It's telling (I think) that we continue to stray from the central issue, and continue mentoring Mark on what a certain policy change might or might not do. Focus elsewhere when you can't solve the two objectives Mark stated:
To refresh, Mark said:
Is the issue more that a group that perhaps not all of your members like is mentioned on the pricing page, [Yes, that's the root cause] or is it that I would support that group at all ...? [Absolutely, unequivacably, not] I certainly don't want to make group owners' lives more difficult. But I also have my beliefs and would like Groups.io to support things I believe are good. [and members appear to support that too, and there's a way to accomplish both the above.]Now notice, Mark did not say not more difficult "unless I sell less ice cream," or "in a way that I can sell more ice cream," or "I don't care if group A stops buying ice cream," or "I could care less if it's harder for only group B owners," or any other qualification.
Can someone, please, enumerate, logically, only those things that Mark can do that meets his two stated desires? Without dragging into a proposed "fix" the business practices' of others, or his ice cream sales, or about IO being successful, and bla bla...? I have suggested one, can anyone suggest an one alternative?
Can we take on it's face, that Mark already knows and can logically weigh out all that? And that the "real-life" difficulty to a group owner is not a subjective notion. More difficult is more difficult, only the degree to which is variable.