Author: Swaminathan
Date: 04:15:03 10/26/05
Go up one level in this thread
On October 25, 2005 at 21:25:34, Bruce Moreland wrote: >On October 25, 2005 at 14:30:30, Uri Blass wrote: > >>On October 25, 2005 at 11:59:39, Swaminathan wrote: >> >>>On October 24, 2005 at 13:35:13, Bruce Moreland wrote: >>> >>>>On October 24, 2005 at 13:24:28, Peter Skinner wrote: >>>> >>>>>On October 24, 2005 at 09:59:17, Mike Hood wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>I don't know how the moderation team discovered this, but I hope it's the start >>>>>>of a new trend. After all, it's part of CCC's charter that everybody should use >>>>>>their real name. If it were up to me I'd require proof of identity on >>>>>>registration, and re-registration should be demanded from all current members by >>>>>>causing all current memberships to expire on a certain day. A small one-time >>>>>>registration fee, payable by cheque or credit card (not cash!) would furnish >>>>>>adequate proof, as well as giving a boost to the funding of CCC. >>>>> >>>>>Interesting idea, and I like it. >>>>> >>>>>You wouldn't even need to charge a fee to become a member but the use of a >>>>>checking account or credit card with an pre-authorization charge (a charge that >>>>>is not actually billed, but verifies card/account holders information) then I >>>>>believe we could seriously illiminate some of our problems. >>>>> >>>>>Here is the only problem with the idea. >>>>> >>>>>If we were to have 15,000 members, most credit card companies charge a 40-50 >>>>>cent transaction fee, even on the pre-auth's. >>>>> >>>>>15,000 x .40 = $6000 >>>>> >>>>>Even if we were to only get 5000 _real_ users out of the number that is in the >>>>>database, then that is still a fee of $2000. >>>>> >>>>>A better way of doing it would be a $1 fee via PayPal. >>>>> >>>>>Again you get authentic information, and $1/person to help Steve out with costs. >>>>>This wouldn't be a yearly fee, but every little bit helps here. >>>>> >>>>>Wouldn't you agree? >>>>> >>>>>Peter >>>> >>>>A registration fee at CCC would mean we would get no new members. >>> >>>yes,Some great programmers here like Fabien wouldn't have given us his monster >>>Fruit >> >>I believe that Fabien's decision to release Fruit is not related to this forum. Talking about commercial release,tournament participation and beta testers[Jaochim],he has been motivated to some extent by people here.He never would have updated the fruit 1.0 version thereafter,his first released version would still have been his last update. >>Uri > >This forum wouldn't exist if Steve charged to post here. It is bad enough that >you have to register to read it. Our community would be much bigger if you >could read the forum without registering, because people would see a post they >wanted to respond to, and register. No,Not for this place,It is beneficial for CTF,as it is one of the best forum I have ever come across. >bruce
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.