 Poster: A snowHead
|
This is - in essence - a club, a society, a village well, a coffee machine, a gossip shop, a font of knowledge. Over the coming months, maybe years, it will be built by hundreds or thousands of different people. It will contain a mass of information, written by a highly-motivated gang of contributors dedicated to wintersports. It could become very valuable indeed.
Who owns it? Who should own it? Who should control it? Should it contain advertising? Should it be sponsored? Should it be available for sale? Should it one day fall into the hands of an internet baron? Does it matter?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
I don't care who owns it, or profits by any posts I make, although it is a subject that needs to be addressed. I like being able to swap knowledge with others. I do agree that it is a valuable resource and I think that the SCGB should have compiled all the hard facts into either a book or an on-line resource that could have been accessed by all. This site should do the same in the not too distant future. It would be a great asset to be able to search opinions (because that is what most of the posts are), by a subject and get a return with threads regarding that subject. The threads that drop off the site are a lost resource.
If this becomes a club, in the true sense I will join just to show support.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
He who pays the piper calls the tune, and I doubt that this facility is free (even the Domain Name registration cost something).
I belong to a car club (http://www.cliosport.net)which is internet based, and we pay a nominal £5 per year which pays for the upkeep of the website. Non members are more than welcome I should add!
I guess this approach could work here.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
I'd imagined that U Brain owns it, as he gave it to us and only he can take it away (amen). But then I don't know anything about t'internet. Or business law come to think of it. What actually is there to own? (appears I don't know much about intellectual copywright either)
Are we members, or just registered users?
Does U need some cash to keep SnowHeads alive? If so, happy to contribute (though I hope that wouldn't make me a shareholder or anything vulgar like that).
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
In the technical sense, we are all registered users....however I guess in the spirit of things we are members of the snowheads contributors club 
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
|
|
|
|
|
That's what I thought. It's time for us all to share the challenges and share the costs of an expanding site. No? This is the nearest thing I've seen to epicski.com, which has been hugely popular because of its independence, but remains (as far as I know) under one guy's ownership and control. I'm not sure what happens if he's run over by a Pistenbully.
Would a cooperative business model be appropriate here? The sub price per person could presumably be very low, but I don't think we should follow the contribution policy adopted by epicski. Better to have a compulsory subscription, maybe.
As this thread develops, U Brain (who I take my hat off to) might want to express his own vision for this pup.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Good old SQL server 
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
There is a thread over on Suggestions about PayPal donations which may be relevant.
If this is to be an open forum, by definition it must remain free of charge to those who register.
If however it needs money to survive then advertising, sponsorship, voluntary contributions or whatever have to be considered.
|
|
|
|
|
|
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
|
|
I'd oppose any subscription. It would discourage a whole pile of people; if cash really is an issue than I think we should go by voluntary appeal...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Not necessariy, Ian. It could be free for a month, then a very modest sub. The BBC is not a bad model of strength and independence through mass public financing via the licence fee. The problem with your last sentence (not, not the camel !) is - WHO MAKES DECISIONS about ads and sponsors? Maybe we're better off without them, if the thing is cheap enough to run with a cheap sub?
If this site is to be a happy collective bunny then it must avoid the same trap the SCGB has fallen into - a remote secretive committee. Can't we all pay and discuss the strategic decisions here on this magnificent round table?
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
|
Sorry, that referred back to Kuwait Ian. Not Ian H.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
Getting 200+ (at the last count  ) to agree on a collective decision could be impossible. That is why most organisations have an elected committee. However, I think any organisation that takes money off you has to be open to scrutiny and input. If this site does go in that direction, then all debate must be in the open for subscribers to scrutinise.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
DG mentioned epicski earlier.
It was the brainchild of one guy, and he now has another guy who helps as his assitant in running the site. They refuse advertising, but do have links using Amazon, etc, where, if you click on the link to get to the site, they then get a couple of cents on any order that's placed.
The other thing they do is accept voluntary donations (using paypal) to cover the costs. In the early days this made no difference to access, although it changed your user title from being a "member" to a "supporter", more recently they set up a supporters lounge, a private area only accessibly to those who donate. A donation can be anything from $0.50 to $500. Part of the reason for the supporters lounge was to have an area for free discussion - on politics, etc, which they don't like on the rest of the site, as it can cause a lot of friction.
I don't think we need a pay only section, but I do think that it would be good to set up a way that we can support the running of this site.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
I would be very much against making anyone pay simply to use this forum. However if SnowHeads were to become something more than this forum (e.g. a club), then it may be appropriate to charge a membership fee, but only if it were clear what the club was for and what the benefits of membership would be.
If SnowHeads remains simply a forum (even if it becomes the best snow-sports open forum on the web), I think running costs should (and would) be met from voluntary contributions.
Advertising - do we need it? I would imagine that voluntary contributions alone would be more than enough to support the forum. However as this is u brain's baby, presumably it is his decision whether or not to accept advertising, and if there were any profits they would be his. And, if I can accept for a moment that capitalism really isn't that weird, fair play to him.
Committees - they don't have to be remote and secretive David!
Sorry, not much of a conclusion there, but I think David has started a potentially fascinating discussion thread with this. I look forward to seeing where it goes.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
|
What's wrong with forced payment? It would be the price of a peanut compared to the cost of a ski holiday!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
| David Goldsmith wrote: |
| What's wrong with forced payment? It would be the price of a peanut compared to the cost of a ski holiday! |
Quite. For example, a 'subscription charge' of £5 is the equivalent of buying the site-owner a beer in a resort bar, and I'm sure we'd all be happy to do that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
| Quote: |
What's wrong with forced payment?
|
Why pay when it;s so easy to set up something free? You pay for added value, as all the record companies are now discovering - added value may be articles etc, but access to a forum is not a valid ebough reason on its own for forced payment
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forced payment discourages new members. What I mean is, if someone can log on to a variety of forums, why would they log onto one they must pay for?
(also some of us are allergic to peanuts)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I think it's U Brain's call. He had the cojones to pick up the forum ball (to continue the metaphor) when the SCGB dropped it. A model could be for him to invite a steering committee with relevant experience to plan and then implement the future direction of the site. The independence, objectivity and breadth of experience is valuable, at least to us, and we should (in my opinion) nurture this site and see how it might grow. To do that U will need some money and some time from skilled people. I am sure both those things exist, even amongst the 200 members we have now.
I'm excited by the possibilities.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
I think the Ski Club had the right idea (before they shut us out  ) Allow people in for free, but have a premium service that attracts a fee.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Telford Mike. You refer to "site-owner". In a way that's the key issue, for all sorts of reasons. I've no problem at all with U Brain enjoying huge pride at what he's put into place, and us all buying him gallons of drinks in future (!), but the ownership of this site, its content, its commecial exploitation (if that's the way it goes), and its possible sale are things we may wish to control.
We're writing the content, and it's our existence as 'numbers' who create the asset value of the site. So why don't we all cough up and maintain control of the site the way we want it?
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
| Wear The Fox Hat wrote: |
| Forced payment discourages new members. |
This is true. One way round it is to limit the amount of posts that guests can make - 2 per day for example. This means that they can participate sufficiently to feel part of the community, and hence will be more likely to become a 'subscriber'.
|
|
|
|
|
|
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
|
Wow is that a plaudit for the SCGB !!!! 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| David Goldsmith wrote: |
Telford Mike. You refer to "site-owner". In a way that's the key issue, for all sorts of reasons. <snip>
We're writing the content, and it's our existence as 'numbers' who create the asset value of the site. So why don't we all cough up and maintain control of the site the way we want it? |
You're quite right David, and I'd love to cough up. I'd much sooner pay for things that have value (like this site), than have to rely on the largesse of the host.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
|
Things are moving fast - I was referring to Elizabeth's posting. Must remember the refresh button if I get interrupted in mid composition.
Last edited by You know it makes sense. on Mon 16-02-04 16:14; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
I think I'd prefer adverts & the like on the site. How do other free sites keep going?
Ones that spring to mind are the Magicalia sites like http://www.bikemagic.co.uk/
I've really no idea how they run, but they are a commercial site that requires no fees from users.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
I'm not sure how much time U Brain has but once you start with fees and/or advertising the whole thing turns into a business and needs much more time. On the otherside if UB doesn't do anything the increased internet traffic and server/storage costs could really put financial pressure on him.
Either way I can see UB needing time and/or money.
If UB does decide to go down the advertising route perhaps people could help by putting local ski outlets (e.g. Snow & Rock, Field & Trek) in touch with UB. Having said all that pop-ups are a pain in the rear end so static advertisements like BikeMagic and OutdoorsMagic use are prefered.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
|
Carefully selected and appropriate advertising gets my vote along with a subscription fee, albeit a low one. A steering committee, as suggested earlier, seems like a good idea to provide direction etc.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
I've bene in contact with the magic boyts abvout setting up a snow site (and mentioned it to Sir David, after MO day but before I found this site).
Microsoft are now phasing out pop-ups from MSN and their other sites as theyve finally bowed to user pressure and admitted that 99.9% of people hate popups (the people who pay for them being theonly ones who like them)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
|
|
|
|
|
I agree with WTFH. Any kind of forced payment is going to put people off casual browsing.
I also paid for Epicski, simply because I'd been using it for so long and gained so much valuble insight and information from it. It just seemed natural to contribute.
If your going to base a forum on something, It might as well be Epic.
I'm also dead against advertising. Especially these intrusive floating pop ups with carefully hidden close boxes 
Another US forum, Powder, did that and it wasn't well recieved at all.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I'm happy to pay a voluntary contribution rather than subscription - I'm sure those that want to, and want the forum to continue, will pay
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
OK, but what about ownership of the site? If you make voluntary contributions to someone who maintains proprietorial ownership of your work (and your existence as a member of a large and valuable readership to potential advertisers), that proprietor will be delighted!
But shouldn't you be a co-owner of what you're creating, so that you also co-control the destiny (and operation) of the site?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This is where things get more abstract. A club can define ownership in its constitution. Unless there is some sort of mutually agreed document, control (and therefore ownership) will rest with the owner of the domain.
Does anyone know whether it's possible to 'own' the intellectual property in a site like this? Have there been any precedents?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
