|
|
| Author |
Message |
jgelinas
|
|
Modifying the Dues
| 
Sep 27 21:08 UTC 2010 |
At yesterday's Board meeting, I was asked to draft an amendment to
Article 6, "Dues," of the bylaws, which currently reads:
ARTICLE 6: DUES
a. Membership dues are $60 per year or $6 per month.
b. The fiscal year shall begin on January 1 of each year. The
incumbent treasurer shall close the books prior to this
date.
c. The BOD shall be responsible for keeping the membership
informed as to Grex's financial status. Should circumstances
warrant a change in membership dues, the membership will be
notified and the issue discussed and put to a vote according
to the procedures of Article 5.
d. Dues paid to cover a membership of two years or less will
not be affected by an increase in dues.
In accordance with Section C, above, I propose the dues be changed to
three dollars ($3.00) per month or thirty dollars ($30.00) per year, and
that any members who pay dues at the current rate for the purpose of
voting on this proposal have those dues credited at the new rate, should
the proposal be adopted.
|
| 56 responses total. |
kentn
|
|
response 1 of 56:
|
Sep 27 21:11 UTC 2010 |
Do we want to modify a. above to leave dues to the discretion of the
Board?
|
rcurl
|
|
response 2 of 56:
|
Sep 28 05:01 UTC 2010 |
That is generally preferable - it is uncommon to state the dues in an
orgasnization's bylaws.
|
mary
|
|
response 3 of 56:
|
Sep 28 12:43 UTC 2010 |
Joe: Do you prefer being specific in the bylaws rather than leaving it up
to the BOD?
All: What would the dues need to be in order for you to jump in and become
a voting member? (Said realizing many simply aren't interested, at any
price, in voting membership.)
|
nharmon
|
|
response 4 of 56:
|
Sep 28 20:17 UTC 2010 |
My cutoff is somewhere between $15 and $20.
|
jgelinas
|
|
response 5 of 56:
|
Sep 28 21:02 UTC 2010 |
I figured it would be just as quick to follow the procedure outlined in
the bylaws as it would be to give the authority to the Board. I started
another item to discuss the question of how to make changes in the
future. I think it is Item #287.
As an item of administrative interest, please note that all three items
currently proposed can be voted on simultaneously, since they don't
conflict with each other.
|
mary
|
|
response 6 of 56:
|
Sep 28 21:25 UTC 2010 |
Interesting. My initial thoughts on this would be to set the dues at
$18 a year. But crunching a few numbers we get monthly expenses at
~$140 a month. $100 to Provide, ~$30 for a phone line, and a few bucks
for things like domain charges, filing fees and certificates.
So, even if we drop the last dial-in, we'd need ~75 members to maintain
Grex as is. That's a lot of members. We have ~$1900 at present, so we
could coast for a bit, but without reasonable support the party won't go
on too much longer.
As hard as it is to imagine 75 people giving $18 a year I'm left
wondering if maybe it's time to close shop if 75 people can't or won't
help with that amount.
I suspect some folks are just going to sit back and see what happens -
if others pick up the slack. But I'm also getting the feeling that they
may be disappointed in how that goes.
|
kentn
|
|
response 7 of 56:
|
Sep 28 22:24 UTC 2010 |
Considering we aren't trying anything new around here, per se, but
rather debating it ad nauseum (these sorts of what do we do discussions
have been going on for years and on mostly the same topics), we probably
will coast.
But that's not what I'd like see. It is within our power to keep it from
happening. This is partly where Mark's comment about "more enthusiasm"
comes in. We need to think more about what we can do rather than about
what we don't like, what we can't do, etc. You don't know until you
try. And we need to act rather quickly.
A lot depends on what we can accomplish in terms of applications and
improvements to applications on the system that might attract new
users (for example, those who want to avoid a command line). Whether
such improvements would attract any new users, let alone any number
approaching what we need to continue operation (with any dues level)
remains to be seen. (But consider that we aren't asking people to become
members in any significant way and are, after over 9 months, still
trying to figure out to send out renewal notices!).
I do think we can get more users if we "provide a system worth
supporting" as one user said, and some users are asking for web-based
applications (and note that this does not mean that if we implemented
more web-based apps, the CLI apps would go away. There is no good reason
they can't remain).
The fact that we can't compete directly with Facebook or Twitter is
not an issue since we are looking at a niche market anyway. And that
doesn't mean we can't have a more modern interace to the system. There
are plenty of small backwater web sites on the internet that have
small but thriving, active communities. They aren't trying to compete
directly with any of the big social web sites. We don't need to compete
directly, either. I doubt we want to be that big of an operation,
anyway. We can define success differently.
However, without enthusiasm and a willingness to participate in a
meaningful fashion, it all falls apart.
|
rcurl
|
|
response 8 of 56:
|
Sep 29 03:47 UTC 2010 |
Might try dues of $25/annum. In another organization that has dues of $24/a,
a lot of members send $25 anyway. Some sort of "round number" psychology is
at play (not that 25 looks very round).
|
mary
|
|
response 9 of 56:
|
Sep 29 11:33 UTC 2010 |
Would you send in $25 a year? Anyone?
|
kentn
|
|
response 10 of 56:
|
Sep 29 12:45 UTC 2010 |
Rather than $60, sure, $25 sounds really good in comparison. One big
question, though, is what that dues level looks like to new users.
|
slynne
|
|
response 11 of 56:
|
Sep 29 15:49 UTC 2010 |
Yes. I would send in $25 a year. I would send in $60 too but I keep
finding myself in financial situations where I just can't. But those are
unanticipated things.
|
cross
|
|
response 12 of 56:
|
Sep 30 16:18 UTC 2010 |
I'd front five fins for Grex.
|
mary
|
|
response 13 of 56:
|
Sep 30 16:46 UTC 2010 |
Me too, assuming a fin is a five.
|
cross
|
|
response 14 of 56:
|
Oct 1 05:08 UTC 2010 |
Yeah.
|
jgelinas
|
|
response 15 of 56:
|
Oct 2 16:01 UTC 2010 |
Kent, expecting new users to figure out that this is a membership
organisation seems a bit much to me, unless the newuser blurb spells it
out. I haven't read the blurb in a while, though. Expecting them to
immediately become members is, I think, completely unreasonable,
especially considering the expressed willingness of those who have been
around a while.
|
kentn
|
|
response 16 of 56:
|
Oct 2 16:44 UTC 2010 |
I see nothing wrong with trying to encourage people to become members
when they first log in. That's why having the system be more useful
and inviting is a big thing. If all they see when they log in is a dead
end, then, no, I doubt they'll see it as worth a membership. At that
point, you've lost them and it's anybody's guess if they'll ever become
a member.
We're not doing a good job of advertising what we do and what the
benfits of membership are, IMO, and we're making it worse by locking the
front door and hollering "Who's there? What's the secret password?".
But Grex has not been actively encouraging memberships for a long time
now (years). As far as I'm concerned, any time is a good time to ask.
|
jgelinas
|
|
response 17 of 56:
|
Oct 5 18:14 UTC 2010 |
To me, the advantage of $18.00 per year is that those who pay for three
months at the current rate, which is required to vote on this proposal,
can get a year's membership without further ado. Setting the dues at
$25.00 per year would require some further action to get a year's
membership.
The motivation for changing the dues right now is not so much to raise
money as it is to raise membership. So, based on the discussion to
date, I'm thinking the final text will look like:
"Dues shall be $18.00 per year, or $2.00 per month, effective September
27, 2010."
We still have a week to discuss the matter.
|
mary
|
|
response 18 of 56:
|
Oct 5 19:10 UTC 2010 |
Sounds like good reasoning to me, Joe. I'd support this proposal.
I guess now that both of your proposals have had a chance to sit a bit I'm
wondering if you'd consider bringing only one forward to a vote. Doing
otherwise is kind of confusing and if both pass it would be a mess.
|
rcurl
|
|
response 19 of 56:
|
Oct 5 20:43 UTC 2010 |
I'd suggest abandoning monthly dues. It makes much more work for the treasurer
as well as a lot of wasted busy work cutting people off and putting them back
on if they don't get monthly dues in on time. Annual dues only makes the most
sense.
|
krj
|
|
response 20 of 56:
|
Oct 5 21:06 UTC 2010 |
I concur; if we are getting down into the $20-$25 range for annual dues,
monthly just doesn't make sense in terms of labor costs. Might want
to leave a six-month option for those who are cash-pinched, though,
as a compromise.
|
mary
|
|
response 21 of 56:
|
Oct 5 22:24 UTC 2010 |
I agree with members being given the choice to pay dues for either a six
month period or one year (or more in those increments).
We'll probably want to also change the bylaws which now state -
Article 2
b. To be eligible to vote, an individual must be a current member
and have paid a minimum of three months dues.
Maybe change it from three months to six? Or even one year?
|
kentn
|
|
response 22 of 56:
|
Oct 6 01:48 UTC 2010 |
If we only allow a minimum of 6 mos. that's more than 3 mos. so that's
okay for voting. It would be good if we limit the number of by-law
changes to just those necessary, unless we absolutely need to change
them.
Right now it's members we need for voting, but soon, it'll be members to
help pay the expenses. One thing at a time, I know, but we do need to
see a little farther into the future than just the end of the year. And
we don't want to be moving the dues up and down every time we need money
or voters. So, setting a reasonable level, a happy medium compared to
similar systems, the users' idea of a good dues level, and the Board's
idea of what we need to keep the system running, would probably be best.
|
rcurl
|
|
response 23 of 56:
|
Oct 6 03:57 UTC 2010 |
The difference between six months dues and annual dues is too small to justify
the extra work for a volunteer treasurer. If you want options, offer two or
three year or more dues.
|
jgelinas
|
|
response 24 of 56:
|
Oct 8 13:51 UTC 2010 |
Kent, if we don't get members, we won't continue past the end of the
year. If we get enough members, then the $18.00 per year will cover our
expenses.
I'm inclined to leave the proposal as is: folks can decide on their own
whether to pay $6.00 just for an election, or $18.00 for the health of
the system. Since there is little other reason to pony up for less than
a year, I don't anticipate a lot of extra work for the treasurer.
|