Go back
are no-subscribers welcome?

are no-subscribers welcome?

General

mwmiller
RHP Member No.16

Joined
25 Feb 01
Moves
104478
Clock
08 Aug 04
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Phlabibit
I will say one thing... anyone who doesn't pay has all the rights of any pawn start to suggest ideas.

Any star that wants to ask them to get a star is ok too.... but these users have every right to offer ideas.

If Russ didn't want them to voice their ideas, he'd ban them from Help and Site Ideas.

These users are just as important to Russ as u ...[text shortened]... don't make them feel less than a star. They are welcome at RHP, and so are their ideas.

P-
I agree.

The best way to promote this site to new members is to make them feel welcome as a part of the community. This is a great site and it will sell itself if we just make everyone feel welcome.

Even if they choose no to subscribe, as long as they're enjoying the site they will bring others in, and some of them will subscribe. I don't think the free members are placing too much of a burden on the server, since they are limited in some respects, such as the 6 game limit, and no clan or tournament participation.

There is just nothing to be gained by trying to make someone feel guilty about not being a subscriber. Harrassing or pressuring people is more likely to drive them off than make them want to subscribe.

just my opinion,
Marc

Bobla45

Joined
20 Oct 02
Moves
599534
Clock
08 Aug 04
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Exy
Russ did mention it in a post a couple of months ago. There are less than 1,500 actual paying subsribed members at RHP. Period.
If that number is accurate I would not be surprised if the site eventually folds. No one can raise a family and spend the money needed to maintain a business on 30k a year forever, I would have thought a lot more of the members were paying than that😳

E
Damn fine Clan!

The Double R Diner

Joined
03 Sep 03
Moves
72459
Clock
08 Aug 04
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Bobla45
If that number is accurate I would not be surprised if the site eventually folds. No one can raise a family and spend the money needed to maintain a business on 30k a year forever, I would have thought a lot more of the members were paying than that😳
Indeed.

$30k - that's about £17k over here where the site Admins live.

mwmiller
RHP Member No.16

Joined
25 Feb 01
Moves
104478
Clock
08 Aug 04
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Exy
Agreed. But non-subscriber's should also respect that they are getting a damn good service for free, albeit limited and as a non-subscriber posting suggested changes in the forums may rankle us paying members.
If someone has a good suggestion that benefits this site, what possible difference does it make where that suggestion came from? I haven't seen any evidence that suggestions from pawnstars are any better or worse than suggestions from non-subscribers.

So if a suggestion improves the site, that's all that matters. If it came from a free member, it certainly doesn't 'rankle' me, and I don't know why it would rankle anyone.....

just my opinion,
Marc

no1marauder
Naturally Right

Somewhere Else

Joined
22 Jun 04
Moves
42677
Clock
08 Aug 04
Vote Up
Vote Down

I don't know why this issue keeps coming up. Non-subscribers are allowed access to the forums and their suggestions should be just as welcome as subscribers; if they have an idea that makes the site better it benefits everybody and makes it more likely people will subscribe.
When I was still a non-subscriber I made a couple of suggestions and had to put up with the same BS; "You don't pay where do you get off suggesting anything blah, blah, blah". This crap makes it LESS likely somebody's going to join; ridiculing people usually does not get a positive response. I joined and believe it's the best $20 I ever spent but I certainly didn't appreciate being basically told to shut up until I paid.
One last observation: to most of us, thankfully, $20 is no big deal. But I would not automatically assume that "anybody who has internet access" has an extra $20 to spare. Even if you have Internet access from your home you may be a single parent stretching your income so that your kids can use the net or somebody on a fixed income living alone and wanting an outlet to the world, etc. I think we should welcome everybody, listen to their suggestions and yes, urge them to join; but I think constantly suggesting that non-subscribers are moochers is counterproductive and poor manners.

T
Kupikupopo!

Out of my mind

Joined
25 Oct 02
Moves
20443
Clock
08 Aug 04
Vote Up
Vote Down

People with internet, who take time to play chess on this site DO have an extra $20 per year. People who are overstreching do not play chess on this site because it takes too much time, if they can afford dsl or cable, then again i say that they can alos afford an extra $20 PER YEAR.

The subscribers are what keep RHP running as it is. Improvements cost time and effort. We are already paying a small fee to keep the site alive, what makes you think these improvement don't require more money?

Alot of non-subcribers CAN afoord becoming members, especially the ones making hhuge moves, and making suggestions to the site (since that means they've been around enough to be able to have a say). If they don't join and the site keeps growing the fee will go up more and more, until it's so high that people stop subscribing. The site will die then, until it reached the level it was in the start.

I think the non-subscribers should be limited more the longer they are on the site. non-subs playing more then 3000 moves should be restricted in their forum activities, and more then, say, 5000 should go back to 5 games or something along those lines.

That way they had a time to taste the community here at RHP, and also we don't have the site being taken over by non-paying, heavy playing members.

T

Joined
29 Jul 01
Moves
60863
Clock
08 Aug 04
1 edit
Vote Up
Vote Down

Strikes me somewhat that there is more indignation at this "breaking" of some moral code than there is when users openly abuse, provoke, wind up and disparage their fellow users. In re: this thing, people's egos seem awfully affronted terribly easily.

Golly, I think I'll save my feelings of low-level small-scale indignation and dismay for those people who cut in front of me whilst queuing at the bank, for those who fail to give up their seat to an elderly person on a bus, for those who talk loudly during a theatre performance, for those who drop litter, for those who smoke in the faces of other people's children, for those who use their mobile 'phones in places and situations I consider to be inappropriate, for those who shout abuse at the homeless, for bullies who taunt and ridicule. Not for one individual whose situation I know absolutely nothing about who hasn't subscribed to the site yet uses the site in a manner which is altogether in-keeping with the rules. Perhaps they have a fear of addiction so don't want to be able to play more than 6 games. Dunno, does anybody?

And for those people whose feelings are running high and are deploying the affordability argument, I wonder how many of them donate more than the requisite bare minimum $20? Doing so would surely contribute to the site to a greater extent than posting confrontational replies to non-subscribers and developing a "them" and "us" atmosphere likely to only dissuade and alienate would-be subscribers.

no1marauder
Naturally Right

Somewhere Else

Joined
22 Jun 04
Moves
42677
Clock
08 Aug 04
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by TheMaster37
People with internet, who take time to play chess on this site DO have an extra $20 per year. People who are overstreching do not play chess on this site because it takes too much time, if they can afford dsl or cable, then again i say that they can alos afford an extra $20 PER YEAR.
What does the amount of time people spend on the site have to do with their financial resources? A retiree or a disabled person or someone who's unemployed might have a lot of time to play chess but not have much money!

E
Damn fine Clan!

The Double R Diner

Joined
03 Sep 03
Moves
72459
Clock
08 Aug 04
1 edit
Vote Up
Vote Down

I think the logical assumption has been that if someone can afford a computer with an Internet connection then they can afford the extra $0.0547 a day it would cost to subscribe to the site.

Ravello
The Rude©

who knows?

Joined
30 Dec 03
Moves
176648
Clock
08 Aug 04
1 edit
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by no1marauder
What does the amount of time people spend on the site have to do with their financial resources? A retiree or a disabled person or someone who's unemployed might have a lot of time to play chess but not have much money!
This is also true but making some calculations : $19,95 :365 days =0.054 $ per day.
Who cannot save a 5 cent coin per day?
If one really can't save this small amount of money sure do not have internet or a pc,so what Master37 says it's quite right.

Edit:didn't see Exy's post

TSP
HIT THE LIGHTS

Joined
15 Nov 03
Moves
57135
Clock
08 Aug 04
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by T1000
Strikes me somewhat that there is more indignation at this "breaking" of some moral code than there is when users openly abuse, provoke, wind up and disparage their fellow users. In re: this thing, people's egos seem awfully affronted terribly easily.

Golly, I think I'll save my feelings of low-level small-scale indignation and dismay for those people ...[text shortened]... ping a "them" and "us" atmosphere likely to only dissuade and alienate would-be subscribers.
This is all true ... (and very much how I would like to be - which I ain't) ... If someones jumps the queue in front of me, he/she is in for a rough ride with the Slow Pawn. But what you wrote is different to what has been argued about ...

I welcome non-subscribers as much as anyone else and if I wouldn't be so competitive and had more time, I'd surely play a few 'normal' games, BUT we are talking about users that have been part of this community for a long time (and 2000+ moves takes time if you only have 6 games at a time) ...

They are parasites to me...

And I can only re-inforce my earlier argument that if someone can afford a computer with an internet connection (anywhere in the world) then he/she can afford the 20 bucks ... It will never be perfect and I am sure that a small minority I misjudge now, but what the hell, the positive effects would be much greater then the few users RHP would loose, by implementing tighter restrictions for non-subscribers ...

Well, this is just a business point of view ;-)

Boris

D

Joined
30 May 04
Moves
4421
Clock
08 Aug 04
Vote Up
Vote Down

Paying for this site is optional, and while it stays optional there will be people who choose not to pay. If all the non-subsribers left the site never to play or use it again do you really think it would be a better place?

Potential users see the amount of members joined to this site and join themselfs, some pay some dont - if there were only paying members the 'community' would be much smaller and i think less people would want to be a part of it.

I dont think non-paying members are doing any damage - games are restricted, site options are restricted, things like profile pictures are not allowed etc etc

If non-paying members were such a problem, the next time we log onto RHP we would get a screen up saying something along the lines of "subscribe or dont play".

TSP
HIT THE LIGHTS

Joined
15 Nov 03
Moves
57135
Clock
08 Aug 04
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Darius07
Paying for this site is optional, and while it stays optional there will be people who choose not to pay. If all the non-subsribers left the site never to play or use it again do you really think it would be a better place?

Potential users see the amount of members joined to this site and join themselfs, some pay some dont - if there were only paying mem ...[text shortened]... nto RHP we would get a screen up saying something along the lines of "subscribe or dont play".
You are missing the point ...

You can argue and argue and argue but the bottom line is that without subscribers there would be no RHP at all

And the more people subscribe, the easier it is for the administrators to implement changes, make this site better expand current services, etc. etc. etc.

So yes, you are a burden if you are a non-subscriber for ages not pulling your weight ...

Boris

Ravello
The Rude©

who knows?

Joined
30 Dec 03
Moves
176648
Clock
08 Aug 04
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Darius07
[b]Potential users see the amount of members joined to this site and join themselfs, some pay some dont



b]
It isn't so simple.
The numbers are clear :75000 users during past years,which only 1500 (less) of them subscribed.
This means that 2 guys pay and 98 play for free.
Having only the 2% of people that subscribes is not a good thing for RHP and if the trend continues this way I will be surprised if this site will be again here in 2008.
I've nothing against non-subscribers but is required some community sense and the ones that can SHOULD cough the money.
When the moment will come,I will be very happy to pay more than the mere subscription,this site is worth the small expense and needs our money to continue existing in the future,even for the ones who don't pay.

Bobla45

Joined
20 Oct 02
Moves
599534
Clock
09 Aug 04
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Ravello
It isn't so simple.
The numbers are clear :75000 users during past years,which only 1500 (less) of them subscribed.
This means that 2 guys pay and 98 play for free.
Having only the 2% of people that subscribes is not a good thing for RHP and if the trend continues this way I will be surprised if this site will be again here in 2008.
I've nothing agains ...[text shortened]... expense and needs our money to continue existing in the future,even for the ones who don't pay.
2 guys pay and 98 play for free? Hey, RHP is Social Security!😵😵

Cookies help us deliver our Services. By using our Services or clicking I agree, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn More.