A Statement Regarding the Future of the Forum

[Gil Jesus]

21 minutes ago, Jean Paul Ceulemans said:

I post on some other free forum carriers and they work find, but you will loose the history cache on this one (wich is one of the key-problems).

About insults, happens on every type of forum... BUT that's why ANY forum should have a good moderator to keep things under control, in this forum I have seen it going wrong a number of times, it's really up to the moderator to take measures.  It's like running a company, you need a boss...  Even on a pay-forum it will go wrong, nothing to do with freebies imo.  A good moderator is needed in both forms

If the forum is not "pay-to-post", there's no benefit to paying. If you offer someone a service and give them the choice of paying or not paying, what do you think they're going to choose ?  In an open posting format, what benefit would the paying member have that the non-paying member would not have ? What incentive do you have to draw new members to the forum ? "Pay-to-post" does that. It offers the paying members the benefit of posting and at the same time eliminates those "members" whose purpose here is only to disrupt, insult and cause chaos.

Only the serious researchers will pay up.

And the "guests" will still be able to read for free.

I get the tradition and the John Simkin legacy thing. That comes from the hearts of well-intentioned people. I get that. But this is about whether or not this forum will exist three weeks from now. This isn't about heritage, this is about survival.

This forum can no longer survive with one person ( first John, then Jim ) taking the burden of the costs alone, nor should we expect him to. That's not fair.

I agree with you that it has to be run like a business, but in order for a business to be successful, it has to have capital. And to ask certain members to pay while excusing others, with no benefit offered to the payer, IMO, just doesn't seem fair either.

That's my two cents worth.

[Guest]

Thanks for your reply, I guess the current contract is probably outdated, a paprameter like 100 users per two days is not like something one can control.  

[Gil Jesus]

51 minutes ago, James R Gordon said:

Gil,

I hope you are not suggesting I insulted you.

If I have I do apologise.

The point I raised was the importance of John Simkin's heritage. For example the breadth of the EF.

It was not my intention to suggest you were not interested in that?

James

No not at all, I was talking about the lone nutters. I doubt they'd stick around if they had to pay. That tells you something about their commitment.

[James R Gordon]

Gil,

I understand your point. It does have merit.

I feel this is am issue for the mebership not the admin team.

James

[Guest]

49 minutes ago, Gil Jesus said:

If the forum is not "pay-to-post", there's no benefit to paying. If you offer someone a service and give them the choice of paying or not paying, what do you think they're going to choose ?  In an open posting format, what benefit would the paying member have that the non-paying member would not have ? What incentive do you have to draw new members to the forum ? "Pay-to-post" does that. It offers the paying members the benefit of posting and at the same time eliminates those "members" whose purpose here is only to disrupt, insult and cause chaos.

Only the serious researchers will pay up.

And the "guests" will still be able to read for free.

I get the tradition and the John Simkin legacy thing. That comes from the hearts of well-intentioned people. I get that. But this is about whether or not this forum will exist three weeks from now. This isn't about heritage, this is about survival.

This forum can no longer survive with one person ( first John, then Jim ) taking the burden of the costs alone, nor should we expect him to. That's not fair.

I agree with you that it has to be run like a business, but in order for a business to be successful, it has to have capital. And to ask certain members to pay while excusing others, with no benefit offered to the payer, IMO, just doesn't seem fair either.

That's my two cents worth.

The problem is, when you are charging people and offer them something for it, you are in a business (let it be a non-profit one), and that's a lot more to keep an eye on (forms and files, bookkeeping, taxes,....).   I think that's what Cory Santos was aiming at.

[Guest]

n/a

Edited August 5, 2022 by Jean Paul Ceulemans

[Benjamin Cole]

Well, hindsight is perfect, but limiting new members in recent years did dry up the pool. 

It would be nice if all members made new members and each other feel welcome, with friendly commentary.

It's OK to disagree, but first acknowledge that the other person put some effort into their presentation, has a different point of view, but is probably earnest in their sentiments. 

Maybe, if we encourage membership and treat each other civilly, we can grow membership, thus diluting costs per member. 

Another problem is the JFKA is receding into history. Worth pondering is if the forum should also place an emphasis on the Deep State in modern context.

We apply the lessons of the JFKA, and media coverage, to current events. 

I plan a post soon on parallels between the 1/6 committee and the WC. Unfortunately, though I plan the presentation as an instruction on the nature and format of state investigations...well, there will be a lot of hostile commentary. 

That's my two cents, and nothing but appreciation in this corner for all of you. 

[Sean Coleman]

I know it’s crass and would spoil the near perfect format here, but could advertising provide extra income? 
 

…and everyone who has donated can have a little gold crown above their avatar head to signify they are JFK assassination research education forum royalty 🤴 

LNers get a jesters head

[James R Gordon]

Sean,

It is not Crazy. If permisable it is something we shou;d look into.

James

[Chris Davidson]

James,

I would appreciate it if you would STOP giving updates on the $5 donation drive until after the week has elapsed.

This defeats part of the reason for having it.

This last page of conversation is another reason for it.

You already informed us that we had enough money to cover September's payment without the $5 fundraiser. 

The $5 donations should extend our Invision subscription through October.

This should allow plenty of time for discussions/concerns about the forward moving direction of the forum.

Of course, there needs to be a discussion cut-off date too. Maybe by the end of August.

This would allow plenty of time for people to have their voices heard.

Chris

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[James R Gordon]

Chris,

I am not sure I agree. But lets leave discussion until Friday August 12th.

James

[Mark Ulrik]

15 hours ago, Gil Jesus said:

Only the serious researchers will pay up.

Or perhaps the biggest narcissists. Why should the people posting the best and most thought-provoking content even have to pay? That people like Pat Speer and a few others choose to post here doesn't pay the bills in itself, but it adds value in other ways that make this forum worth supporting.

I could, however, get behind a payment model that invokes a penalty for using extra large fonts.

Edited August 6, 2022 by Mark Ulrik

[Chris Davidson]

On 8/4/2022 at 4:15 AM, James R Gordon said:

Having the admin staf choose the Paypal owner - especially Kathy who has an excellent knowledge of members - seems a good way forward.

Because of currency transfer I agree the Paypal account owner needs to be American.

It would seem logical if the account is also linked to Invision.

 

Would someone care to get this rolling via a new topic, asking for those interested in the Paypal/financial overseer position

to respond by a set date (How about 4 days from today, after it is posted?)

And then 3 days afterwards for the admin staff to choose a person?

Total Time Frame - 1 week.

 

[Gil Jesus]

5 hours ago, Kathy Beckett said:

I cannot believe what you wrote here.  So if an LN doesn't contribute (and how are you going to know if they do or don't), they cannot be a member?  WOW. That would have to be the same for a CT for something like that to be fair.

This forum has been used for years by all sorts of folk. We started taking donations when we took over the forum, but we barred no one just for money.

What would you do if all of a sudden you had a huge monetary problem, and because of that could not contribute, and therefore could not post about something that has been your life's work?  You don't know what folk go through. I contributed several hundred dollars when we took over (there was a group of us who contributed), but i cant do that now. I only get SS, after tithe, food, and rent, I am very low on funds. I cannot do donations every month. some months yes,some no.  Under the pay rule, I am out, because it has to be fair.

Not to mention upthread, someone brought up about possible problems with the forum requiring "pay to post." This could create problems for the Forum owner.  We don't want that. This is not a business.

 

We just need to streamline the donation part.  That is what we are doing in the next few weeks.

I was hoping that folk would donate to keep the Forum afloat, not just for what they want to see here,or who is gonna run the show.  I thought people cared about this place.   Those who can donate should. 

Up to you guys.

Kathy, I'm retired, I get SS too and I get barely by. I'm aware of the hardship for some but I just don't think that it's fair to ask one person or 10 people to pay for the gas so everybody else can ride in the bus for free. John Simkin, God bless him, took that burden upon himself, but that was a long time ago.

Historically, donations haven't got it done, or else Jim wouldn't be in the pickle he's in. Then there's the question of who pays the shortfall every month when the donations don't cover it ? Somebody's going to have to take that hit.

Donations may keep the forum afloat for a few months, but I doubt they'll be the answer in the long run. They never have been. Down the road, you may have to consider yearly subscriptions for membership anyways.

5 hours ago, Kathy Beckett said:

 

 

  

 

[James DiEugenio]

Yes it does. 

It is the best, most informative and most active JFK forum out there.

And its not just the active members, but there are many lurkers.