Date   

locked Re: Pricing Changes #update

 

On Sun, Dec 20, 2020 at 10:09 AM, PurplePenny wrote:
others do without their own healthcare to pay for their cats
yes
 
--
J

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


locked Re: Pricing Changes #update

PurplePenny
 

I understand that this service has to pay for itself, and luckily my group is grandtfathered so this won't affect it.  However, if I were just thinking of moving to G.Io this would cost me nearly $2000 a year which would be prohibitively expensive for me.  I can' ask members for contributions: many of them are struggling finacially as it is.  One member sold her car to pay her vet bills, others do without their own healthcare to pay for their cats.  They just couldn't afford to donate, and I couldn't afford to pay $2000 from my own pocket.

As other have asked, I wonder which aspect is the most costly.  Could a lower cost per member with a tiered system for added benefits work?  For instance, my group only averages about 5 messages a day, but we do need to use photos and files. We do need occasionally need the message archive going back to the start of the group in 1999 (I had to do one just today!), but I think most message searches are within the last 5-10 years.

Penny


locked Re: Pricing Changes #update

 

That won’t work because a decision was made (which I strongly agree with) a long time ago not to let members know which groups are paid and which ones are not.

On Dec 20, 2020, at 9:27 AM, Drew <pubx1@af2z.net> wrote:

The option for group owners to directly pay for their group (Premium, Enterprise) would still be available. In that case membership would be a freebie for subscribers, regardless of their individual subscription level.

In other words, subscriptions in "paid" groups would not count toward individual subscribers' maximum groups limit. Only subscriptions in Basic (i.e., free-to-owner) groups would be counted.

Drew




In the case of an organization (club, business, etc) the owners of the group would have the option of paying for it and inviting y still have the option of paying for the group

On 12/20/20 11:49, Andy Wedge wrote:
On Sat, Dec 19, 2020 at 11:43 PM, Drew wrote:
I wonder if Groups.io has considered charging subscribers directly
instead of charging group owners. It could be a multi-tier system,
for example:
- FREE: Subscriber can be a member of up to three Groups.io groups;
- $5.00/yr: ... up to ten groups;
- $10.00/yr: ... unlimited groups;
or whatever numbers make sense.
I can see issues with this where someone is subscribed to (using your example) 3 groups and then joins a club that has a membership fee and uses Groups.io for its communication. As a paid-up member of the club, that person should expect the same level of communication as every other member. If a club is prevented from adding (or inviting or approving a subscription request from) a paid-up member because that person already belongs to 3 other unrelated groups it creates a bad impression about Groups.io and a potential headache for the group admin.
Subscribers could always try and work around this by having multiple accounts from different email addresses but being pushed into that when they perhaps they don't want to create a new email address or are not technically capable of managing multiple addresses is not a good situation.
Andy



--
J

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


locked Re: Pricing Changes #update

Drew
 

The option for group owners to directly pay for their group (Premium, Enterprise) would still be available. In that case membership would be a freebie for subscribers, regardless of their individual subscription level.

In other words, subscriptions in "paid" groups would not count toward individual subscribers' maximum groups limit. Only subscriptions in Basic (i.e., free-to-owner) groups would be counted.

Drew




In the case of an organization (club, business, etc) the owners of the group would have the option of paying for it and inviting y still have the option of paying for the group

On 12/20/20 11:49, Andy Wedge wrote:
On Sat, Dec 19, 2020 at 11:43 PM, Drew wrote:
I wonder if Groups.io has considered charging subscribers directly
instead of charging group owners. It could be a multi-tier system,
for example:
- FREE: Subscriber can be a member of up to three Groups.io groups;
- $5.00/yr: ... up to ten groups;
- $10.00/yr: ... unlimited groups;
or whatever numbers make sense.
I can see issues with this where someone is subscribed to (using your example) 3 groups and then joins a club that has a membership fee and uses Groups.io for its communication. As a paid-up member of the club, that person should expect the same level of communication as every other member. If a club is prevented from adding (or inviting or approving a subscription request from) a paid-up member because that person already belongs to 3 other unrelated groups it creates a bad impression about Groups.io and a potential headache for the group admin.
Subscribers could always try and work around this by having multiple accounts from different email addresses but being pushed into that when they perhaps they don't want to create a new email address or are not technically capable of managing multiple addresses is not a good situation.
Andy


moderated Re: Strip digital signatures (smime.p7s) #suggestion

Andy Wedge
 

On Fri, Dec 18, 2020 at 02:58 PM, Bruce Bowman wrote:
It might be beneficial if groups.io simply stripped these signatures instead of applying the group's attachment policy to them.
My group moderates attachments and I have one member who more often than not has a .p7s attachment which I end up deleting. I have suggested to this member that they turn off the option in their mail client that generates this attachment but so far it has fallen on deaf ears.  I'd be in favour of stripping them out if possible.

Andy


locked Re: Pricing Changes #update

 

On Sun, Dec 20, 2020 at 08:49 AM, Andy Wedge wrote:
Subscribers could always try and work around this by having multiple accounts from different email addresses
Don't think so. Groups.io would presumably track the IP address. But in any case, the subscriber-pays idea seems unworkable for a whole bunch of reasons.
 
--
J

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


locked Re: Pricing Changes #update

Andy Wedge
 

On Sat, Dec 19, 2020 at 11:43 PM, Drew wrote:
I wonder if Groups.io has considered charging subscribers directly instead of charging group owners. It could be a multi-tier system, for example:

- FREE: Subscriber can be a member of up to three Groups.io groups;
- $5.00/yr: ... up to ten groups;
- $10.00/yr: ... unlimited groups;

or whatever numbers make sense.
I can see issues with this where someone is subscribed to (using your example) 3 groups and then joins a club that has a membership fee and uses Groups.io for its communication. As a paid-up member of the club, that person should expect the same level of communication as every other member. If a club is prevented from adding (or inviting or approving a subscription request from) a paid-up member because that person already belongs to 3 other unrelated groups it creates a bad impression about Groups.io and a potential headache for the group admin.

Subscribers could always try and work around this by having multiple accounts from different email addresses but being pushed into that when they perhaps they don't want to create a new email address or are not technically capable of managing multiple addresses is not a good situation.

Andy


locked Re: Pricing Changes #update

SBL webmaster
 

Drew wrote:
I wonder if Groups.io has considered charging subscribers directly
instead of charging group owners. It could be a multi-tier system, for
example:

- FREE: Subscriber can be a member of up to three Groups.io groups;
- $5.00/yr: ... up to ten groups;
- $10.00/yr: ... unlimited groups;

or whatever numbers make sense.
That comes at the problem from a different direction, but I doubt that it
would be adequate for Mark either.

The costs of running groups.io fall into several categories. Among them are:

- Fixed costs that don't depend on the number of groups or members
- Per-group costs that grow linearly with the nunber of groups
- Per-user costs that grow linearly with the number of users
- Message delivery costs that grow with the square of the size of a group.

That latter category comes about because as a groups grows, more messages are
generated AND those messages need to be delivered to more people. I suspect
that this is the main reason that Enterprise is priced at 4x the per-user cost
of Premium -- the extra features associated with Enterprise alone wouldn't
justify this.

That said, I too am dismayed at the low thresholds that have been set on group
sizes. I'm in a group of more that 1500 people who share a common interest
that costs nothing, and has no formal organization -- just a bunch of
volunteers who manage and moderate the mailing list and maintain a website
(the webiste is not on groups.io). We just need the email server and the
web access to the message archives. But if we were required to pay for an
Enterprise account because of the size of the group, we'd never be able to
afford it.

-- Dave Tweed


locked Re: Pricing Changes #update

billsf9c
 

Our premium-to-migrate the kitchen sink group has 2000 members... and dropping back to free, 1Gig of memory. In 20 year it has used/collected (billable) 750Megs.

Say, we are good for 5 more years. OK.

All I am saying that to jump from
000$ & 1Gig to
____$ & 20 Gigs is a too-huge leap.

If not 1 Gig to
2 Gigs, 4, 8, 16, etc then maybe
2, 5, 10, 20.

Of course WE cannot see the difficulties in implementing tiers. 1, 4, 16, 32? 1, 5, 20? How the tiers can be economically formed is beyond us.

2nd issue; per Member;

Collecting $1 through some services costs 58 cents. If that was the minimum, collecting $0.10 is 58 additional cents.

3rdly; I was in well over a hundred yahoo lists. Often I'll offered to take over a list to keep it alive. Perhaps some way to give "volume buyers" a break. Speaking annually; 10$/100, 5 for 2nd 100 & each 100 up to 500. 3$ for ea 100 to 1000.
My group of 2000 would be 10+20+15... 45$.

We looked at staying Premium.
We didn't use the services.

The PayPortal was of interest, justnto donate annually, but the provider wanted a cut and it was Wells Fargo, known to have pricing set that was discriminatory toward poor & therefore many elderly. Maybe that has changed. The taste in the mouths of some, has not. I left when the took over 1st Interstate.

And the portal carefully protects us from double paying. Well...  Donate 10$ and you cannot donate 5 more - even if 24 hours has elapsed. The owner must set up a PayPortal with a new donation name.

1 Gig in 20-25 years for a semi-busy list, jumping to 20? "Our HardDrive" would be all dusty in, uh... 400 years...

200$ for 2000 members?
How to collect 10 cents apiece?
Several lists?
Who doesn't get new socks this year for their birthday?

May have to dig out my Hayes1200.

BillSF9c


locked Re: Pricing Changes #update

Drew
 

I wonder if Groups.io has considered charging subscribers directly instead of charging group owners. It could be a multi-tier system, for example:

- FREE: Subscriber can be a member of up to three Groups.io groups;
- $5.00/yr: ... up to ten groups;
- $10.00/yr: ... unlimited groups;

or whatever numbers make sense.

Fees for Enterprise groups would still be paid by the group owners.

BTW, the above subscriber fee structure is still a "freemium" system since those who pay for more make it possible for those who are satisfied with less to go free. In time free subscribers may opt to pay the fee in return for access to more groups.

Drew

On 12/19/20 17:43, JeffH wrote:
I like the idea of having a method to accept donations - especially if the primary motivation is to support the group's existence on Groups.io. I've reminded people that Groups.io is and has been 100% free of advertisements. It's one of the few services left that is like that so in that regard it stands out from the rest.
I manage/maintain 3 different groups on Groups.io - all 3 revolve around amateur (ham) radio. Only one of the groups is in support of an amateur radio club that is 501(c)(3) non-profit and has an annual membership fee. The other two groups are merely discussion boards to support interest groups - definitely not anything even remotely resembling a club.
That said, there are group members that are willing to donate money to support the group's existence on this site. But without an integrated mechanism to support receiving monies, we have to resort to using something like Go Fund Me which is, in my opinion, overkill for the type of money we are talking about for a $220/year annual fee.
I've looked at solutions like Donorbox before but I'm not sure if there's a method for adding custom HTML to allow for adding a button to provide a mechanism to accept donations but I wouldn't be opposed to doing something like that. Hopefully that wouldn't violate terms of service.
It would be great for Group.io to offer an integration with Donorbox (or similar) for this purpose. Is this something that could be considered in the near future?


locked Re: Pricing Changes #update

ro-esp
 

On Fri, Dec 18, 2020 at 04:08 PM, Peter Cook wrote:

Ronaldo, the point about non-US non-profits was already made.
Yes, the moderator could have refused my comment

The question remains how people outside the US should prove non-profit status


groetjes, Ronaldo


moderated Re: Allow members to mute other members #suggestion

 

On Sat, Dec 19, 2020 at 12:45 PM, Glenn Glazer wrote:
Alice and Bob would simply have to accept that limitation
So would Carol and Ted. (groan....)
 
--
J

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


locked Re: Pricing Changes #update

JeffH
 

I like the idea of having a method to accept donations - especially if the primary motivation is to support the group's existence on Groups.io. I've reminded people that Groups.io is and has been 100% free of advertisements. It's one of the few services left that is like that so in that regard it stands out from the rest.

I manage/maintain 3 different groups on Groups.io - all 3 revolve around amateur (ham) radio. Only one of the groups is in support of an amateur radio club that is 501(c)(3) non-profit and has an annual membership fee. The other two groups are merely discussion boards to support interest groups - definitely not anything even remotely resembling a club. 

That said, there are group members that are willing to donate money to support the group's existence on this site. But without an integrated mechanism to support receiving monies, we have to resort to using something like Go Fund Me which is, in my opinion, overkill for the type of money we are talking about for a $220/year annual fee.

I've looked at solutions like Donorbox before but I'm not sure if there's a method for adding custom HTML to allow for adding a button to provide a mechanism to accept donations but I wouldn't be opposed to doing something like that. Hopefully that wouldn't violate terms of service. 

It would be great for Group.io to offer an integration with Donorbox (or similar) for this purpose. Is this something that could be considered in the near future?


moderated "Are you sure you want to discard these 0 drafts?" #bug

 

Very minor bug. When 0 drafts (or anything) selected for discard (or whatever), confirmation message should read "No [xyz]s selected" instead of "are you sure."
--
J

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


moderated Re: Allow members to mute other members #suggestion

Chris Jones
 

On Sat, Dec 19, 2020 at 04:28 PM, Glenn Glazer wrote:
Alice and Bob don't like each other and mute each other.
I must say I have found this thread a bit depressing. As we go through life we encounter all sorts of people we don't want as "bosom buddies" but we have to get along with them on some level and thus have to accept that we cannot avoid them, or they us. Perhaps the most likely scenario is the work environment where we have little or no choice about the people we have to work alongside or deal with in other organisations.

IMHO it says nothing favourable about the characters of the people involved if they are incapable of "live and let live", particularly (as seems to be the case) where neither is actually saying anything that breaks any rules of proper group conduct. 

As group members (and moderators) we probably all groan from time to time at so and so's latest post without feeling any uncontrollable urge to not read the post or perhaps reject it unless there is a genuine substantive reason for that rejection.

I suppose I am trying to say that the people involved should "grow up"...

Chris


moderated Re: Strip digital signatures (smime.p7s) #suggestion

 

Bruce, Mark,

It might be beneficial if groups.io simply stripped these signatures
instead of applying the group's attachment policy to them.
Or better still, check the signature and apply a badge of some kind to the message indicating that there was a signature and whether it was valid or invalid.

Right now, if the group allows attachments, the signature passes through to the receiving members. I haven't investigated whether it is still valid having passed through Groups.io, but if not perhaps it should be stripped before being sent out.

Shal


moderated Re: Allow members to mute other members #suggestion

Glenn Glazer
 

On 12/19/2020 12:41, Shal Farley wrote:
IMO Alice and Bob would simply have to accept that limitation as part of their use of the group. Or unsubscribe.

Shal

Agree, that's the point I was making.

Best,

Glenn

--
PG&E Delenda Est


moderated Re: Allow members to mute other members #suggestion

 

Glenn,

Alice and Bob don't like each other and mute each other. Both are on
digest, so the system has to figure out, on a member by member basis,
which subset of messages go in each digest. This is horribly
complicated to implement and almost certainly not performant.
This already happens for each member's mute or follow choices. So not much new about that part.

Now, we have Charlie, another digest user who is agnostic to Alice's
and Bob's little spat. He's also an email user, not a web UI user.

Is the system supposed to detect this for each mute and
filter it out of replies as well?
It doesn't matter whether Charlie uses individual vs digest, nor email vs web. All that matters is that Charlie quoted either or both of them.

And no, I don't expect the system to do anything novel about such quotes. It already does its best to remove trailing quotes from digest, and to hide trailing quotes on the web. I don't expect any extra effort to detect quotes of muted members.

IMO Alice and Bob would simply have to accept that limitation as part of their use of the group. Or unsubscribe.

Shal


locked Re: Pricing Changes #update

Peter Cook
 

On Sat, Dec 19, 2020 at 12:56 PM, Linda Hamilton wrote:
but I gather that my 20-year-old group of 950 members that was migrated to groups.io in late 2019 and is now a basic rather than a premium group would not immediately be affected.
That's correct. Based on past history, in all likelihood it would never be affected as long as you don't upgrade.


locked Re: Pricing Changes #update

Peter Cook
 

On Sat, Dec 19, 2020 at 12:56 PM, Linda Hamilton wrote:
a charge of $2,000 USD annually. 
For 950 members I believe it would be $522.50 per year, not $2,000. The per-member fee is for all members above 400, so $220 base + 550 x $0.55. 

Per Mark:

Premium

Starting at $20/month or $220/year
Up to 400 members, then $0.05/member/month or $0.55/member/year for each member above that

Pete.

2601 - 2620 of 29680