Forum menu
I love the forum, and I use it a lot (way too much maybe?).
I like to pay what's fair for things I use, so I contribute to Wikipedia for instance. Seems fair.
I'd be gutted if STW and the forum went tits-up.
For this reason I have happily increased by payment.
APF
Personally, I am deeply uncomfortable with any idea of ‘charity’ for STW.
I can see both sides of the argument here. The thing is though, there will be members who want to help and are in a position to do so. This is enabling them to do that. There will be some who simply cannot afford to, or don't want to, and that's absolutely fine too.
Humble has been successfully running a "pay what you want" model for years. They have a minimum price point for whatever they're hawking, but there's always someone who will pay like £100 for a £10 book bundle (they publish a top 10 contributors list).
The argument that "I'd rather give it to charity" is bogus IMHO, if you're in a position to be giving away money then these aren't mutually exclusive. It's the "we should ignore bad things because worse things exist" argument.
It seems most members are here for the forum and that is what they pay for….. That is the case for me anyway, I don’t read the mag at all.
"Seems" is doing some heavy lifting here but, this is surely this is self-fulfilling. The prolific forum posters are, well, posting on the forum; those who are only here for the magazine, how would you ever know?
Grrrr....gnash.... Dec 2021 my annual sub failed, 'cos my debit card renewed. My "account " still has a "pending order" against it for full subs, which I don't want anymore (only ever flicked through the mags cos I liked the smell 🥴). I remember trying to swap to digital only and failed. Just tried again and got caught in a continuous loop "You cannot ammend your subscription as you have items pending" or something like that. I suppose I should email them or something...
The fact remains that posts by ‘free members’ may drive some threads but that does little, if anything, to support STW’s finances.
As for the fatuous statement made by ‘free members’ when this has been raised previously that their posts keep the site going, no they don’t; money keeps it going which explains why the much complained about ads are a necessity.
It’s clear that overt appeals from STW Towers have been unsuccessful in converting ‘free members’ to paying subscribers so I have absolutely no problem with twonks’ post.
Just look at the number of posts from ‘free members’ in threads referring to acquisitions of new shiny things showing they’re happy to spend money but won’t support the forum they use to talk about said acquisitions.
My conclusion is clear – and I’ve posted it before so won’t repeat it.
A request to any ‘free member’ – just remind me of the cost of one take-away coffee.
It’s less than a monthly digital sub.
Not quite sure why I chose this post to reply to...
I am a very reluctant Free Member. I feel bad about it and would happily revive my subscription to use the forum.
But it's been made clear that Forum isn't STW's focus. I've mentioned a couple of defects that absolutely need to be fixed IMHO and if they ever are I will be subscribing like a shot. But until then I felt that I needed to match my actions with my words.
<Edit. My post above makes sod all sense, so I'll try again on the back of something above....
The forum does not subsidise the magazine. In many ways it’s the other way round.
Is it not that members are paying for a magazine membership in order to use the forum ad free and thus it is, in part, the forum funding the magazine?
I’d happily pay the same if I knew all of that money was going to making the forum what I am paying for, not funding a magazine I don’t read
I completely concur. I would happily pay a decent whack for the forum if that money was
1) recognised as being paid for the forum
2) used in significant part to improve the forum
The fact that Mark ( I think it was Mark) seems to have data that shows the Mag supports the forum is exactly what has made me cancel my sub. I assume he was including me in that cohort that apparently pays for the magazine and subsidises the forum.
If they implement an option to allow payment to be recognised as Forum them I'd probably pay it. But there's no way I am continuing to pay for something I don't want so that STW can turn round and say " look, we know you want it as you're paying for it"
I can no longer live with the temporary shame of spending the last 2 yrs on here as a freeloader. It has been interesting tho', I think I managed a "You're being too shouty now here's a little ban" and a couple of pile-ons which were fun🙄. By all accounts, with my full member status, I can jump on pesky upstarts with my new issue Crush-the-Free-ass-Johnnies badge. Ooh, and maybe grow a beard so that I can give it a little scratch and get all debatey? Or maybe I've been black-balled? Anyhoo, I'll sort it out...see you all in another life (sunlit uplands and all that 🤗)
thegeneralist - you could set up a small standing order, say £5/month, without opting for a subscription and tell yourself you're specifically supporting the forum.
I would happily pay a decent whack for the forum if that money was
1) recognised as being paid for the forum
2) used in significant part to improve the forum
That's just not how the world works. You don't buy a Mars bar and get to dictate how much money goes to the shop or to Mars Inc. Your "road tax" goes into a big pot with all the other taxes, it doesn't pay for the roads. Would you happily pay more Council Tax if you knew it wasn't going to be wasted on public transport you don't use?
How would you suppose such a model might look anyway? STW maintaining two separate bank accounts and working on either the magazine or the forum depending on which was larger?
You might not like it but, without the rest of the business the forum wouldn't exist. So in supporting the site/magazine you are supporting the forum.
Great to see my post has got us talking and sharing views and opinions opinions.
With the benefit of hindsight, I should have introduced it as ‘what is singletrackworld worth to you?’, as what I ended up writing does sound like I’m asking for charitable payments - which as such more than justifies the reasoning and questions posed since.
My intention was never to dig about for more money using a ‘pity’ approach. If it came across as such, I apologise.
Either way, nice to see the conversation flow.
PS. The worth of STW to me is more than what I was paying, so I increased it. Perhaps I should have just said that to start 😂
Timely reminder for me, I was thinking of cannng my (print) sub as the last couple mags (especially last issue) has drifted away from what I want to read about but I do browse the (Bike) forum so will renew my sub again in January.
the last couple mags (especially last issue) has drifted away from what I want to read about
I'm the opposite! I subscribe for the print mag, I prefer to read print, love the paper, smell and visuals, and the forum comes with it, so here I am ...
Do we have a tech deficit?
Yes. In staff numbers
Technical debt is not technical deficit. Technical debt is more to do with technical fragility, things that work but only just, that are hard to alter, that is a struggle to understand. Bodge in bodge on bodge. Things that make it hard to improve, modify that people are scared to replace because it breaks everything is tightly woven into your system. Short cuts results in more work in The end
thegeneralist – you could set up a small standing order, say £5/month, without opting for a subscription and tell yourself you’re specifically supporting the forum.
I'd be more than happy to...
As soon as the "Threads I have posted on " and "Google search dates" issues are fixed.
That’s just not how the world works. You don’t buy a Mars bar and get to dictate how much money goes to the shop or to Mars Inc. Your “road tax” goes into a big pot with all the other taxes, it doesn’t pay for the roads. Would you happily pay more Council Tax if you knew it wasn’t going to be wasted on public transport you don’t use?
Your analogy works fairly well for my second point, but not for the first one, which is more important in my view.