A Point About Message Boards

• Sykotyk

  

  This was my post on the dark site. It sums up my reason for not paying a measily $12 a year:
  

  Here's the truth about message boards. All of the content you're paying for comes from the poster, not the site. The poster and his own opinion, analysis, discussion, etc aren't being reimbursed.
  
  So, until the posters reap an income for their posts, why should I pay for their content?
  
  I won't. So, I'll stay on the free board.

  I don't know if I'll get banned. If and when JJ goes free again, I'd like to have my normal screen name. One that I've had for over 10 years to almost any message board I've ever visited (it is rather unique... pronounced like 'psychotic').
  
  But, I can't fathom taking money for other people's time, energy, analysis, and input.
  
  Would you go to a concert if you knew the performers weren't paid for their performance? Would you buy a newspaper if you knew the authors weren't paid for their articles? Would you buy food if the farmer wasn't paid for growing it?
  
  Why should the site make money for other people's work when they don't see any revenue--even fractions of a cent--from it.
  
  
  I can't in good conscious do that. I post what I post for others to read, discuss, berate, and enlighten FOR FREE. I don't do it for others to charge to read my posts, as trivial or as monumental as they may or may not be.
  
  I think that's why we're all here. Not because we're cheap. Not because we're freeloaders. Not because we're anything. We're here because we realize that what we say, think, and do matter, to some extent. We never questioned charging for our own posts, because we value the openness of the forum. And while we may take profit from our work at some point in life, it is us who will profit, not others in spite of us.
  
  Thank you for listening to my drivel,
  
  Sykotyk
  
  "Though my soul may set in darkness, it will rise in perfect light;
  I have loved the stars to fondly, to be fearful of the night."
• Trueblue23

  

  The only thing wrong with that post is that it contains your opinion. You're probably banned already.
• dwccrew

  

  Trueblue23 wrote: The only thing wrong with that post is that it contains your opinion. You're probably banned already.

  I posted a similar one with my opinion, I'll probably be banned too.
  
  You know the JJ motto "Zing Hi!"
• krambman

  

  The major problem with your original post is that you aren't paying for the content, you are paying for a place for you and others to post the content. The people who post there are choosing to do so in order to share information and opinions they have and to read the info and opinions of others. You are paying for the opportunity. You are paying to have a place where open communication can happen. You are paying for the vehicle. If the posters wanted to be reimbursed for their info and opinions then they should start their own site and charge for it. Now, I don't agree with the new charge either and I especially don't agree with the way they went about making this change, but I don't think that your reason for not paying is very valid either.
• fan_from_texas

  ^^^^
  
  To some extent, that's true. You'd be paying for the medium by which to express your ideas. The problem is that JJHuddle wasn't the only message board; it had critical mass, but the platform itself wasn't unique. Think Facebook/Myspace--there are thousands of programmers who could create a similar site, but they aren't worth billions because the people are at Facebook/Myspace. If either site got really crazy with its rules, people could migrate to a new site, and the value would flow with them If Facebook started requiring people to pay to be on it, people could leave and go to whatever free alternative existed. The value is with the community, not with the format, and for any site to take action that destroys its community ruins the business model. There's no innate value to JJHuddle other than the people on it (with the exception of the articles, etc. that they post, and my views on the value of that are well known).
  
  Driving out the community to generate more revenue is cutting one's nose to spite the face. It's so unbelievably stupid and short-sighted (if my estimate of the % of people leaving the site are in the right ballpark).
• krambman

  

  FFT, that is the best explanation of what I've been trying to say since this move was announce (although you put it far more succinctly and eloquently that I ever could). Perhaps you should send this along to the management over there if you haven't already done so.
  
  Just curious, what is your estimation of the % of people leaving the site?