Re: Samuel's Paid User Proposal
#suggestion
Scott Chase
RE: "Second, you're already grandfathered in, as I understand it."
Again, being "already grandfathered" would be inconsequential, if a $2.50 paywall was added in front of us.
|
|||||||
|
|||||||
Re: Samuel's Paid User Proposal
#suggestion
On Tue, Jan 12, 2021 at 09:00 PM, Shal Farley wrote:
I was going to suggest that perhaps there should be a plan that includes no free slots, for group owners of your persuasion.I thought of that and immediately blew it off. This whole idea pits groups against each other. "This one is free," "that one charges," etc. -- J Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones.
|
|||||||
|
|||||||
Re: Samuel's Paid User Proposal
#suggestion
On Tue, Jan 12, 2021 at 08:51 PM, Scott Chase wrote:
Do any of you who have well-established, huge groups here care at all how this might impact all the many new tiny groups who just recently paid $220 to transfer all our groups over here from free Yahoo?First of all, I'm not in favor of Drew's "everyone pays $2.50" proposal. I just think it's heaps better than Samuel's proposal where you have to pay to get into a group if you've over the group limit. I think Mark's original, unblemished plan (or proposal, depending on whether you believe it's cast in stone or not - there has been some question about that) is best. Second, you're already grandfathered in, as I understand it. And for the record, although it's not relevant, my group is far from huge. And I'm grandfathered in, too. I am just concerned about how Samuel's proposal would affect the forces swirling around groups.io as a whole if people can, or have to, pay to get into groups that are past their limits. -- J Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones.
|
|||||||
|
|||||||
Re: Samuel's Paid User Proposal
#suggestion
J, Right. IMO too complicated, both logistically and politically/psychologically. Better for everyone to pay the yearly $2.50 completely unrelated to any specific group. Drew's suggestion. I was going to suggest that perhaps there should be a plan that includes no free slots, for group owners of your persuasion. But there's a numeric question that comes into play: In Mark's original Pricing Changes number of included members x the per-member cost equals exactly the base cost of the group (for both Premium and Enterprise, monthly or yearly). Subtracting off the included members would leave a plan cost of zero. If we exclude Basic and Enterprise groups from this option it may be ok for a type of Premium group to have a zero base cost, or a very nominal one, so long as every member (including the owner) has a paid Groups.io account. Shal
|
|||||||
|
|||||||
Re: Samuel's Paid User Proposal
#suggestion
Scott Chase
"Everyone" paying $2.50 is not better for "everyone". Please, each group has different circumstances. I don't want a $2.50 user paywall added to access my group. It will die. And I suspect that many of the other tiny group owners who don't follow [beta] would probably agree. Do any of you who have well-established, huge groups here care at all how this might impact all the many new tiny groups who just recently paid $220 to transfer all our groups over here from free Yahoo?
Scott
|
|||||||
|
|||||||
Re: Subscribers leaving before pricing change
#misc
If the new price changes reflect the cost of doing business. large, free lists like mine will not be grandfathered forever, I plan on in two or three years having to become a paid list or quit.
Obviously if upgrading to a paid list will be required not now but in a couple of years, over the next five years it makes sense to upgrade before the price increases. Most organizations are lucky to keep their promises, not to change anything for current members for two years, after three years all bets are off. I only saw Mark make a promise not to force large free lists to upgrade on Jan 18th. After that I saw no guarantee that it wouldn't happen in 2022. Have we seen price changes in recent years? Sure. Do I expect to see pricing changes in the future after implementation of a new price structure? Yes. I should also plan accordingly. ken RCardona posted:
6:14am #27809
If a change doesn't affect your group, why would you bother your group with this information until such time that it would? You're creating anxiety and panic for yourself and your group members without benefit. I don't get why you did this and then are putting this back on Mark when it doesn't affect your group.
Robert
|
|||||||
|
|||||||
Re: Samuel's Paid User Proposal
#suggestion
Right. IMO too complicated, both logistically and politically/psychologically. Better for everyone to pay the yearly $2.50 completely unrelated to any specific group. Drew's suggestion.
-- J Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones.
|
|||||||
|
|||||||
Re: Samuel's Paid User Proposal
#suggestion
J,
In my opinion: no refunds. The site would say that before you pay (we're talking about $2.50 here). Others have suggested that Groups.io have a generous no-questions-asked refund policy. I'm fine with that too. Either way,
if the member can't have (or doesn't request) a refund then in addition to membership in his/her desired group, the member gets the reassurance that the group owner has no motivation to kick him/her out to make a slot for someone else. Maybe there's a waiting list for them, as has been suggested before. If so hopefully such a list could be automated somehow so that the group owner doesn't need to manage it. Maybe it is optionally controlled by owners that want to manage it (select who gets the next slot), otherwise the slots could be filled in the order that people entered the list. Shal
|
|||||||
|
|||||||
Re: Samuel's Paid User Proposal
#suggestion
What happens when a group’s member count is at its free limit, a member pays for a year’s worth of groups.io specifically to get into that group, and a week, a day, or an hour later the group loses two members, bringimg its count down below the free limit? If this happened in a retail situation the store woukd honor the discounted price (I’m this case, zero).
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
So it’s another potentially fraught refund situation. People are going to know that there is a charge precisely when a group reaches its free limit. The group’s member count is always displayed on the home page (and if the “free limit” is not also displayed, it will be a simple matter for midt to soon figure it out). So they are going to be aware that they paid to get in, the group has once again become “free,” and they are going to feel that they deserve a refund.
On Jan 12, 2021, at 4:14 PM, Shal Farley <shals2nd@...> wrote:
-- J Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones.
|
|||||||
|
|||||||
Re: Samuel's Paid User Proposal
#suggestion
Leeni
-------Original Message-------
On Jan 12, 2021, at 3:43 PM, Leeni <leeniluvsgroups2@...> wrote:
-- J Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones.
|
|||||||
|
|||||||
Re: Samuel's Paid User Proposal
#suggestion
I think the ability to pay your way through is worse.
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
On Jan 12, 2021, at 4:14 PM, Shal Farley <shals2nd@...> wrote:
-- J Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones.
|
|||||||
|
|||||||
Re: Samuel's Paid User Proposal
#suggestion
Leeni,
To me, the alternative (Mark's Pricing Changes alone) does not seem preferable:
"I am going to do a search for kitty groups and maybe I can join one. Why should I have to wait around to see if XYZ Kitty group ever has an opening when there are others with probably many of the same members that I can join that aren't full." At least with this Proposal the would-be member has the option. Shal
|
|||||||
|
|||||||
Re: Samuel's Paid User Proposal
#suggestion
Leeni, I think that’s a slightly diffrent issue. People would be unable to join any group after it has reached its limit even under Mark’s proposal.it’s not a matter of paying to join the group or whether or not it’s free. It’s a subtle difference.
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
On Jan 12, 2021, at 3:43 PM, Leeni <leeniluvsgroups2@...> wrote:
-- J Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones.
|
|||||||
|
|||||||
Re: Samuel's Paid User Proposal
#suggestion
Leeni
-------Original Message-------
On Jan 12, 2021, at 2:51 PM, Glenn Glazer <glenn.glazer@...> wrote:
On 01/12/2021 14:40, J_Catlady wrote:
p.s. You think people don't talk to each other? At least in the cats groups world, and no doubt in other universes as well, people are always yabbing to each other about which group they just joined, which group they recommend, etc. -- J Relying on people to not conspire with each other is not a safe approach. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Security_through_obscurity Best, Glenn -- PG&E Delenda Est -- J Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones.
|
|||||||
|
|||||||
Re: Samuel's Paid User Proposal
#suggestion
On Tue, Jan 12, 2021 at 03:20 PM, J_Catlady wrote:
They post this within another group, and members of that group start applying for membership in the fabulous xyz kitties groupAnd BTW, this happens all the time. It's one main way people find out about a lot of the cats groups. -- J Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones.
|
|||||||
|
|||||||
Re: Samuel's Paid User Proposal
#suggestion
Glenn gets it right here. And imagine the confusion, if not anger. “I just joined the xyz kitties group, it’s great, highly recommended.” They post this within another group, and members of that group start applying for membership in the fabulous xyz kitties group. But wait! “Hey, I just applied there and had to pay for some general groups.io membership!” “What are you talking about? That didn’t happen to me.” “ Maybe they are rejecting you?” Etc etc etc Multi-person conversation.
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
On Jan 12, 2021, at 2:51 PM, Glenn Glazer <glenn.glazer@...> wrote:
--
J Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones.
|
|||||||
|
|||||||
Re: Member Page is Blank for Moderators?
#bug
On Tue, Jan 12, 2021 at 8:43 AM Sandra <sancole827@...> wrote:
This should be fixed now. Thanks, Mark
|
|||||||
|
|||||||
Re: Samuel's Paid User Proposal
#suggestion
Glenn Glazer
On 01/12/2021 14:40, J_Catlady wrote:
p.s. You think people don't talk to each other? At least in the cats groups world, and no doubt in other universes as well, people are always yabbing to each other about which group they just joined, which group they recommend, etc. Relying on people to not conspire with each other is not a safe approach. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Security_through_obscurity Best, Glenn --
PG&E Delenda Est
|
|||||||
|
|||||||
Re: Mobile/desktop menu flip
#bug
Thanks for the explanation, Mark. Sparked a few questions in GMF.
The system still needs a little tweaking. See attached screenshot on what I get when the viewport is exactly 1239. Bruce
|
|||||||
|
|||||||
Re: Samuel's Paid User Proposal
#suggestion
p.s. You think people don't talk to each other? At least in the cats groups world, and no doubt in other universes as well, people are always yabbing to each other about which group they just joined, which group they recommend, etc.
-- J Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones.
|
|||||||
|