[Theforum] meo barriers (was community vs. corporation)

Warden, Matt mwarden at mattwarden.com
Sat May 25 15:27:31 CDT 2002


marlene wrote:
>So this means someone can become a member, wait 30 days, submit an
>application stating what they'll do with their site, and wallah ...
>they're eligible to be approved. While it is suggested, they aren't
>*required* to give back to the community at all.

C'mon Marlene... you are completely misrepresenting that page. They're
"eligible" without meeting the 30 day suggestion. They just dont' have a
very good chance of being approved. Equally so are the rest of the
suggestions on that page which you didn't mention:

<quote>
Also please note that accounts are not automatically given out. In fact,
if this is your first time to evolt.org, the chances of you getting
approved for an account are pretty slim. What helps your chances for a
members.evolt.org account?

*Having written an article pertaining to web development for the evolt.org
web site.
*Having been a member of evolt.org for more than 30 days.
*Contributing to the evolt.org mailing list.
*A recommendation from a current evolt.org member.
*A combination of these things.

Community is a two way street! What's your contribution?
</quote>

It doesn't say "you are automatically approved after having a weo account
for 30 days".

In fact it mentions contribution right there.

Each of these things listed above HELPS their chances of being
approved.

If you want to change the wording on this page, that's one thing. But,
I've handled meo apps in the past and am doing so right now. So, I guess
that means I know what the barrier is.

>The barrier I'm talking about is asking people to contribute back to
>evolt.org for the service we're providing

Which is exactly what it asks.

>contribution could take the
>form of either a monetary/item donation or by participating in
>evolt.org in a significant way (or both if a person chooses).

Which is exactly how it's always been. The difference here is that we're
considering a "mandatory donation (with exceptions, of course)"

>Why is asking people to give back a bad thing?

It's not, nor has it ever been.

If you want to talk about this, lets' talk about it. Quit spending the
time wording and  misrepresenting things. Otherwise, we're back to the old
admin, getting nothing done.

>>We're exploiting the popularity of the meo service because we feel we
>>have to.
>
>Dan was our angel investor/supporter. Dan has chosen to leave and
>take his monetary support with him, which is his right. In doing so,
>he has removed our former ability to give our services freely. Now we
>have to do something else. We must find a way to support our services
>or they'll go away, which won't help any of our members.

Great! That is exactly what I said in once sentence. Except, Dan wasn't
our only investor. We got parts and donations from many people, even
those who had/have no involvement in evolt.org.

>However it would be wonderful if you could offer an alternative. Do
>you have any ideas how we can sustain evolt without going to
>corporate backers (and potentially compromising our unbiased,
>non-commercial status) and without asking our members to contribute
>back to the organization?

Why would we not ask our members to contribute? We always have.

Why would we not seek corporate sponsorship/donations? We always have. We
just need to keep them like the ChiliSoft deal.

When did I say to not charge for meo? In fact, I said we feel we have
to. I'm included in that "we." My issue is that it's being represented as
a needed barrier, which it isn't. And it's also being represented by some
as money that will *only* be used to keep meo alive, which it isn't.

I'm just asking that we're clear on what we're changing here, so everyone
on theforum knows exactly what we're doing.

This just isn't an issue of "we need more of a barrier on meo." Just as I
have deferred to you on financial matters because you know more about them
than me, you should probably consider that I've been intimately involved
with meo for a long time and know exactly what the barriers are and aren't
and whether or not we need a larger one.

It's also not an issue of "meo users should be contributing to the costs
of running the meo service that they use." In reality, they'd be paying
for meo and carrying the other services to one extent or the
other... while the people who use those other services are not required to
contribute anything.


Thanks,

--
mattwarden
mattwarden.com




More information about the theforum mailing list