iSign
New Member
I guess the real question is....What is Signs101?
If your answer is, "A professionals sign forum" , then your vote is restrictive.
If your answer is, "A free enterprise website", then your answer is less restrictive.
No matter how much some of you think (or wish) it can be BOTH, your dead wrong.
Skyhigh, maybe the real question is who is paying for signs101, and for that question, BOTH of 2 categories of members are paying the bills here, and the lion's share is covered by the group that is helped, not harmed by exposing prices. We pick up the smaller share.
Vid has a valid point, in acknowledging that Fred is not a remote dictator. He is a sign maker who used to be one of the most helpful & prolific posters on 4edgetalk.com, and soon thereafter became the same kind of helpful contributor over here... later buying the site, maybe in part so it could be saved from extinction, and at least in part, if not entirely so he could try his hand at making it a viable business as well as an excellent community opportunity.
My point is that the evidence is there that our feedback is sought, considered, and acted upon around here. If we, the signshops, want to move into the role of paying the lion's share of the bills, we most certainly would also have our wishes carry more weight.
yeah, and if more stepped up, and then we all agreed to pay double (28¢ a day too much for ya, c'mon!) ...we could quite likely eliminate the merchants completely. We would still use them of course, & they could still join the fun for 28¢ a day, but no more spamming & there would never be a topic [or policy] that had to be handled in such and such a way so as not to piss off our meal tickets (not that this really happens here... but you get my point... Merchants are cool, but could become like lobbyists, that we owe some form of allegiance to)
Edited to add that "More" of us, is a key word in my theory, as is the point of paying "Double" ...I don't know the real numbers, but you get the idea. I know I would pay $100 for the keys to this place, if it was going "members only" ...I don't know for sure that I would vote for that, because I like the volume, and diversity of posts filling this place up each day, and that would go down for sure... but if the decision had been made & I had 2 choices, being locked out, or paying more... I'd pay more!
Didn't cable TV used to be commercial free, or am I imagining that? I'd love commercial free TV, but if my cable bill went up, I'd have to think twice about it. Can't have it both ways as someone once said!
Mike, I once had a customer google his own new business name, and found a thread where I was talking about him & although I didn't say anything i wouldn't have said to him, it was momentarily awkward because other people were commenting on his logo & not always favorably.
I still got his work, but only after he questioned me on if I really wanted it, as the discussion centered on who's jobs we might pass on for risk of a possible unhealthy business association. His logo was a bit over the top for some, but for me it was one I wouldn't sign my name to, not one I wouldn't do, and in the end, he was ok with that.
The reason I am addressing this point to you, is that I was surprised to read a few times, that as a result of your misinterpretation of the benefits of a Premium forum, you no longer planned to value the $50 subscription highly enough to maintain it.
Since your last post brought up that you see value in hiding, not only the general exposure of prices, but also the individual price/client discussions that any one of us might wish to engage in with the security of a members-only section.
While we didn't get everything some of us thought we were going to get for our $50, we did get a lot of what we were after, and in my opinion what we got is worth the $50 a year.
In fact what we had before Premium forums was worth $50 a year, which is why a lot of us have been paying it for a few years before the Premium Forums existed.