moderated Re: Samuel's Paid User Proposal #suggestion


txercoupemuseum.org
 

I think Samuel’s idea is flexible enough to explore as to practicality.

Instead of focusing on the 100 person “limit”, how a 100 “active participant” limit instead. Most email-based groups have the great majority of their “subscribers” as functional “lurkers”. If a subscriber posted less than 3-5 times annually, that, to me, is an “inactive participant. Yes, these get all the “redistributed” emails from “active participants, but their presence does not substantially increase that traffic.

It is common for software companies to offer a “free trial” period. On Groups.io, I suggest one appropriate for persons who want to set up a group. As for their subscribers, they would have a choice of “inactive participant” (who “settles for the give and take of others") or "active participant”, free to participate without limitation (for a fee)?

These parameters may be “tricky” to sound out and properly define so as to be practical, but that’s a “one-time deal”…not an ongoing administrative burden (once defined and agreed). I think the concept has infinite potential in the context in which it has arisen.

In particular, I wish to thank Mark for his open mind on this pivotal subject; all too many in his position have a terminal “not invented here” ego problem. No complex proposal is “reasonably workable” until properly investigated and fully defined.

Best,

WRB

On Jan 7, 2021, at 5:02 PM, J_Catlady <j.olivia.catlady@gmail.com> wrote:

I sort of liked Samuel's idea when I first saw it, but I see problems with it. All of the below pertain to when the group has reached 100:

-Is the group owner supposed, or is groups.io going, to maintain a wait list?
-What about restricted groups with a questionnaire - are people requesting admission supposed to complete the questionnaire knowing they won't be admitted immediately, or perhaps not even knowing at first?
-Is the 14-day pending member limit (before deletion) going to be removed?
-In general, how and at what point, would or should requesting members be notified that the group is temporarily full?
-How, and this is not a technical issue, but how are group owners supposed to figure out whom to remove (and how to inform them) if and when a "more desirable" person requests admission?
-"Try before you buy" also sounds very tricky. How many people will be allowed in on that basis? How would it be kept track of (in case someone tries to repeatedly try), and other issues...

And that's just off the top of my head. When I saw the proposal I liked it at first. But I'm not so sure it's reasonably workable.

--
J

Join main@beta.groups.io to automatically receive all group messages.