# money for macosx borad



## SoniCX (May 5, 2003)

hey where does all the money come for the macosx board? just from the commercial?


----------



## toast (May 5, 2003)

I think it's running on an already commercial server.


----------



## dlloyd (May 5, 2003)

Oh god. Weren't you here when we had that little 'fiasco' and the site was shut down?
It seems to me that the site gets it's money in three ways: 
1) Blackmailing it's users be threatening to remove the site if they don't pay up.  (Yes, I am still mad about that)
2) Displaying stupid never-changing ads (honestly, put something _interesting_ on here!)
3) (I better say this otherwise ScottW is going to flay me alive) Quite a bit out of Scott's pocket.

Don't take this the wrong way though, I love this site


----------



## Sogni (May 5, 2003)

I feel the same way as dlloyd on #1 very strongly!!!
(reason I left, reason I'm not really here -just every now and then cuz I do have friends here, and MAIN reason I no longer contribute to the board. )


----------



## ScottW (May 5, 2003)

Leave then.  Don't hang around. Should we de-activate your account for you? If you hate America leave, that is what I say.

It is sad that some people just don't get it, but do realize that this board is supported in part by...

1) Donations (freely, not via blackmail)
2) Email Accounts
3) Advertisers

Don't blame me for the advertisers not swapping out their ads.

Thanks.


----------



## dlloyd (May 5, 2003)

> _Originally posted by ScottW _
> *
> 1) Donations (freely, not via blackmail)
> 2) Email Accounts
> ...



1) Freely given _now!_ Not at first though.
2) I forgot about these. Make that four ways then.
3) Get some real advertisers then. No one is forcing you to use some lame *** advertiser that switches their ads only twice a year. I was under the impression that most of the ads were for some of your other business ventures or people you were doing a favor to though...


----------



## Alex (May 5, 2003)

You're walking on some thin ice buddy.


----------



## dlloyd (May 5, 2003)

Yeah, I know. It was a risk I decided to take 
I almost got kicked off right after the board went down too. I didn't though. I think most people like me around


----------



## ScottW (May 5, 2003)

Well, the thing is dlloyd... it really doesn't matter what most people think, after all, popular vote doesn't make the decisions around here, nor does popular vote make the decision on who is to be President of the USA.

The slam down is coming... you choose if you want to be smashed. Drop it now and walk away, or cross the line... your choice.


----------



## toast (May 6, 2003)

Ice is getting thinner


----------



## profx (May 6, 2003)

*crack*

uh-oh


----------



## dlloyd (May 6, 2003)

Well, he asked and I gave him his answer! Is there something totally completely morally unforgivably _wrong_ with that?


----------



## ebolag4 (May 6, 2003)

> _Originally posted by dlloyd _
> *Oh god. Weren't you here when we had that little 'fiasco' and the site was shut down?
> It seems to me that the site gets it's money in three ways:
> 1) Blackmailing it's users be threatening to remove the site if they don't pay up.  (Yes, I am still mad about that)
> ...



OK, can't let this one slide by. Here's my two cents (which is probably worth even less than that).

1. It is not blackmail to honestly state to users that the site was going to go down unless some people started contributing. Every infrastructure has a price tag, and that cost is always passed onto the consumer in a capitalistic system.
2. What ScottW said.
3. Never forget this one. Scott was the founder of the site, paid for it initially out of his own pocket, and (I'm guessing here) probably still spends a good chunk of cash keeping it running.

Scott, I want you to know that there are some of us who love and appreciate not only what you've done here, but even the methods you have employed to get the job done. You've been criticized for numberous things (such as the above, and the whole "censorship" thread), but I for one thank you for those decisions. If I were to run a board in the future, you and you're would be my model.

Keep up the good work!!!


----------



## Sogni (May 6, 2003)

We're not saying that people shouldn't contribute or donate...
It's not the WHY that pissed me (us?) off, it's the HOW...
I think I can safely say that we don't have a problem with that AT ALL.... 

It's just the WAY it happened that felt oh-so-much like blackmail (kidnapping for ransom) - and also felt it as a big slap in the face. Ok financially I didnt contribute but at the same thing it was like saying that my contributions with help to others didn't count for squat...

*That didnt mean I didn't like the board*, and WOULD HAVE contributed financially if it was ASKED in the proper way (email asking for help woulda done it for me, or how about a banner? Or instead of shutting it down - a "splash page"?)... 

I guess I was especially disguested that the site was shut down right when I needed it the most! 

And no, I don't need yet ANOTHER email address, I got tons of them - and have my own domain 'n server... 

So I left in disgust... 

But like I said, *that didn't mean I didn't like the board*... 

And no, I'm not naieve to know what it takes to run a site like this - if I had to pay regular hosting fees and traffic fees for my server and a high-traffic site or two then I'd be in a rough spot myself...

Nor do I have anything against anyone here...

In the end, this is your site to do as you will... At least I've gotten it off of my chest - do what you will with it.


----------



## dlloyd (May 6, 2003)

Yes Sogni, _*we.*_ 
I second pretty much everything that Sogni said, with one major difference: _I *can't* pay_. I don't have an income. Shutting down the site for people who can't/wouldn't pay anyway didn't do any good, it just made us mad.
Sure, Scott started the site, but without it's users, how much good would it really be? I donate probably an hour or two _daily_ of my time to reading and answering people's problems. I don't think I should have to pay also. I'm going to invoke something my Mom once said about a church: (sorry for you non-Christian people, I don't want to start a war  ) "It takes three things to keep a church going: money, work, and prayer." Now, some people decide to donate monetarily. Some people can't do this, but they work by cleaning the church. Elderly people can't do either of these things, so instead they pray for the church.
Now, to relate this to our board: some people (Site Supporters) are sending money. Others (Admins, Moderaters) are donating work. Still others (many hard working people, such as myself ) are donating time to help people with problems. (which is what this site was started for, wasn't it?)
Now in my church, at least, neither of these gifts is concidered any smaller than any of the others, even though we are financially struggling. Maybe this isn't a good example, but I thought this was a good metephor for my views.

Oh, and sorry for bringing this back up, we've just opened old wounds, haven't we?


----------



## Randman (May 6, 2003)

> it really doesn't matter what most people think, after all, popular vote doesn't make the decisions around here,


 It's your site Scott, your rules. And I have no issues when you're chomping at the bit when a couple of posters are being buggers.
 BUT quotes such that the above can come across as quite petty and reflect a bit poorly on the site. I use this site because I think it matters what people have to say and that maybe it matters what I have to say. I contributed because I get good information on it and an occasional laugh.
  BUT when the owner of the site declares that no one else matters, than it comes across as heavy-handed and a touch mercenary.
  Sometimes you can attract more flies with sugar than you can vinegar, even if some of the flies are pests.


----------



## ScottW (May 6, 2003)

Yea, but it takes a good dose of poison to get rid of the rodents, and their is plenty of poison to go around. Those who enjoy the board and use the board and don't cause trouble aren't rodents and shouldn't need to worry about being attracted to the poison. Those who think they are holier than thou and deserve extra special attention will find the poison to be fairly attractive.

If you have rats in your house, you have to have poison. Who really wants to attract flies anyhow, I know I don't. 

Just remember, it's the rodents that keep the good people away.


----------



## dlloyd (May 6, 2003)

*cough* *cough* *wheez* *hack* *sniffle* *snort* *whine* *gasp* *silence....*

H-he p-p-put d-down _chilly p-powder!_

*sob*


----------



## toast (May 6, 2003)

ScottW said:

*1) Donations (freely, not via blackmail)*

This site closed a few months ago. Instead of it, you could find a page saying donations from users were welcomed to finance the site server.

Was it blackmail ? Was it a menace saying 'this site is closed, no hand in some ca$h or you'll never get this site again ?'

No? The truth is: the closing down was timed. A week or so. Whatever the donations were, the site reopened. Okay, a special 'Gold' forum had opened. Two rooms out of a dozen rooms. I'd like to know what can be said in those rooms, as I didn't contributed: "Oh, that's so great to have a private room", "Oh yeah". I didn't contribue and still, I'm over 1500 posts. And post everyday.

Thus, Scott is 100% right. This site asked for donations. Those who still feel frustrated should worry about themselves. I can understand the anger on the first week after the closing (I was angry indeed) but look, *almost* nothing has changed for us non-payers.

I do not think, and this my own opinion, that Scott was dictatorial or brutal in his method to ask for donations.

*2) Email Accounts *

Indeed. And those who can live without @macosx.com addresses are happy people.

*3) Advertisers* 

I like the fact ads don't change. My eye knows them so well I don't see them any more. Perfect !


----------



## dlloyd (May 6, 2003)

LOL, funny about the ads, toast 
I was just answering a question, I didn't mean to bring this whole debate back up again...


----------



## toast (May 6, 2003)

Well, you did. Not so bad, finally. Retrospective debates are instructive indeed.


----------



## edX (May 7, 2003)

instructive - in what way? i haven't heard anything new. just the same complaints that i got tired of hearing when the site reopened at that time. 

and since that time, the site has grown in both members and activity. it has done nothing but get better. i have no idea what you still have to whine about. and there is a constant reminder that the site still needs contributions and yet you can see for yourself that they don't come flooding in. when the real choice was between shutting the site down and getting people's attention and shutting it down for good, which one would any of you prefer? 

and yes dlloyd, we need posters as well as financial contributors to make the site strong - always have. but how would you suggest that the site could have been left open to a select few based upon 'merit'? 

to quote the Eagles - "Get over it".


----------



## toast (May 7, 2003)

> _Originally posted by edX _
> *instructive - in what way? i haven't heard anything new. just the same complaints that i got tired of hearing when the site reopened at that time.*



Nobody is forcing you to read this thread, Ed. I personnally find it instructive to have some questions re-emerging soe time after, just to see if opinions have changed or not.


----------



## dlloyd (May 7, 2003)

Like I said, I meant to answer a question, I did not mean to bring up this old argument... I agree with toast in his last post, but if I remember correctly, it was a combination of ScottW and Sogni who actually brought the 'debate' back to life.
My opinion (again) is this: I have no problem with the site asking for donations, it all comes down to the way it was done. I think it was too heavy-handed to shut down the site _without warning_. What I think should have happened is that you asked for donations, if you didn't get enough, then you warn that the site may close for a few days, and if they still don't come in, _then_ close the site. At least then people have a chance to donate _before_ such drastic mesures are used.

Better toast?


----------



## Sogni (May 7, 2003)

Yeah, what dlloyd said.


----------



## edX (May 7, 2003)

> _Originally posted by toast _
> *Nobody is forcing you to read this thread, Ed. I personnally find it instructive to have some questions re-emerging soe time after, just to see if opinions have changed or not.
> 
> *



wrong. you might notice i am the moderator of this forum. as such, it is my responsibility to read every post in it. 

all i can say is that carrying around all this anger at what happened isn't very good for anyone, especially the people who are angry.


----------



## dlloyd (May 7, 2003)

I'm not angry! 
I'm just trying to defend myself.


----------



## toast (May 7, 2003)

> _Originally posted by edX _
> *wrong. you might notice i am the moderator of this forum. as such, it is my responsibility to read every post in it.
> 
> all i can say is that carrying around all this anger at what happened isn't very good for anyone, especially the people who are angry. *



You are right, you have to read the contents. But nobody forces you to have an opinion on them 

Your second point carries much truth though.


----------

