Author: Stuart Cracraft
Date: 11:54:03 08/24/04
Go up one level in this thread
Steve, c is right. Set a fee that doesn't scare off half the tribe and take it from there. I'd make it high enough so that you don't have to raise it for a long time. Be sure to include a "lifetime membership" option as well. Suggest: 1) monthly 2) yearly (should be less) 3) lifetime (even less) Stuart On August 24, 2004 at 12:31:14, Steven Schwartz wrote: >Dear CCC Members: > >I have just re-read this post, and I apologize for its ridiculous length, but I >feel it necessary to tell the membership what is on my mind, and I welcome >feedback. I understand it is not "on topic" and for that I apologize, but, I >believe, it is very important to the CCC and CTF.... > > >When the Computer Chess Club began about 7 years ago, ICD was asked to host it, >I think, because the Founders knew that we sold all the chess software and >dedicated chess computers on the market and, perhaps, that we would do a good >job keeping it up and running. And, even though it has not always been a sea of >serenity, I think, overall, we have kept our promise to make CCC and CTF, >elections and all, a reliably consistent place to visit. > >But things have evolved over the years. The software and dedicated chess >computer market that were once a profit center in themselves, have become an >"accommodation" or even a loss leader for chess customers who buy chess boards, >pieces, tables, clocks, etc. > >The profit from chess software and dedicated chess playing computers is down >dramatically because of an abundance of places on the Internet from which anyone >can buy. And, as you know, there are more and more instances of programmers >marketing directly to the end user not to mention freeware chess programs >galore. > >I have no issue with any of the above. This is a capitalistic marketplace, and >competition will lower the price to the consumer. This, of course, is good for >the consumer, at least in the short term. But it does make it difficult for >those selling the product to maintain the support services that are no longer >properly funded with the profit that was once made. We have chosen to not lower >the quality of our service to our customers one iota, but that has left no room >for extraneous expenses. > >Bottom line is that any capitalistic advantage that we once had by hosting CCC >(and CTF) has dwindled to nothing, but the time, work, and expense of operating >the CCC and CTF have not. > >So, what's the answer? There are several choices: > a) some other organization can take over the responsibility of hosting and >running CCC and CTF > b) CCC and CTF can be disbanded and members can rejoin the USENET Newsgroups > c) members can pay a yearly fee to belong > d) members can voluntarily contribute > >My preference would be either "c" or "d" because I think it is safe to assume >that "b" would be a disaster just as it was back in the mid 1990s, and I do not >think many people want to return to that era. I, personally, do not like "a" >because even though I am sure someone would volunteer to take over the hosting >responsibility, the time and effort and skill of running elections, fixing >problems, coordinating moderator issues and communication, and keeping the board >basically free from unwanted intrusion, is something that we are constantly >working on and fine tuning. This is not a project that runs on its own. And >given a choice between "c" and "d', I would prefer to ask for donations before >forcing everyone to pay. Assuming those who gave voluntarily were generous >enough to make up for those who would choose not to contribute, I think we would >do fine, and we would not have to be concerned that members would drop out >because their free entertainment suddenly had a price attached to it. > >I think everyone will agree that the board, the great majority of the time, runs >extremely smoothly. I am not much of a poster, but I visit and read CCC and CTF >several times a day. I am sure many of you are equally obsessive. I like the >idea that ICD is the host of the CCC and CTF, and I am proud of what we have >helped to create, but I believe it is time for the members to help defray the >expenses. For 7 years that has been our burden, and for the first 4 of those >years what we got back in sales from members basically made the hosting >bearable, but for the last 3 years or so we have absorbed the work and cost, and >it does not look as if the industry is getting any better for the retailer. > >Something needs to be done. I have known it for a long time, but I have said >nothing until now because I felt I owed something back to the chess computer >industry, and I did not want to be perceived as being greedy. But we are way >beyond that point now. > >So, that is the way I perceive issues related to the CCC and CTF. Perhaps you >agree and perhaps you don't, but I am willing to hear what the membership has to >say, and I welcome your thoughts. >Steve >ICD/Your Move Chess and Games >www.ChessUSA.com
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.