opposed to fees for DU.

I do mind if they take up a lot of time with it here. There have been at least two dozen threads decrying this new plan of Skinners. His site. His plan. I'll be here posting, regardless. I can afford the fee and will pay it. If I could not afford it, I would not pay it. Either way, I would be here posting. A waste of time, this is.

[hlthe2b]

30. It is, however, a very popular stance from the staunch capitalists

among us who have little regard for the contributions that the smaller donors have made to DU over the years. As we have come to know, that mind set is to ask "what have you done for me lately?"

So we throw those whose donations of less than $42 each year would have earned them full DU donor status aside. With the success of DU, they are just no longer needed. It is "just business," after all. We should celebrate the success that made that possible to no longer "need" these smaller donors. :eyes:

I want to think that these considerations were those that Skinner, et al just failed to really consider. I WANT to think that. (sigh)

But I say to those who are hurting in this economy--far more than I-- you have my greatest sympathy and empathy and my determined vow to continue to fight for you and for all of us. Though it seems de rigueur to toss aside many of our own in the name of pragmatic policy, that is NOT acceptable to me.

[Mnemosyne]

38. iirc, it was stated in another thread that paypal has a bottom monthly min. of $5. I may

be remembering it incorrectly, but am pretty sure that was the given reason.

I agree, unfair.

[Kali]

40. I think it is a common practice

to give a discount to bulk purchases or subscriptions - it rewards the consumer for providing a stable or consistent spending amount. i don't REALLY have a problem with it. I have more concerns with the total amount being proposed.

PERSONALLY I like the fund drives and the way it allows many with even limited funds to help other members. The much higher amount will certainly prevent me from doing that, in fact if that were implemented right now I doubt if I would be able to swing the full amount for myself. When I can afford it I try to get a few stars for other members. THAT activity is what I think of when I think of liberal progressive behavior. Helping others that might need it.

I saw one suggestion earlier today to not have a star or other indication of membership status and that might be a good idea if this new thing is implemented. In the meantime, people can try this out for year by doing the low $5 donation now, and there are free ad-block programs for most browsers if that isn't doable or people can't get matched up with somebody buying extra stars for others.

[hlthe2b]

43. These poll results are pretty overwhelming...

the snarky comments from the usual suspects aside..... :shrug: