I've thought fairly long and hard before making this post, but...
(Note; in this post, by "groups.io" I mean the whole groups.io ecosystem)
On Sat, Jan 2, 2021 at 09:37 PM, Tom Madden wrote:
Most of which I would not disagree with. Except
But individuals do join, and become part of, groups.io - and have individual relationships with Groups.io, Inc as well as the groups they are members of.
The value of groups.io is down to - and enjoyed by - the triad of Groups.io, Inc; group owners; and group members. All three are needed - and benefit. And for a better groups.io, all need - in their various ways - to grow. The problem with the proposed new pricing structure is that, for new and upgraded groups, (increased) members impose (increased) cost on group owners, which has not been the case so far.
While some groups have funds from, or for, their members with which they can pay Groups.io, Inc , others do not (and, I would suggest, that includes some of the largest publicly listed groups, which have 5 figure mamberships), and so are reliant on being free Basic groups; which hitherto have been available. But that in the future are unaffordable.
While their owners may be prepared accept the responsibilty of running them, putting in the time and effort required, payment is - for many if not most - not a responsibility that they can or will be prepared take on.
And so suggestions have been made as to how individual members - as beneficiaries of the service - can make payments to Group.io, Inc , for that service.
The absence of 'free to owner', basic, groups will make groups.io poorer.