Grex Oldcoop Conference

Item 387: Cyberspace Communications finances for 2006

Entered by aruba on Thu Jan 11 03:41:06 2007:

This is a special year-end report on Grex's finances for 2006.

Beginning Balance     $3,735.11

           Average        Total
           -------        -----

Credits    $330.00    $3,960.00     Membership dues
            $33.33      $400.00     Sale of old Sun equipment to mdw
            $20.00      $240.00     Miscellaneous donations
             $1.14       $13.62     Interest
             $0.20        $2.38     Silly Hat Fund
           -------    ---------
           $384.67    $4,616.00     

Debits     $100.00    $1,200.00     Colocation fees
            $48.33      $579.98     Phone bills
             $6.93       $83.17     Paypal discounts
             $3.33       $40.00     Rental of P.O. Box
             $2.49       $29.90     Fees to maintain our domain names
             $1.67       $20.00     Fees to maintain our corporate status 
           -------    ---------
           $162.75    $1,953.05     

Ending Balance        $6,398.06

We added 24 people to the membership rolls in 2006:

beebot, c3067692, charcat, cross, easlern, firewizz, glenda, jadecat, 
kaf28, kingjon, koppula, lapdragon, llama, lutefisk, matasw, mudlark, 
muthu, nharmon, pmakinen, ringbark, scholar, stefburn, steve, and walkman. 
Of those, 15 were still paid-up members at the end of the year.

At the beginning of 2006 we had 48 paid-up members.  At the end of 2006 we 
had 53 paid-up members.  We had an average of 49 paid-up members during the 
year.

Thanks to everyone who contributed to Grex in 2006:

ajax, arabella, arthurp, aruba, atticus, beebot, c3067692, chanur, charcat, 
coyote, cross, easlern, eskarina, firewizz, fitz, garrigan, gelinas, 
glenda, gorg, i, jadecat, janc, jason, jep, kaf28, kaplan, kedar, keesan, 
khamsun, kingjon, koppula, krj, lapdragon, llama, lutefisk, matasw, 
mbroggy, mbusse, mdw, mnac, mrtuna, muthu, naftee, nharmon, pengo, 
pmakinen, polygon, rcurl, remmers, ringbark, robfitz, scholar, scott, 
slynne, srw, stefburn, steve, trh, vortayne, walkman, wh, witling, wlevak, 
and a few more people who asked to remain anonymous.  Thanks all!
47 responses total.

#1 of 47 by aruba on Thu Jan 11 03:44:12 2007:

It seems pretty clear that Grex had a pretty good year, financially.  In
fact, a very good year.  We had twice as many new members as in 2005, and we
took in a lot more than we spent.  Thank you to everyone who supported Grex
in 2006!


#2 of 47 by cyklone on Thu Jan 11 04:04:17 2007:

But this is the people's money! If we have a surplus, we should give it back
and stimulate the economy.


#3 of 47 by cross on Thu Jan 11 04:08:42 2007:

Zing!


#4 of 47 by albaugh on Tue Jan 16 22:36:45 2007:

What is grex gonna do with that net gain of ~$2,500?


#5 of 47 by i on Tue Jan 16 23:09:40 2007:

Contract a sysadmin outsourcing firm in Bangladesh.


#6 of 47 by cross on Tue Jan 16 23:49:56 2007:

Burn!


#7 of 47 by aruba on Wed Jan 17 05:18:34 2007:

First, we should all take a deep breath, and feel good for a moment that
Grex did so well over the past year.  It hasn't always been the case, so we
deserve to enjoy it.

But absolutely, if there are problems we can solve by throwing a little
money at them, now is a good time to do that.  People have been talking
about a RAID array.  How much staff time will be required to install a RAID
array if we buy one?


#8 of 47 by cross on Wed Jan 17 05:39:17 2007:

It would be a fairly significant investment; essentially, the system would
have to be reinstalled onto it.  That might not be a bad thing, as grex is
due for an operating system upgrade anyway (it is now two OpenBSD releases
behind).


#9 of 47 by aruba on Wed Jan 17 17:03:23 2007:

Are there any system upgrades which require money but not significant time,
and after which the users will see an immediate improvement?


#10 of 47 by maus on Wed Jan 17 17:06:33 2007:

Very important technical purchase: send chocolate to all of the active
participants in the technical conferences


#11 of 47 by cmcgee on Wed Jan 17 17:09:23 2007:

Yes!! Feed them chocolate.  Improve their sense of well being!


#12 of 47 by mcnally on Wed Jan 17 17:47:28 2007:

 re #9:
 >  Are there any system upgrades which require money but not significant
 >  time, and after which the users will see an immediate improvement?

 /var/mail needs more disk space -- needs it badly.

 setting everything up on a high-performance RAID array would be nice
 but I guarantee we'll find uses for a spare disk if we wanted to buy
 one now and start using it for /var/mail until a more permanent solution
 comes along.


#13 of 47 by cross on Wed Jan 17 18:13:36 2007:

Regarding #9; McNally points out the need for additional mail spool space.
Actually, I'd say that the spool space isn't the problem so much as spam is;
if the spam problem could be brought under control, then space probably
wouldn't be such an issue.  To reiterate my ideas for controlling spam:

1) Make SpamAssassin (and the rest of the `standard' spam scanning tools)
   default for all users.  Users who wish to turn off spam scanning may do
   so by editing SpamAssassin configuration files.
2) Make *incoming* email `opt-in' for new users, with the *default* to be
   forwarding off-site.
3) Make outgoing email require some sort of automated verification process,
   or `sponsorship' by an existing member.

My suspicion is that the vast majority of legitimate users don't care about
email, and would not notice if their incoming email were simply turned off.
For those that do care, this would give sufficient coverage that they'd
still be able to do whatever they needed to do with a minimum of hassle and
user intervention.  I suspect that this scheme would more or less eliminate
the majority of the spam problem.

As for the RAID controller, I think I should clarify.  The incremental cost
of installing such a thing would Not add significantly to the overall cost
of doing a standard system upgrade.

I do, however, find it a bit disturbing that the major consideration for not
going with this improvement seems to be staff availability.  It speaks to
our lack of staff resources and our need to address that issue.  Of course,
the benefit to the users would be elimination of sources of downtime and
increased space/performance.


#14 of 47 by keesan on Wed Jan 17 21:13:20 2007:

At a recent board meeting it was suggested that everyone have incoming mail
for mail sent from grex, but not from the rest of the world, by default.


#15 of 47 by nharmon on Wed Jan 17 21:24:17 2007:

Yes, definetely keep local mail on by default. How else would new
members request mail access? :)


#16 of 47 by cross on Wed Jan 17 22:40:08 2007:

Right, that goes unsaid.


#17 of 47 by jep on Thu Jan 18 13:27:36 2007:

I got my annual notice from aruba that it's time to renew my membership.
 Well, I'm not sending in any money at this time.  When there's a need,
I'll send a contribution, but Grex has enough now to meet it's expenses
for years.


#18 of 47 by scholar on Thu Jan 18 13:33:16 2007:

Low-life.


#19 of 47 by mary on Thu Jan 18 14:55:24 2007:

And you know what?  If Grex was in need Jep would be there, as he said.  
That sounds like a nice deal, to me.  Thanks, John.


#20 of 47 by tod on Thu Jan 18 15:21:00 2007:

re #17
DITTO

re #19
Do I get a pat on the back, too? ;)


#21 of 47 by keesan on Thu Jan 18 15:46:47 2007:

If grex ever stops existing, would the savings account be donated some place
or split among current members?


#22 of 47 by nharmon on Thu Jan 18 16:00:10 2007:

http://cyberspace.org/local/grex/bylaws.html

  ARTICLE 8:  DISSOLVEMENT
 
  In the event the membership is unable to support Cyberspace
  Communications, all property belonging to the club shall be
  sold.  The remaining cash assets, after paying final bills, shall
  be donated to a charitable organization, as determined by the
  BOD.  All elected officers shall then be released from their
  obligations and the corporation dissolved.


#23 of 47 by easlern on Thu Jan 18 18:40:36 2007:

There's still hope, Sindi- maybe Grex can take out a very big life insurance
policy and something unfortunate could happen to him. . .


(I know a guy.)


#24 of 47 by mary on Thu Jan 18 19:10:11 2007:

What I will miss is John's being able to participate in our voting 
process.  That's one good reason for being a member and paying dues.


#25 of 47 by slynne on Thu Jan 18 20:15:29 2007:

Maybe the board could consider lowering the dues for a while? It might
encourage more people to become voting members. The more people involved
in the process, the better, imho. 

And, fwiw, I would also John being a participant in the voting process. 


#26 of 47 by tod on Thu Jan 18 23:03:29 2007:

How can we find out how long we've been paying members? Is that online?


#27 of 47 by scholar on Fri Jan 19 01:40:49 2007:

Since when have we been paying members?!

I haven't gotten one red cent.  :(


#28 of 47 by denise on Fri Jan 19 03:36:24 2007:

If the dues were lowered, I bet more people *would* become members. I know
I would if I could. :-)


#29 of 47 by jep on Fri Jan 19 14:27:42 2007:

I'd pay a nominal fee such as $5/year to be able to vote.  I guess I can
become a member for a month if I want to vote oni anything, though, right?

I don't get anything from my membership; I pay it to support Grex.  But
Grex doesn't need any support.  It's piling up money.  I just don't find
it support-worthy to help Grex have a bigger pile.  I'll re-join when
Grex has used some of it's money for something and has any use at all
for more money.


#30 of 47 by mary on Fri Jan 19 14:53:47 2007:

The bylaws state:

ARTICLE 2:  MEMBERSHIP

  b.  To be eligible to vote, an individual must be a current member and
      have paid a minimum of three months dues.


#31 of 47 by cross on Fri Jan 19 15:14:46 2007:

Hmm, I say we quarter the membership cost, to $15 per year.


#32 of 47 by jep on Fri Jan 19 15:34:39 2007:

I say Grex should find something worthwhile to do with it's money.  If
it cannot do that, it should lower the amount it is taking in.  There's
no need for Grex to be stockpiling money.


#33 of 47 by cross on Fri Jan 19 15:39:02 2007:

Yes, I agree with you.


#34 of 47 by slynne on Fri Jan 19 15:42:29 2007:

Well. It is nice to have a financial cushion. 


#35 of 47 by aruba on Fri Jan 19 17:08:02 2007:

Indeed.  It wasn't so long ago that things looked pretty bleak.  So before
we start reducing our income, let's talk about what to do while we have a
surplus.

mcnally was the only one to answer my question about what we could do that
wouldn't require a lot of staff time.  Are there any other suggestions?  We
actually have a spare (rebuilt) disk, sitting on my desk, that could be
installed in Grex at any time.  (The result of sending in a disk for
warranty repair, and buying a new one at the same time.)


#36 of 47 by cross on Fri Jan 19 18:08:53 2007:

er, I'd like to point out that installing a new disk into grex and moving mail
to does require a bit of staff time.  In fact, it would require about the same
amount of time it would take to move grex to a RAID system.


#37 of 47 by remmers on Fri Jan 19 18:17:34 2007:

Is "a bit" the same as "a lot"?


#38 of 47 by cross on Fri Jan 19 19:10:21 2007:

It depends on who's doing it, and how they transfered the data.


#39 of 47 by mcnally on Fri Jan 19 22:53:34 2007:

Installing a new disk onto Grex and moving mail onto it probably requires
no more than an hour of staff time in my estimation.


#40 of 47 by cross on Sat Jan 20 02:37:13 2007:

Similarily, I'd guess that putting in a RAID storage system would require
about half a day.  The hardest part would probably be installing the harware
into the chasis; transfering the data and setting up the system to boot from
the RAID would be simple but just take a while.


#41 of 47 by jep on Sat Jan 20 04:35:40 2007:

re resp:35: Mark, I am in favor of Grex being financially secure.  I
admire and appreciate the job you in particular, and the Board in
general, have done to get Grex into good position with it's money.  But
there *is* a point where it's secure enough.  It's my feeling that Grex
is there.  It's taking in money which it doesn't need.


#42 of 47 by remmers on Sat Jan 20 14:29:25 2007:

It sounds like #39 would be a reasonable thing for somebody to do, as
it's not very time-consuming and would alleviate a vexing problem.


#43 of 47 by maus on Sat Jan 20 14:49:50 2007:

Does anyone have an order-of-magnitude guess of the cost of buying or
renting an anti-spam/anti-phish appliance? Maybe something like: 

 - http://www.barracudanetworks.com/ns/products/spam_overview.php
 - https://www.mailfoundry.com/store/category_537368463fae/
 -
http://www.mcafee.com/us/smb/products/anti_spam/secure_internet_gateway.h
tml

My understandign is that the staff time to put one of these in is fairly
small, and it would only consume one IP number and only require
changing, like, 2 lines in our DNS zone table. 


#44 of 47 by aruba on Fri Mar 9 21:50:16 2007:

I finally got around to looking up the links mentioned in #43.  Those look
like serious anti-spam appliances; on the order of $1000-1500 apiece.  Does
anyone have any experience with any of them?  If they actually work well,
then maybe we should consider one.


#45 of 47 by nharmon on Fri Mar 9 22:18:56 2007:

I think the appliances work pretty well. We have a McAfee anti-spam
appliance. However they would add to our physical footprint.


#46 of 47 by mcnally on Sat Mar 10 00:48:13 2007:

 I wasn't very impressed when we demo'ed a Barracuda Networks spam
 appliance at the ISP I work for and unless I'm confusing them with
 another similar company I think there's a per-user component to their
 pricing, which would be very undesirable for Grex, which has thousands
 of mostly inactive users.


#47 of 47 by nharmon on Sat Mar 10 02:29:15 2007:

I can't speak on Barracuda's licensing, but McAfee does not have a
per-user licensing cost outside of them recommending different hardware
sizes depending on mail load.


There are no more items selected.

You have several choices: