moderated Re: Samuel's Paid User Proposal #suggestion
I’ve said this already but I’ll chime in to say that for me, the only realistic options are (a) owner o okays all plus enhanced donations and (b) everybody pays. To use the word “convoluted” to describe the Samuel plan, as Sara did, is understatement. The complexities are so bad that they’re laughable (I literally lol’d reading his and Sandi’s posts about the care and maintenance of the “free slots” - no offense to Samuel, it does sound great on the surface and at first glance). IMO that plan is so bad that it could actually have fatal consequences. I don’t even think all the downsides have been recognized or appreciated yet.toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
That all said, I don’t know how “everybody pays” woukd work for my block group. Most members are silent snd just receiving posts. It’s affordable here, but it woukd be difficult to round everyone up to pay. But we are grandfathered so I’m not worried in our particular case. Membership is critical for people on the block (information during emergencies, etc) so it’s important at this point that the group stay as is. The people in my cats group I don’t think would have a problem paying, and if they didn’t, it’s not as critical for them. But again, grandfathering is important to me because I want to avoid the perception that people are paying *to be in the grouo*, with all the inherent possible legal problems. (Paying *to join groups.io* is different and acceptable.)
On Jan 15, 2021, at 5:05 AM, Tanya's Feline CKD Website <email@example.com> wrote:
Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones.
My humanity is bound up in yours, for we can only be human together. - Desmond Tutu