Forum Participation Question

[Roman Kurywczak]

I have a questions and poll for both members and participants which will probably be another sensitive topic......so let's remember to keep it civil!:w3

How long should BPN allow partcipants to post in the forums. Right now, it is indefinite.....which raises some concerns behind the scenes so I would like your feedback on your choice.

1. Participants can participate indefinitely

2. Participants have 1 year to participate and after that period, join or not be allowed to post.

3. Participants have 6 months to participate and after that period, join or not be allowed to post.

4. Participants have 3 months to participate and after that period, join or not be allowed to post.

5. Particpants have restricted areas that they can partcipate without joining.

[Jay Gould]

Three months works for me. If you do not realize the benefits from a $20 investment - tough!

[Steve Kaluski]

With the wealth of knowledge, the high calibre & diversity of images from around the world and the overall growing content of the Forum, $20 is a bargin and as Jay said, a good investment too.:cheers:

[Dumay de Boulle]

All I have to say is being a BPN member is the best $20 (R140 South African Rands) I have ever spent:S3::cheers::5

[Stu Bowie]

Even us South Africans as Dumay mentioned pay 140 bucks, well thats our exchange rate to the dollar, and I feel its worth every cent. You get to see images from across the globe, and make friends too. :w3

[Roman Kurywczak]

I forgot to vote.....until now. I like the idea of 3 months with no restrictions.......so new people to the site can take it for a "test drive"........after that trial period.....you would have limited/restricted access.

[Jay Gould]

I forgot to vote.....until now. I like the idea of 3 months with no restrictions.......so new people to the site can take it for a "test drive"........after that trial period.....you would have limited/restricted access.


Limited to looking and not posting!

[Roman Kurywczak]

Limited to looking and not posting!

Correct! May tweak the time to say 4 months.....but that should be enough.

[Jay Gould]

Lets hold out for three and compromise at four when management says six! :cheers:

[Mike Tracy]

Unless voting is restricted to members only the results might not be accurate. I will speculate most forum participants check indefinite :w3

I say 3 months is ample time to pony up or move on.

[Jay Gould]

Duh! Now why didn't Roman think of that?:2eyes2:

A very valid observation!

[Roman Kurywczak]

Unless voting is restricted to members only the results might not be accurate. I will speculate most forum participants check indefinite :w3

I say 3 months is ample time to pony up or move on.

I agree on the 3 months Mike.....but as for the members who vote.....I checked the box to show who voted. In your poll......are the numbers underlined? If you click on it......can you see the members names? That way we can judge if the voting is stacked:bg3:. I'm from NJ.....so I may know a thing or 2 about that:2eyes2:. I beleive we've had dead people vote in a few elections:eek:.

[Roman Kurywczak]

Duh! Now why didn't Roman think of that?:2eyes2:

A very valid observation!

See above:bg3::c3:. Can you see who voted when you click on the numbers in the poll? You are supposed to......I can:t3......so we are making sure the deck isn't stacked. I had a lot of coffee today.......so the hamster is running full speed up in the noggin'!

[Mike Tracy]

I agree on the 3 months Mike.....but as for the members who vote.....I checked the box to show who voted. In your poll......are the numbers underlined? If you click on it......can you see the members names? That way we can judge if the voting is stacked:bg3:. I'm from NJ.....so I may know a thing or 2 about that:2eyes2:. I beleive we've had dead people vote in a few elections:eek:.

Gotcha. I can see the names.

Your pretty sharp for being primarily a landscape guy.

[Roman Kurywczak]

Gotcha. I can see the names.

Your pretty sharp for being primarily a landscape guy.
Ouch! I might have to fix that misperception:w3!

[arash_hazeghi]

haha Roman that's scary the votes should be anonymous!!!!

[peter delaney]

The amount of time and money we spend on our photography , why would someone need 3 months to think about spending $20 on a forum were they can show case their work ,learn from their peers and become a member of one big cosmopolitan family:S3:

[Bob Decker]

What everyone seems to be missing is that a large part of the income potential for a site like this comes for advertising. Big visitor numbers drives advertising desireability and value. Next, is the sale of products, the promotion of books and of workshops. Again, the more accessible the site the higher the sales are likely to be. Membership fees are likely a very small part of the money flowing into this site. The fee is more to off-set the cost of hosting images on the site's server than to pay the bills.

[Roger Clark]

I voted for one year. In this day and age there seems to be an attitude that the internet should be free. I think if the limit were set to 3 months, some people who may occasionally visit may not be here long enough to realize the benefits to becoming a paying member. To encourage participation, I vote to be on the easy side as it may take a while to convince some people.

Let me add also that the image quality level from people who post on BPN is well above the the average photographer, especially beginners (and some with decades of photography experience) who may aspire to take pro-quality photos. They may be surprised to learn how far apart their photos are from the great photos they thoguht they were taking (when they had gotten many Wow! great photo! comments on other sites). So it may take them a while to even get to a level of being comfortable in posting in eager to learn, let alone the bird forum. I think an early requirement for those people may be too soon for them to be comfortable. Obviously, such cases are the very ones who could be helped the most, but that is our perspective having the insight. They have to come to that same realization on their own and it takes time.

Roger

[Bob Decker]

It's probably also worth noting that membership provides a number of benefits not offered to non-member participants. There are advantages to paying to play. Personally I don't see the need to force membership. Apparently the current business model works for the forum owners. Who am I, as a participant, to tell them how to run their business?

[Dave Leroy]

So I guess the way this is going to work is from the first time a person posts and/or does a search the clock is ticking. Otherwise and no change here, a person can lurk indefinitely.

I think it took me a couple months to join after finding the site and i was actively looking for some way of getting started with constructive feedback.

So speaking for the ETL types out there, I think 6 months is a good compromise to entice those not sure or confident enough to get going.

Dave

[Roman Kurywczak]

Great thoughts expressed by all and all valid IMO. I hope more poeple vote to get a better understanding of both the members and participants.

[Harshad Barve]

The day I seen this forum , I became member , no need to allow forum participants to see everything for FREE and PARTICIPATE , If you can spend $$$$$ for equips , 20 $ is nothing for learning how to use it

Just my 2 cents :S3:

[Harshad Barve]

4. Participants have 3 months to participate and after that period, join or not be allowed to post.
.
I can agree on of FP being able to see forum for some time , but they should not be allowed to PARTICIPATE :S3:

[Maureen Allen]

I agree with Harshad. Why not let people look around all they want (and for as long as they want) but limit them to just that. No participation until you pay. This site is so worth the small investment and if people really want to learn, it's a ridiculously small price to pay for an incredible education.

[Jim Neiger]

I think we want as many members as possible. To do this we need to attract them to the site, demonstrate the value, and then give them an incentive to join. I think a 6 month cutoff is good for this. Many people are busy and three months may not be enough time to demonstarte the value if their visits are infrequent. 6 months seems reasonable to me. We want to err on the side of too much time, not, not enough time.

[Jim Neiger]

I can agree on of FP being able to see forum for some time , but they should not be allowed to PARTICIPATE :S3:

We want them to experience the thrill of getting great comments on their work or ideas.

[P-A. Fortin]

I voted for one year. In this day and age there seems to be an attitude that the internet should be free. I think if the limit were set to 3 months, some people who may occasionally visit may not be here long enough to realize the benefits to becoming a paying member. To encourage participation, I vote to be on the easy side as it may take a while to convince some people.

Let me add also that the image quality level from people who post on BPN is well above the the average photographer, especially beginners (and some with decades of photography experience) who may aspire to take pro-quality photos. They may be surprised to learn how far apart their photos are from the great photos they thoguht they were taking (when they had gotten many Wow! great photo! comments on other sites). So it may take them a while to even get to a level of being comfortable in posting in eager to learn, let alone the bird forum. I think an early requirement for those people may be too soon for them to be comfortable. Obviously, such cases are the very ones who could be helped the most, but that is our perspective having the insight. They have to come to that same realization on their own and it takes time.

Roger

Could not have said it better myself.

[Mostly because of my English, but that's not the point here.]

[Hilary Hann]

I voted for one year. In this day and age there seems to be an attitude that the internet should be free. I think if the limit were set to 3 months, some people who may occasionally visit may not be here long enough to realize the benefits to becoming a paying member. To encourage participation, I vote to be on the easy side as it may take a while to convince some people.

Let me add also that the image quality level from people who post on BPN is well above the the average photographer, especially beginners (and some with decades of photography experience) who may aspire to take pro-quality photos. They may be surprised to learn how far apart their photos are from the great photos they thoguht they were taking (when they had gotten many Wow! great photo! comments on other sites). So it may take them a while to even get to a level of being comfortable in posting in eager to learn, let alone the bird forum. I think an early requirement for those people may be too soon for them to be comfortable. Obviously, such cases are the very ones who could be helped the most, but that is our perspective having the insight. They have to come to that same realization on their own and it takes time.

Roger

Good points Roger, would possibly change my vote if I had read this first but too late now.

[Roman Kurywczak]

Jim brings up some very good points as well for allowing longer acess. Hope more people chime in!

[Jamie Strickland]

I voted for one year. In this day and age there seems to be an attitude that the internet should be free. I think if the limit were set to 3 months, some people who may occasionally visit may not be here long enough to realize the benefits to becoming a paying member. To encourage participation, I vote to be on the easy side as it may take a while to convince some people.

Let me add also that the image quality level from people who post on BPN is well above the the average photographer, especially beginners (and some with decades of photography experience) who may aspire to take pro-quality photos. They may be surprised to learn how far apart their photos are from the great photos they thoguht they were taking (when they had gotten many Wow! great photo! comments on other sites). So it may take them a while to even get to a level of being comfortable in posting in eager to learn, let alone the bird forum. I think an early requirement for those people may be too soon for them to be comfortable. Obviously, such cases are the very ones who could be helped the most, but that is our perspective having the insight. They have to come to that same realization on their own and it takes time.

Roger

I agree with Roger

[Tom Graham]

The poll has 57 votes.
The thread has 1,374 views.
What does 1,317 abstains mean?
Tom

[Hilary Hann]

Tom, I have looked at this thread many times, every time someone posts a reply. Sorry that I've bumped up the viewing count, others may have as well. Some may not want their name to appear next to their vote. Some haven't decided yet. Lots of reasons why a vote may not have been made. Also, can non members/participants look at the thread even though they can't vote? Many reasons.

[Tom Graham]

AH HA, so Hilary, you are confessing , you are the one viewing 1,317 times!!!!
Way too much time on your hands!!! Don't you have any more color photos you can make into B&W???
Tom
no stupid clown face here so I'll use :t3

[Hilary Hann]

1318 :bg3:

[Steve Kaluski]

Tom I assume you have now placed your vote, so lets not add to the numbers Boys & Girls. :w3

[Bob Decker]

The poll has 57 votes.
The thread has 1,374 views.
What does 1,317 abstains mean?
Tom

Maybe that unless the forums' publishers are the ones asking the question it's all moot? Or perhaps it means they're just happy to be here and don't really care one way or the other if paid membership is forced? Maybe even several, like Hillary, keep getting drawn back to check results like so many moths drawn to the flame! :w3

[Roman Kurywczak]

Like many, I have checked the results myself to see how it was going. I'm not going to speculate as to why people looked but didn't vote ....but it doesn't require a PhD to figure out that some participants would love to see it continue indefinitely and just use the site. I am only a moderator....not an owner. The final decision will of course be thiers.

I do take issue with the term "forced membership" above by Bob. I know of no company that allows you to use their product for free indefinitely. Why should it be any different here?

[Bob Decker]

I do take issue with the term "forced membership" above by Bob. I know of no company that allows you to use their product for free indefinitely. Why should it be any different here?

First, Roman, I'm a paid subscriber by choice. If however I come to feel the owners or their representatives treat me in a disrespectful or unacceptable manner that could change when renewal comes due.

Secondly, should I list the number of photography forums on the interwebs that do not require a subscription fee for participation? It would become quite a long list. Similarly, there are a number of forums that do require a paid subscription in order to participate, usually with a short free subscription allowing folks to see and decide if they want to spend their hard earned cash. In my possibly simple mind that is a form of "forcing membership" on folks who want to participate. It's non-negotiable... you pay to play or don't play at all. I'm not sure of your definition of "forced" is but being "required" seems pretty close to mine.

It makes no difference to me. Not my forum. I have no major financial investment in it nor, because of that fact, should I have any major role in decision making. As long as I see the value in membership I'll continue to pay. There are advantages to membership here... advantages that have value to me beyond payment being a requirement of participation.

Now at this point, Roman, I'll stop expressing my opinion. Because you, as a representative of the owners, have made me feel uncomfortable doing so. Enjoy your conversation and poll that apparently is only interested in one side's opinions.

Later,

[Roman Kurywczak]

I don't want you to feel uncomfortable.......that is why I posted the thread in the first place to get feedback. The owners did not ask me to do this......I chose to do this on my own as many of us have debated this behind the scenes!
You mention a list of forums that are free. Tons of ads too. Do any of them actually critique? I have visited most of them so I feel quite comfortable saying they don't.
#1 reason I posted this poll is to see how others felt. Over 85% of the responders feel there should be some limitation although there is disagreement on how long. Should we disregard their thoughts? That is all I was trying to point out and I hope some of the 1000+ viewers chime in.

[Doug Schurman]

Hi Roman, <?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>
You have made a couple comments here I wanted to respond to.<o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>

<o:p></o:p>
I know of no company that allows you to use their product for free indefinitely.<o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>
Actually there are lots of companies. All the major TV networks do. Many services on the Internet do too, and they are not all pure informational either. Logmein.com has a free service to connect to any PC on the internet for no charge. Of course they also have paid versions too. They must think the more exposure they get to free users the more their paid users will grow.<o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>

You mention a list of forums that are free. Tons of ads too. Do any of them actually critique? I have visited most of them so I feel quite comfortable saying they don't.
<o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>
I visit three Bird Photography sites<o:p></o:p>
birdforum.org<o:p></o:p>
juzaforum.com<o:p></o:p>
BPN<o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>
All three have critiques. Certainly I would say BPN has the highest level Photographers on average of the three. However the other sites have their strengths too. <o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>
Regards,<o:p></o:p>
Doug<o:p></o:p>

[Roman Kurywczak]

Hey Doug,
You mention the major TV companies. If we had the ads they do.....the forum would look something like this: 16 minutes of responses or viewing time.....and 14 minutes of ads for every half hour......don't think we would be around too long:bg3:!.....although I do think the owners group would be ecstatic at the revenue stream!

In all seriousness.....How much do the other forums charge and what is the participation? I know the 2 others major nature forums charge more. I will check the others out.

[Desmond Chan]

Maybe even several, like Hillary, keep getting drawn back to check results like so many moths drawn to the flame! :w3

Then each of them have to do it about from 25 to 38 times :bg3:

[Desmond Chan]

I don't like this poll if you ask me...for obvious reason but, seems like a trend is coming...


What everyone seems to be missing is that a large part of the income potential for a site like this comes for advertising. Big visitor numbers drives advertising desireability and value. Next, is the sale of products, the promotion of books and of workshops. Again, the more accessible the site the higher the sales are likely to be. Membership fees are likely a very small part of the money flowing into this site.

Bob is correct !!

Apparently, this thread together with the previous "haven't you learned anything here... shame on you not paying...it's only $20" thread tell us that some here are not happy about the non-paid participants.

If it were up to me (then of course not am I crazy?), if I still want both paid and non-paid participants, here's what I would do:

1. Non-paid members are restricted to accessing and participating (read and post) BPN Community and Discussion forums (except Buy & Sell) only. No time limit.

2. New, non-paid participants could post 20 (or whatever number the management feels comfortable and add time limit if necessary) images for critiques and no more participating (see, post or respond) until becoming paid-members.

Reason for 1 is to maintain traffic. You need that to attract advertizers. Reason for 2 is, as you would agree, because the critique forums and the educational materials here are the main selling point of this site and valued by most if not all participants.

Something I've noticed: Chas a week or so ago posted a question here. The responses he got here was and still is: 4, including his own. Chas posted the same question to the other paid-site (you know the one that charges more). How many responses he got on the first day? When I checked and that was not the end of that day yet: 10. Now is 44. As far as I can tell, this is not an isolated example. Another reason for 1 above.

And, why didn't members here answer Chas's questions, huh?

And that other paid site, they don't mind featuring an image from non-paid member either :w3

You don't just compete with other paid sites, you compete with free sites as well.

Should internet be free? I don't know. But last time I checked, many good information could still be obtained from the internet, including Roger's own :S3:

Oh, we all still have to pay for accessing the internet.

Price is a factor in deciding whether to buy or not, but it's not the major factor in a lot of time.

Like it or not, that's it for now.

[Hilary Hann]

I don't really mind the free participants, especially if they bring knowledge and enthusiasm to the sub-forums. Likely these participants will end up becoming members anyway. What annoys me more is the number (paid and unpaid) who post images but never or rarely comment on anyone else's image. I know it can be difficult but if you can see that someone is trying hard to comment there is a lot of good will engendered. Not much can be done about that, except the repeat offenders tend to have very few comments after a while.

[Bob Decker]

I promised I was going to back out of this discussion but I guess I'm one of those moths being drawn to the flame!


I don't like this poll if you ask me...for obvious reason but, seems like a trend is coming...



Bob is correct !!

Apparently, this thread together with the previous "haven't you learned anything here... shame on you not paying...it's only $20" thread tell us that some here are not happy about the non-paid participants.

I don't understand that mentality. When I chose to spend my $20 it was for the convenience of uploading images here rather than hosting them elsewhere. Easier image posting and it took a little load off my website's server. There are a few other perks but that was my primary motivation. If others don't mind linking the images they post I'm alright with that.


If it were up to me (then of course not am I crazy?), if I still want both paid and non-paid participants, here's what I would do:

1. Non-paid members are restricted to accessing and participating (read and post) BPN Community and Discussion forums (except Buy & Sell) only. No time limit.

2. New, non-paid participants could post 20 (or whatever number the management feels comfortable and add time limit if necessary) images for critiques and no more participating (see, post or respond) until becoming paid-members.

Reason for 1 is to maintain traffic. You need that to attract advertizers. Reason for 2 is, as you would agree, because the critique forums and the educational materials here are the main selling point of this site and valued by most if not all participants.

There's nothing in a "pay to play" scheme that benefits me as far as I can see. It my actually be harmful. How you ask? The larger the number of participants the better the odds of drawing comments on images from them and, I'd expect, the greater number of posts being added. For members trying to learn that's more opportunities to do so. For those pros trying to sell workshops, webinars and such it equates to a larger audience to try to sell to.

Now if you may be thinking that second aspect, larger audience for the pros, isn't particularly beneficial for you as a novice or amateur. Simple question for you, who's input and advice do you think is more valuable? That coming from other amateurs or that coming from pros? If your answer is pros then maybe doing things to attract them is beneficial to you.


Something I've noticed: Chas a week or so ago posted a question here. The responses he got here was and still is: 4, including his own. Chas posted the same question to the other paid-site (you know the one that charges more). How many responses he got on the first day? When I checked and that was not the end of that day yet: 10. Now is 44. As far as I can tell, this is not an isolated example. Another reason for 1 above.

And, why didn't members here answer Chas's questions, huh?

And that other paid site, they don't mind featuring an image from non-paid member either :w3

I've noticed that myself. Responses to posts here seem to be much fewer and farther between than on that other site. There also seems to be more of a clique mentality here than there. It feels like if you're not part of the "crowd" your posts tend to be ignored. Even on a tiny little site that's shy on members like Wildlifesouth.net posts seem to draw a larger number of comments. Perhaps there's a bit of an elitest mentality here? Would that also explain the seeming dislike of "freeloaders" who aren't paying their $20 per year?


You don't just compete with other paid sites, you compete with free sites as well.

Should internet be free? I don't know. But last time I checked, many good information could still be obtained from the internet, including Roger's own :S3:

Oh, we all still have to pay for accessing the internet.

Price is a factor in deciding whether to buy or not, but it's not the major factor in a lot of time.

Like it or not, that's it for now.

The comparison was made between this site and TV and the question raised if we'd mind more advertising. I don't find the banner ads on that other site at all annoying. So no, I wouldn't mind additional ads here. I pay a much larger fee for access to a huge wedding & portrait photography forum portrait. The amount of advertising there is greater than on either of the nature sites being discussed. But there's another difference too. That site is for professional photographers only. It's a place where they pay to openly dicuss business issues and ideas. Definately a different environment than a forum open to all.

More food for thought.

[Roman Kurywczak]

Let's keep it civil gentlemen:bg3:!

I have been a moderator her on the site for over 3 years now. I posted this poll mostly because of what Hilary commented on......people posting images but not commenting on others......so I was wondering if this was due mostly to participants or members. Put yourself in my shoes.......would you want to comment on someones images who wants your opinion yet doesn't feel they want to become a member for a prolonged time and become part of the community? Mods don't get paid for this! We are volunteers. My time is becoming more and more precious and scarce......yet it still gives me satisfaction in helping others by critiquing.

To me, participating in the forums and not becoming a member of the community shows disrespect to the moderators. Why should they spend their time critiquing those who only "use" the site and don't want to become part of the community?

Perhpas this is a topic for another thread.

[P-A. Fortin]

I think you can be a part of this community without paying the 20$ (as much as you can pay the 20$ without being involved). To me these are 2 different issues.

As of members who want your opinion without becoming part of the community, this is a tricky one.

Let's come up with an example: me :eek:. Photography-wise, I suck. Normal, I started 6 months ago. Hence, I made 2-3 posts in the ETL forum, got very useful comments and critiques there and just reading around these forums has lead to obvious improvement into my technique so far. Yet, at this point, I would definitely not feel comfortable to come out and critique the work of other much more experienced photographers. I could easily get a "Come back when you make sense" reply from them. Obviously this would not happen here since people are too nice for that, but you get the idea. So instead I try to get involved some otherway, for example in this discussion (though I have the feeling this is about to turn into a jello-wresting contest). But these are small isolated opportunities for me at this point to get involved. The whole point being: I can make a very good use of the comments and critiques on this forum, being a beginner. However, before I get to the point where I feel comfortable and have opportunities to get more involved, this will take some time. Maybe alot of time. In my humble opinion, much more than just 3 months.

Let's pretend there is a 3 months restriction before you have to pay. Most likely, newcomers such as I would run away before they get to the point where they feel like/realize this 20$ investment would be worth it. It takes a bit of time and courage to go on and post something you know is crappy to get advice from much more experienced people. If you feel from the start you are some kind of an "outsider", being a non-paying member, this might be enough to scare the new guy away to other forums/communities. Which might cut the supplies of fresh blood to this community and maybe even turn it into a close circle of highly experienced photographs simply "high-fiving" each other whenever they post their pictures. I doubt the result would be that harsh, but this is definitely not what you would be aiming for here, right?

I have been reading these forums a bit for over 3 months before I actually created an account so I could start posting. Most users would simply have created an account and waited to see what happens. Just look at how many users have 0 posts and yet are active on a daily basis. What if you cut the possibility for them to post before they even actually made their first post? And how would you handle people creating a new account under a false name every 3 months just to bypass the rule?

I understand how you may feel regarding the involvement of some members. However I believe the success of this community lies in the voluntary involvement of their members, not into forcing them to participate or go away.

[Roman Kurywczak]

Good points P.A. ! I do think the participation is another issue......and one that should be addressed in another thread. If you look at the top of each forum....there is a sticky adressing your fear of critiquing. Perhaps we should make that more visible?

[P-A. Fortin]

Nha, it is visible enough. I did read it. Even with it though, it is still a "mental step" to dive in the first time and put your images to "the test".

And at this point, I fear more of writing a critique than receiving one :bg3:

I don't mind someone telling me that my picture is crappy, as long as it comes with an explanation that makes sense. This way I'll learn something and get better, which is the whole idea behind this.

However as of now, due to my lack of experience, I would fear criticizing someone's picture because I am not sure my explanation would make sense

2 different "fears of critique" :S3:


As of participation, maybe for another thread indeed, but while at it... I do not know if vBulletin (the forum software) would also such requirement, but maybe it would be possible to require a minimum "posts to picture" ratio. For example, you would need 5 or 10 regular posts to be allowed to post a picture. However I guess it would be complicated to enforce, and would especially make moderators' life a nightmare since I guess some people would just post random short message ("Good idea [insert name here]!", "Thumbs up") just to fit the requirement.

But yeah... discussion in another thread.

[Desmond Chan]

I have been a moderator her on the site for over 3 years now. I posted this poll mostly because of what Hilary commented on......people posting images but not commenting on others......so I was wondering if this was due mostly to participants or members. [snip]Put yourself in my shoes.......would you want to comment on someones images who wants your opinion yet doesn't feel they want to become a member for a prolonged time and become part of the community? Mods don't get paid for this! We are volunteers. My time is becoming more and more precious and scarce......yet it still gives me satisfaction in helping others by critiquing. [snip]
Why should they spend their time critiquing those who only "use" the site and don't want to become part of the community?



With all due respect, Roman, you should take that up with the owners. If you want to know the rates of paticipation between paid and non-paid participants, I think you should also consult the owners. Although you said: " I posted this poll mostly because of what Hilary commented on......people posting images but not commenting on others......so I was wondering if this was due mostly to participants or members", your poll and your responses tell another story. I don't see how your poll could answer your question.

[John Chardine]

I've been following the poll and voted but at the time did not leave a comment. My vote was 6 months. However, Roger and P.-A. above (and maybe others) give good arguments for a one year "honeymoon" period and I am inclined to change my vote to 1 year.

Regarding P.-A.'s point about critiquing, the educational value of BPN derives from several ways of using the site. In those who want to learn, you will be able to feed back the knowledge gained from each of these activities into your photography- from making the image to processing:

1. Just viewing images and seeing the range of qualities. Here you will start to develop a sense for what makes a good image as you browse more and more.

2. Viewing images and reading the comments and critiques of others to solidify (or not!) what you were concluding yourself.

3. Posting your own images for critique.

4. Critiquing other images which requires you to REALLY look at an image, understand it, analyse it, and finally put your thoughts into words.

5. Anything I have left out!

If you don't leave comments and critiques you miss out on one of these cornerstones of the BPN educational process. Critiquing is not just good for BPN and building its community, it's good for you too!

[Bob Decker]

Roman, over the years I've been a fourm owner, an administrator, a super moderator and a moderator as well as just a plain old participant. I feel your pain. That said, if you don't find the position rewarding enough then you should drop back to just being a participant. I've seen moderators on this and other sites not participate. That's a bad thing for forums. It's also a bad thing when mods differentiate between paid and non-paid participants. There are reasons some folks choose to pay... reasons others don't. I have zero issue with either.

I doubt requiring a fee would result in greater participation. Lurkers will be lurkers... posters will be posters. The biggest issue in whether a forum is active or not has more with creating a friendly, nurturing environment that anything elese. Treat folks with respect and friendliness and they'll want to be part of the community. Isolate, disrespect or ignore new folks, or one segment or another and they won't want to participate. It's really that simple.

[Tom Graham]

My 2 cents. Sure I can afford $20. There are several web sites that I participate in and they are free - and are more useful/fun for me than BPN. With so many good free sites, a fee (even small) to a site becomes a big positive vote for it.

If each site I participate in charged $20, I would not pay it to all of them. How many $20 fees can I afford? Called competition. But only $20, hey, cost of burger meal for two, two packs of cigs, it's only pennies a day. Such marketing does not work on me. You want to see the value of BPN versus other sites, make it a $100 mandatory fee. Every *member* here could easily afford it, would they pay it?

Tom
ps - my experience on the internet goes back to about 1980 when it was ARPANET run by BBN, forums were USENET, you used terse UNIX commands. And no commerce was allowed on it. The good'ol days - not really :S3:

Tom

[P-A. Fortin]

If you don't leave comments and critiques you miss out on one of these cornerstones of the BPN educational process. Critiquing is not just good for BPN and building its community, it's good for you too!

I am well aware of that!

What I was trying to say is that getting to the point where you are comfortable enough to start critiquing other's images takes a while. Most likely much more than 3 months. Unless you already have some experience and photography background when you join.

If I had registered an account here as soon as I started to read around (instead of waiting until I felt ready to post), it is quite likely than within my "3 months probation" I would have posted a critique in the likes of "Your bird is way off the center and I find it quite annoying!" :eek:

[dankearl]

As another novice (I have been photographing for only 1 1/2 years), I understand PA Fortins reluctance to jump in and critique, but I did because it was the policy here.
No one has to listen to you (and probably don't), but you do learn by critiquing.
I joined right away because it was the policy. If you don't want to there are a lot of other sites that are free.
Getting critiques here was an eye opener. They can be blunt and I was taken back at first, but I also think I have learned a lot.
3 months should be long enough.
I don't think it needs to be that long. I lurked for a bit, so knew what I was joining.
People will always lurk here, I don't think the membership policy cuts down on the site traffic. I think if you want to post you should adhere to the sites policy or find another site to post on.
There are members here who post and don't critique. Moderators should point it out when it becomes habitual. 5 critiques per post may be too much, but commenting on a few takes minutes and like I said,
no one has to listen ot advice I give if they don't think I know what I am talking about.
My 2 cents.

[Jay Gould]

PA and Dan, I couldn't disagree with you more regarding a new photographer's critiques!

Setting aside my strong beliefs regarding participants and members, all beginners are asked, requested, and encouraged to offer their opinions.

Beginners opinions are very important; beginners look at an image with fresh eyes.

A critique is more than a technical review of the image; it is sharing the feeling that an image invokes in you.

We do not photograph only for ourselves; perhaps some do. We do not photograph only for professionals; perhaps some do.

We photograph for ourselves and for a very wide audience.

I am currently reading Galen Rowell's Inner Game of Outdoor Photography. I highly recommend to all; I know several Professionals that read this book every year or two.


Lastingly successful art triggers audience responses that are ready to happen in the culture as a whole. Regardless of how perfectly a photographer's work renders a subject, it is bound to fail unless it strikes that chord that elicits a common emotional and visual response.

Those that fail to comment early in the game fail to share an important part of the wealth of this wonderful forum; how they feel about an image.

If you are not comfortable suggesting technical changes then simply share your emotional response to the image. For me, that is equally if not more important than the technical aspects of whether something is level or sharp or contains noise or a color cast.

So long as the owner's provide for a participant's category I encourage all participants to share their feelings from day one.

[P-A. Fortin]

Very good point. I have to admit that I (up to now) always considered only the technical aspect of critique. I would never have considered the idea of posting any comment of this kind up to now. It never even came close to crossing my mind.

I guess it has to be the same for most new members though. At least those new to photography I mean.

[Desmond Chan]

I don't think the membership policy cuts down on the site traffic.

(I'm assuming you meant paid-membership policy) Generally speaking it will. Last time when local Subway giving out free breakfast sandwish, line-ups show up everywhere. Just basic economics. Then again, price is a factor but not the most important factor in a lot of cases.

[Desmond Chan]

I guess it has to be the same for most new members though. At least those new to photography I mean.

You should go look at threads that encourage participants (I'm using it loosely here in case you're wondering) to make comments. All they ask for from you is to say what you like and what you don't like. It's actually very easy. If you don't like the colors, then say: "I don't like the colors." And if you agree with other comments, then you say: "Agree with great comments above." What they don't like to see, but it still appears sometimes, is something like a simple: "Stunning mate !" :t3 with no further elaboration. :cheers:

[P-A. Fortin]

What they don't like to see, but it still appears sometimes, is something like a simple: "Stunning mate !" :t3 with no further elaboration.

I don't like to see that either. It is actually what got me here: the absence of such comments. (Or at least when they show up, there is some more meat around the bone).

There are forums in my area in french (that would have been much easier on me) but to me it is nothing more than a place to boost your ego rather than a place to learn and improve. People post their image and then the "Good job!" counter goes up and up and... that's it. Whether its a piece of art of a digital catastrophe (you know, like kids drawings... "Wow, nice school bus kid!" "It's a bird!"), the same comments pile up and it just goes nowhere.

Don't tell me it's good when it's not. And in fact, don't tell me it's bad when it is. Just tell me WHY it's good or bad. Then it will have been a productive critique.

So until I can add some meat around the bone myself, I'll try the "colors" and "agree with above" technique :t3


Edit: Okay, so this whole thread drifted away from topic. How long should participants be allowed to contribute on the site without becoming members? :bg3:

[dankearl]

Desmond, I don't believe that paid membership cuts down on the site traffic.
They would know, they know how many "hits" they get.
I visited the site a bunch before I posted and joined.
I would think a lot of "birders", people who don't even photograph birds, visit the site.
The amount of people like you, who post a lot and don't join is fairly small, from what I see.
Most of the posts are from members, I bet most of the "hits" are not.
As for the topic, I think you should join after 5 posts, not a time limit, but a post limit. After 5 posts, getting feedback and such, you should be able to decide if you want to continue using the site.
If you just want to look, you are free to, as with most internet sites.

[John Chardine]

Very good point. I have to admit that I (up to now) always considered only the technical aspect of critique. I would never have considered the idea of posting any comment of this kind up to now. It never even came close to crossing my mind.

I guess it has to be the same for most new members though. At least those new to photography I mean.

The piece about critiquing by James Shadle is a sticky at the top of the Landscape forum, but I couldn't find it anywhere else. It should be on top of every critique forum.

P-A: I don't understand why Jay's suggestion never crossed your mind. All you have to do is read the first section of James' piece on critiquing and you will see the following:

"Critiquing an image is not as difficult as most people believe. It can be as easy as stating what you like or don't like about an image."

Jay (above) said this in another way: "(a critique) ... is sharing the feeling that an image invokes in you."

I am really not sure why this is so hard.

[Roger Clark]

"Lastingly successful art triggers audience responses that are ready to happen in the culture as a whole. Regardless of how perfectly a photographer's work renders a subject, it is bound to fail unless it strikes that chord that elicits a common emotional and visual response. "

HI Jay,
Great quote. Please confirm, is this a Galen Rowell quote?

It is a great quote because I see critiques (not necessarily on BPN) of images that have a great subject in great light and the audience may gasp, OOOH and AAAH at the image but the critique focuses in on some rule not followed. Sometimes I just cringe at the formula critique (again, not necessarily on BPN).

Roger

[Desmond Chan]

Desmond, I don't believe that paid membership cuts down on the site traffic.


I suppose I didn't make it clear enough. What I was saying is this: a site that has both paid and non-paid participants will end up having more participants than one that only allows paid participants, giving every other thing equal.

Anyhow, what's the point of this thread other than letting some participants throw off some steam? :S3: The question that Roman said he wanted to find out the answer for cannot be answered by this thread as far as I can tell. Whether non-paid participants are allowed here one way or another and for how long will be the decision of the management/owners of this site. If this thread is not started under their instruction, and may be they're not considering some rule/policy changing, or that some of you is not planning to persuade the owners/management to kick the non-paid participants out, then what exactly is the purpose of this thread, other than may be now we know more about some of the members here ?? :5

By the way, dankearl, I was the first one to answer your "Camera Setting" thread, after you've posted it for a couple of days with 170 views but no answer.

[Jay Gould]

"Lastingly successful art triggers audience responses that are ready to happen in the culture as a whole. Regardless of how perfectly a photographer's work renders a subject, it is bound to fail unless it strikes that chord that elicits a common emotional and visual response. "

HI Jay,
Great quote. Please confirm, is this a Galen Rowell quote?

It is a great quote because I see critiques (not necessarily on BPN) of images that have a great subject in great light and the audience may gasp, OOOH and AAAH at the image but the critique focuses in on some rule not followed. Sometimes I just cringe at the formula critique (again, not necessarily on BPN).

Roger

Hi Mate,

The book - a fantastic book that only costs $19.77 on Amazon is a reprint of a series of articles written by Galen in Outdoor Photographer Magazine. The particular quote comes from the article/chapter: Learning To See; two pages in the book that really makes a difference.

You read the book and you start to see the World so differently. Another book that had a similar impact on seeing the World, for me, is The Complete Works of Sherlock Holmes. You read that complete set and you definitely starts to see the buds, leaves and tiny branches; not just the forest.

[Roger Clark]

I've seen moderators on this and other sites not participate. That's a bad thing for forums. It's also a bad thing when mods differentiate between paid and non-paid participants.

Bob,
We have discussed this some. A moderadors job is technically to moderate when needed. I will often hang back and hope other members can answer questions. Moderators should not in my opinion be in there posting on every thread and dominate.

I have not noticed moderators differentiate between paid and non-paid members. People (including mods) have other things to do, so sometimes a post has light responses simply because people (and mods) are out doing other things. Mods do discuss when a forum will be uncovered (or less covered) because of travel, so other mods can fill in when needed.

I have seen a tendency on this and other forums to have light/no comments on poor/boring images. I think people are afraid of driving off a new poster with too harsh a critique. This is independent of moderators and general members/participants.

Roger

[Jay Gould]

And, Desmond, for the life of me I cannot understand how someone can be as active as yourself giving and taking from this site and not choosing to be a Member as a way of saying Thank You to the owners for providing you with a vehicle to have almost 3,000 comments and almost 300 initiated threads.

[Desmond Chan]

And, Desmond, for the life of me I cannot understand how someone can be as active as yourself giving and taking from this site and not choosing to be a Member

You sure about that? :S3:

I'm pretty active on sites that I participated. Bad habit dies hard I suppose :S3:

Oh, I haven't posted any pictures asking for critiques for a long time if you haven't noticed. But, I do critique once in a blue moon these days.

[Jay Gould]

Desmond, am I sure about what? The numbers under your name?

[Desmond Chan]

Desmond, am I sure about what? The numbers under your name?

The member part.

Ok, despite you calling people cheap and apethetic, one thing I know but you don't: what you'd like to see here may not be so far apart than what I'd like to see. That's all I'll say for now.

[Jay Gould]

Des, now you are making a game!

[Bob Decker]

Bob,
We have discussed this some. A moderadors job is technically to moderate when needed. I will often hang back and hope other members can answer questions. Moderators should not in my opinion be in there posting on every thread and dominate.

Roger, IMHO a moderator is part cheerleader, part beat cop. While I agree mods shouldn't dominate there is nothing I find more unacceptable than a post that sits for 1, 2 even 3 days without receiving a single reply. It simply shouldn't happen. At the minimum the board's mod should pipe-up and say thanks for posting.


I have not noticed moderators differentiate between paid and non-paid members. People (including mods) have other things to do, so sometimes a post has light responses simply because people (and mods) are out doing other things. Mods do discuss when a forum will be uncovered (or less covered) because of travel, so other mods can fill in when needed.

Yes, we all have lives to live. No arguement. Even mods. Still, there are enough mods working BPN that non-reply to a post should never occur. If and when it does it does nothing to encourage participation or investment in paid membership. I wasn't particularly suggesting that the mods differentiate between paid and non-paid, but based on some of the commentary in this thread I can definately suspect some of the members do.


I have seen a tendency on this and other forums to have light/no comments on poor/boring images. I think people are afraid of driving off a new poster with too harsh a critique. This is independent of moderators and general members/participants.

Roger

So you're saying the mods here need to learn how to make a "crap sandwich?" Something like this perhaps:

"Thanks for posting lowly, novice photographer with no skills. We appreciate your participation. We don't see a lot of photos of Starlings here. Honestly a lot of photographers just don't bother to photograph common birds. A couple of suggestions to help your images improve. I see you shot this image near noon. Lighting conditions are usually much better earlier in the morning or a couple hour before sunset. You also my want to use a smaller aperature to insure more sharpness (larger f/stop number). Thanks again for posting. I'm sure we all look forward to your next contribution.:

Something nice at the beginning... something nice at the end... the less than positive stuff in the middle. Ez... Pz.

Or just let posts set without replies... and people be discouraged.

[Dave Mills]

I've waded through all the posts(being away for 3 weeks) and really see very little tangible argument for not having a time limit on forum participation. FP get the benefit for free of having their images critiqued which arguably is the main benefit of the site. The personal interaction of others to your image is the best learning experience one can get IMO. Most mods are honest in their critiques and are really trying to teach so someone gets value rather than just feel good.(which is the result of other sites) What keeps me going is the satisfaction of helping other folks improve and have fortunately seen it over the years.
To spend $20.00 p/yr is a pittance for the kind of assistance that is offered. Look at the prices for 1 day personal instruction that many people pay for. It ain't $20. As stated we mods work for nothing. Haven't even received a BPN hat but spend countless hours a year critiquing. Not complaining but just stating fact
IMO folks who are ACTIVE posters and receivers of critiques over an extended period of time are taking advantage of what I consider a far too liberal policy and feel their images should no longer be critiqued after an extended period of time....(the time to be determined)

[Roman Kurywczak]

Roman, over the years I've been a fourm owner, an administrator, a super moderator and a moderator as well as just a plain old participant. I feel your pain. That said, if you don't find the position rewarding enough then you should drop back to just being a participant. I've seen moderators on this and other sites not participate. That's a bad thing for forums. It's also a bad thing when mods differentiate between paid and non-paid participants. There are reasons some folks choose to pay... reasons others don't. I have zero issue with either.

I doubt requiring a fee would result in greater participation. Lurkers will be lurkers... posters will be posters. The biggest issue in whether a forum is active or not has more with creating a friendly, nurturing environment that anything elese. Treat folks with respect and friendliness and they'll want to be part of the community. Isolate, disrespect or ignore new folks, or one segment or another and they won't want to participate. It's really that simple.

I have been away all weekend, but I need more feedback before I respond. What site were you a part of with all those duties? Is it still around? I have been here for 3 years and have never disregarded any post...member or participant.... in my forums. I have also commented on other forums.

I want examples of your participation.....before I comment further. I like to research what others have done and their work.....so I can make a proper response.

[Roman Kurywczak]

Desmond......do you think I don't talk to the owners group:w3? I was very interested for myself as to why people don't become members! I don't think this should be like other sites in regards to moderators......why be like every site? I think Mods need to put their input in....member or participant and I have over 3 years. I would like to know that my work would be appreciated by the participants enough....to want to join!

I beleive that if yo uwant cheerleading and pats on the back.....go post on flickr. You will watch your photography stagnate. There....I said it.

Buck it up....accept criticism.....and learn from it. Notice I didn't say my word was the final say!!! It is my opinion ! You need to listen to the critique.....accept or reject it.....but mostly....learn from it. If you reject the critique and have a valid. reason/argument for it......I will not argue with your assesment......because you have thought it out and learned!

Do you have magazine subscriptions? How much do they cost you? Do you get feedback on your images? Trust me.....if it was up to me, the participation issue would have been long over! Fortunately for the particpiants......the owners group is still weighing it's options and keeping things status quo!

[Bob Decker]

Roman, seriously? What the heck difference does it matter what forums I've worked for? I've been around the interenet about as long as there's been an internet. Many, many forums I've participated in have come and gone. I certainly don't own/host one any more. Lets see, I was a SCUBA instructor for 16 years. During several of those years I was a moderator for the AOL Scuba Forum, then the forum "Sys Op." Eventually AOL went to a system where only paid employees could moderate. I had a website titled SportDiverHQ for a number of years. It had a forum attached to it. I was a mod for the now defunct Professional Wedding Photographes forum... FWIW that morphed into a pay to play site before going belly up. I was also a mod on the now defunct One Light Workshop forums. One light Workshop is still around but Zack dropped the forum. I was also a mod at the Photographers Water Cooler... It's still there but totally inactive. Good enough or you need written references? :w3

As a participant I'm currently active on Wildlifesouth.net, CNPA.org's forum, Digital Wedding Photogrpahers forum, Macro Nature Forum, and Naturescapes... plus one or two invitation only forums that I'm not even suppose to mention the existance of. I occasstionally read and less occassionally post to PhotoMigrations and FredMiranda. I have a membership at Naturephotographersnet... most read, seldom post.

Every observation I've outlined didn't necessarily happen here, but it could. Some things work. Some things don't. You can write me off as a crankly old guy... a mouthy jerk... some bonehead without a clue... or whatever you choose. Then again you could consider what I have to say and apply as you think it fits to your needs. Either way really doesn't much matter to me.

[Chris Ober]

The poll has 57 votes.
The thread has 1,374 views.
What does 1,317 abstains mean?
Tom



It means that a view is not counted as a unique visit. If one person reads the thread 30 times either by refreshing, replying, or reading replies, it's 30 views. One view isn't equivalent to one person. The view count isn't updated on the forum instantly either but.

[Chris Ober]

Tom, I have looked at this thread many times, every time someone posts a reply. Sorry that I've bumped up the viewing count, others may have as well. Some may not want their name to appear next to their vote. Some haven't decided yet. Lots of reasons why a vote may not have been made. Also, can non members/participants look at the thread even though they can't vote? Many reasons.

Yes, people not even registered here can read the threads and the view count will go up.

[Chris Ober]

I removed a few replies that were getting out of line... Keep it polite please...

[Roman Kurywczak]

Roman, seriously? What the heck difference does it matter what forums I've worked for? I've been around the interenet about as long as there's been an internet. Many, many forums I've participated in have come and gone. I certainly don't own/host one any more. Lets see, I was a SCUBA instructor for 16 years. During several of those years I was a moderator for the AOL Scuba Forum, then the forum "Sys Op." Eventually AOL went to a system where only paid employees could moderate. I had a website titled SportDiverHQ for a number of years. It had a forum attached to it. I was a mod for the now defunct Professional Wedding Photographes forum... FWIW that morphed into a pay to play site before going belly up. I was also a mod on the now defunct One Light Workshop forums. One light Workshop is still around but Zack dropped the forum. I was also a mod at the Photographers Water Cooler... It's still there but totally inactive. Good enough or you need written references? :w3

As a participant I'm currently active on Wildlifesouth.net, CNPA.org's forum, Digital Wedding Photogrpahers forum, Macro Nature Forum, and Naturescapes... plus one or two invitation only forums that I'm not even suppose to mention the existance of. I occasstionally read and less occassionally post to PhotoMigrations and FredMiranda. I have a membership at Naturephotographersnet... most read, seldom post.

Every observation I've outlined didn't necessarily happen here, but it could. Some things work. Some things don't. You can write me off as a crankly old guy... a mouthy jerk... some bonehead without a clue... or whatever you choose. Then again you could consider what I have to say and apply as you think it fits to your needs. Either way really doesn't much matter to me.
Why are you getting so PO'd Bob? I didn't think my question was so inflamatory. I see I have touched some nerve with you so I will end this with you.....I will not comment on this any more as clearly it has annoyed you.

[Desmond Chan]

Desmond......do you think I don't talk to the owners group:w3?

I hope you didn't think I wouldn't have thought of that :t3 C'mon, this is a serious poll with serious consequence :w3


Fortunately for the particpiants......the owners group is still weighing it's options and keeping things status quo!

Whatever the outcome, I'd act accordingly :t3:bg3::cheers:

[Bob Decker]

You haven't PO'd me, Roman. Though it did strike me as a strange question.

[James Shadle]

Let me bottom line this for you.
I would like more paid members, however we will always allow non-paying folks to participate.

I'm not a rich man by any stretch and the cost involved in running a forum on a top class server is expensive. What I am is an idealistic photographer who feels a forum like BPN will help countless photographers world wide become better at their craft.

So here are some of the issues I must balance:



I can't afford to pay for the server without some income from the forum
We will only run a limited amount of unobtrusive advertising from trusted vendors. Whenever possible, it is our responsibility to help protect members from unscrupulous advertisers. Members prefer not having to wade through adverting to get to the content.
Charge a modest membership fee. $20 US is very reasonable based on other sites rates and content.

The larger the forum gets, the higher the server fees. What would you do to help offset the costs involved in running a site aimed at helping people become better photographers?

If you are a Forum Participant you are welcomed and encouraged to be a part of the BPN community. Please consider doing your part to keep the doors open.

Likewise, paid Members are welcomed and encouraged to be a part of the BPN community. In addition, I want to personally thank each of you for making BPN a reality.

Without our paid members, outstanding staff and partners, BPN would just be an idea I had while out photographing birds in Tampa Bay.

[Bob Decker]

First, thinks for all you do Capt.


The larger the forum gets, the higher the server fees. What would you do to help offset the costs involved in running a site aimed at helping people become better photographers?


It appears to me that when you open any thread there's easily enough room at the top for one or two more banner ads without them becoming any more intrusive or troublesome. I don't think anyone would object to that.

Also, if raising some additional funds is necessary, why not charge a minimal fee for posting classifieds and workshops in addition to the current requirements. Those would still be a bargin at $5 or $10 per post.

[Grady Weed]

I would be happy to pay more James. And that comes from me, a friend who has known you for almost 37 years! :eek:

I do not exxpect anything for free. I always pay my way. Your site is worth every dime and then some. I find it difficult to gift more than what is charged. You just never know how much extra to donate at times. So paying more, which distributes the load of cost to every user is the way to go from my view.

Whatever you charge in the future is OK with me. I will gladly pay it. I do expect you to give me a ride on the Hooptie when I moved down next year. I can't wait to come HOME! Hug Donna for Pam and I. See you buddy.

[denise ippolito]

I didn't offer my opinion before James BUT since you asked:

I would raise the member fee to $30.00 yearly and allow Forum Participants access to all content and full size images. I feel if they want to lurk, read, view and learn that is fine and welcomed. If they would like to participate in forum discussions (comment on posts such as these) or have their own images critiqued they should pay just like the members do.:S3:

[John Chardine]

That seems to be a reasonable option Denise but I would keep the annual fee at $20 unless there is a compelling financial reason to increase it.

[James Shadle]

I didn't offer my opinion before James BUT since you asked:

I would raise the member fee to $30.00 yearly and allow Forum Participants access to all content and full size images. I feel if they want to lurk, read, view and learn that is fine and welcomed. If they would like to participate in forum discussions (comment on posts such as these) or have their own images critiqued they should pay just like the members do.:S3:

Thanks for the suggestion.
However, IMO that's not fair to those who choose to financially support BPN.
We will not be raising our fee in the foreseeable future.

[denise ippolito]

Thanks for the suggestion.
However, IMO that's not fair to those who choose to financially support BPN.
We will not be raising our fee in the foreseeable future.


I must have misunderstood your last response. I thought you were saying that you couldn't afford to keep things the way they are-if that is not the case then keeping it the same price makes sense.

[Jay Gould]

As far as I am concerned the Owner has spoken. For the foreseeable future "participants" will have a free lunch and there will be no imposed incentive to cause/entice them to buy their lunch.

The Owner's choice and they get 100% of my continuing support and also disagreement with their decision.

[James Shadle]

Jay,
I love you and your passion!!!!

I'll make sure Forum Participants will always be able to participate. However there may need to be some adjustment in their posting frequency, permitted image size , avatars etc. Any adjustments to the FP program would be done to reduce server load.

[Jay Gould]

James, MWAH - the sound of a kiss flying through cyber space! :eek: :bg3:

[Ed Cordes]

I think a year is just about right. It gives the newbies a chance to really scope things out and discover the benefits. Many of us do not have the time to participate every day. So a reasonable amount of time to get a good feel for the site is appropriate. It also doesn't create the feeling of an "elitist" site.