|
Grex > Coop8 > #115: Cyberspace Communications, Inc. finances through 8/31/96 |  |
|
| Author |
Message |
| 25 new of 119 responses total. |
ladyevil
|
|
response 50 of 119:
| 
Oct 8 23:28 UTC 1996 |
Even when they wish they didn't have to..
|
arianna
|
|
response 51 of 119:
|
Oct 10 01:12 UTC 1996 |
(I was once a twit. ~d=)
|
srw
|
|
response 52 of 119:
|
Oct 10 07:11 UTC 1996 |
I don't want to be a co-owner of the system. I don't particularly like the
co-op architecture.
|
tsty
|
|
response 53 of 119:
|
Oct 10 09:07 UTC 1996 |
re #44. from that pov, you are right. i guess the only difference
we ahve is that i don't slice down mercenary to such a fine, fine point.
mercenary to me connotes a much more crude&brutal situation.
|
davel
|
|
response 54 of 119:
|
Oct 10 13:58 UTC 1996 |
As in "mercenary soldier"? They're called that because of the broader
meaning.
|
rcurl
|
|
response 55 of 119:
|
Oct 10 14:41 UTC 1996 |
If a group formed a buyers club purely for social aspects, it would of
course not have mercenary purpose. If they also used the club to pool
resources to obtain discounts, then that would be a mercenary aspect. It
would be fully mercenary if the social aspects were dropped.
|
srw
|
|
response 56 of 119:
|
Oct 10 16:12 UTC 1996 |
Some people perceive the word "mercenary"as loaded with bad connotations.
I don't though, and I wonder how may do. I hate to see the language lose the
use of a good word, but if it is widely enough perceived that way, it woud
be wise to search for a substitute.
|
dang
|
|
response 57 of 119:
|
Oct 10 17:09 UTC 1996 |
I don't see "mercenary" as having bad connotations. It's a reason, like
anything else. In many respects, it means almost the same as professional,
and that's usually seen as having good connotations.
|
ajax
|
|
response 58 of 119:
|
Oct 10 18:20 UTC 1996 |
Webster's includes "venal" and "greedy" among their several
definitions. Those are not normally considered positive attributes.
|
rcurl
|
|
response 59 of 119:
|
Oct 10 21:41 UTC 1996 |
I just checked the OED, and the fully non-derogatory definition is
consider Obs. Here is an intermediate definition:
A. adj.1. Of persons: Working merely for the sake of monetary or other
reward; actuated by considerations of self-interest. Hence of motives,
dispositions, etc.
Note that "merely", which flavors an otherwise neutral definition. Of
course, we are all actuated by considerations of self-interest, to some
extent, but if it MERELY....you're an out-and-out "Mercenary".
|
cmcgee
|
|
response 60 of 119:
|
Oct 11 06:20 UTC 1996 |
All the coops that I know of subscribe to internationally recogni8zed
cooperative principles which currently include:
1) Open membership: Membership in a cooperative is voluntary and open to
anyone who can make use of its services.
2) DEmocratic control: Each member has one vote regardless of their volume
of business with the cooperative or the amount of their investment.
3)Limited return on capital: Investment in the share capital of the
cooperative shoul receive only a strictly limited rate of interest, if any.
4) Savings distributed to members: Surplus above both the cost of operations
and any reserves for expansion of services should be returned to members in
proportion to the amount of business they have done with the cooperative.
5) Edducation: Coopertives should work continuously to educate their members
and the general public in the principles and practice of cooperation.
6) Cooperation among cooperatives: Cooperatives should actively work with
other cooperatives to better serve the interests of the members and their
communities.
In A2, businesses that are organized as cooperatives include housing
cooperatives, babysitting cooperatives, nursery school cooperatives, food
coopertives, insurance cooperatives, producer cooperatives (like the Daily
is, and a section forbidding businesses from using the word coopertive in
their name if they are not set up legally as a cooperative.
The organizing idea behind cooperatives is that people working together
can control capital, labor, and materials in a democratically run enterprize.
Coops *are* businesses, but they are set up on radically different economic
theories than traditional capitalist or communists systems.
(PS I forgot worker owned cooperatives in the above list)
|
cmcgee
|
|
response 61 of 119:
|
Oct 11 06:27 UTC 1996 |
I seem to have dropped some text above. It should read:
......insurance coopertives, producer cooperatives (Like the Daily Grind),
and credit unions. State law explicitly spells out what a cooperative is,
and has a section forbidding businesses........
|
e4808mc
|
|
response 62 of 119:
|
Oct 12 04:31 UTC 1996 |
Did anyone see the article in Sunday's Ann Arbor News (page c7) about an
information coopertive modeled after farm cooperatives? It's in Garrett
County, "An information cooperative, modeled after farm cooperatives, aims
to make computer services so afforable that virtually anyone in the state's
westernmost county can get on-line.
A $10 membership fee, and a $(.95 monthly charge buys individual co-op members
unlimited access to the Internet, e-mail, a community bulletin board and other
features.
That's Garrett County, MD, a *very* rural county.
|
rcurl
|
|
response 63 of 119:
|
Oct 12 06:44 UTC 1996 |
(=?
|
ajax
|
|
response 64 of 119:
|
Oct 12 06:55 UTC 1996 |
I'd guess (.95 meant to be 9.95, since a ( is a shift-9. Also, that seems
like about what I'd expect from such a co-operative. Profit-driven companies
in denser markets are generally charging $15-20 a month for similar service.
|
krj
|
|
response 65 of 119:
|
Oct 12 08:53 UTC 1996 |
If we could charge everyone who uses Grex $10/month we'd be
swimming in money. Even if the usage dropped by 3/4ths.
Would Grex then be as interesting a place?
|
davel
|
|
response 66 of 119:
|
Oct 12 12:59 UTC 1996 |
You mean, if we *did* charge everyone? We *could*, of course.
|
dang
|
|
response 67 of 119:
|
Oct 12 18:07 UTC 1996 |
I haven't read the bylaws recently. Could we without an amendment?
|
ladyevil
|
|
response 68 of 119:
|
Oct 12 20:38 UTC 1996 |
Are we actually seriously considering this??
|
chelsea
|
|
response 69 of 119:
|
Oct 12 20:46 UTC 1996 |
I depends on who you mean by "we". ;-)
|
danr
|
|
response 70 of 119:
|
Oct 12 22:23 UTC 1996 |
Even if *some* of us were considering it, I doubt it would get very far. :)
|
srw
|
|
response 71 of 119:
|
Oct 13 05:12 UTC 1996 |
$10 a month is comparable to what TLN the library cooperative is
charging right here in Washtenaw County. if I remember their flier
from the "Login night at the library" we attended. Requiring payment
to access grex is *far* outside our parameters.
Serious attempts to bolster Grex's income are not likely to include
making membership mnore expensive, but some of us are looking for ways
to somewhat increase the 0.7 % membership rate. We have about 100 out
of 15,000 who support the system. If we could get that up to say a 1%
rate (150 members) we could make things a lot nicer here.
We can do this without degrading the quality of the community, in my
opinion, although obviously not everyone agrees. If we decide that we
like how we are doing so much that we don't want to change anything,
I'll certainly lose interest in this place. If we make a change that's
a mistake, I'll warrant we can recognize that and undo it. I favor
continuing to experiment.^K^KThis is how we got here.
|
rcurl
|
|
response 72 of 119:
|
Oct 13 05:26 UTC 1996 |
I suggest two things. First, *slightly* decrease the size of files that can
be transferred (or e-mailed). I think a *slight* limit on these could easily
halve that 15,000 users, and I don't think we'd lose more than maybe a copuple
of members. The second thing is what we talk about a lot, but don't do, and
that is badger nonmembers to become members. Nicely, of course, but still
enough to persuade a few more percent that joining is preferable to being
badgered.
|
mta
|
|
response 73 of 119:
|
Oct 13 15:32 UTC 1996 |
I don't like the idea of *badgering* users at all! The idea, at least
in my mind, is that GREX is open to everyone regardless of ability to
pay. Now, how welcome is someone who just can't spare any money for a
membership going to feel after being badgered for 6 months?
No, in my opinion deciding to badger people is tantamount to saying
"We'll use this free access idea as a come-on and a marketing ploy ...
but we don't really mean it.
|
danr
|
|
response 74 of 119:
|
Oct 14 00:20 UTC 1996 |
imho, we should never say that Grex is free. It isn't free--someone's got
to pay for it. We should not badger those who truly cannot afford it,
but we should encourage those who can pay to pay their fair share,
even if it means a little bbadgering.
|