I'm a guy who has contributed $ (more than the non-contributors, but not nearly as much as some people around here) and some articles (which I think contribute to the quality of the site--articles in general anyway, I leave my own contributions to the judgment of the public).
Let me share some thoughts. I teach at a university and some years ago, tired of having about a 40 to 50% absenteeism rate, implemented some tough attendance rules wherein high absenteeism led to lower grades and even fails. My teacher evaluations plummeted during this period. (Incidentally, in most public universities, about 40 to 50% of the undergraduates never get a degree. There's an obvious correlation, and my absenteeism is no worse or better than most other courses offered by other instructors.)
What the students "got" out of my attendance tirades at the beginning of the semester was that I was in a kind of war-of-judgment against them and that I resented them. They resented me back. Not all students resented me, but enough to affect my popularity numbers in end-of-the-semester survey sheets. In fact some students applauded the policies because they felt non-attendance dragged down the quality of their own experience. So this situation is very similar to what is going on here, except that we're talking small contributions instead of attendance.
Then I went to a group that counsels teachers on campus how to improve their pedagogy and I was advised to substitute very rapid no-make-up quizzes for attendance. I gave up ranting about attendance and just said there would be quizzes once a week. They were fairly easy and quick to grade, and at the end of the semester I had a good participation metric. I didn't have to lecture the students and my popularity numbers went up.
Incidentally, not being "at war with my students who were blowing off the rules" made me feel better too. I was more relaxed about the entire class room operation and ceased to focus on trying to squeeze something out those who simply weren't going to put out, and were in fact quite self-righteous about their right not to.
But in the end I got a system which gives me an attendance metric and the students got an instructor who was not lecturing them about attendance. So here's the question I put to you all: how can you do something similar?
Because we need to break this down one step at a time. First of all, it is to the advantage of the committed members who contribute to the site to have all the ones who are, in the context of donations, considered non-payers. That's because we as sellers want the largest possible number of "certified" buyers. It is in our interest to have this place be reputed to be *the* friendly, safe place to come to buy and sell. (This objective is not being met as well as one might hope.) We have to remember:
Feeloaders contribute by providing numbers
By providing word of mouth
By occasionally getting more involved and becoming contributors
By occasionally buying
by occasionally selling
So, in this sense, the objection voiced by non-payers that they should be allowed to "feel good about themselves" is pretty much the same as my students who didn't want to come to class but didn't want me lecturing them about attendance. When you get into that situation, it's a conflict that cannot be won. When one puts out resentment one gets resentment back, never mind who's right. It's that simple. The strategy is not good business (and not good pedagogy).
I would suggest that Astromart management consider what it is that is the sorest source of grievance: namely, high volume advertisers who don't contribute. Since new members now have to give credit card information, it would be fairly easy to arrange the TOS to exact a fee when certain thresholds are passed. Thirty ads per year (or whatever, I won't set the policy) with a standard one time joining fee for example is a generous allotment that gives the vast hoi polloi the chance to get their feet wet in selling and draws people here so that the higher volume sellers have a market. That's a good thing, right? If management feels that someone who has had 200 ads and made no contribution is gaming the system, then management should have a rule: if you reach the 100 or 200 ad threshold and don't contribute, you automatically get charged some amount.
If the person has paid some amount before reaching that threshold--even if it is small--then the person does not get charged the threshold amount. I envision providing people with an automated notice, sent to their registered account and also to their Amart mail facility, that they were nearing the threshold where they would be charged if they did not make a voluntary contribution.
So you could have TOS which gets some money out of high volume users and you could also run an operation where many people would be operating at very small, almost free costs and that is good for building up the size of the buyer base which is in everyone's interest.
I am basing my suggestion here on the observation that most of the negative energy is directed at the many non-contributors who have made many dozens or even hundreds of ads. The solution is to find terms of service which allows the people managing the operation to feel comfortable that the system is not being exploited, and that, like many other operations of this kind, the low volume participants get a good deal for free (or for $12) while others get tapped on the shoulder and told it's time to pay in. Not all ads on Craigs' list are free, I'm told. If management feels comfortable with the business model it won't fall into the trap of criticizing the customer base which is absolutely a no-win situation.
Incidentally, I'd like to remind Astromart that some users will post an ad, delete it, re-post (maybe because they've got pics and want to start at the "top of the line"), or re-post because they are lowering their price. These people will think that they are "running one ad," which to astromart may look like three.
Certainly there is something that could be done about this: have a lifetime count of ads posted and ads deleted either in the membership display option (for everyone to see) or displayed privately to the member (on the left in the "my account" section). It could be accompanied by a "free ads remaining" indicator which would make it plain when a user was coming up on the threshold to either voluntarily contribute or get charged.
In other words, it should be possible to set up a system which meets the goals of large membership and making sure significant users kick in. And then when this is done one need not ever criticize individuals for not contributing again, one understands the system one has designed, and lets it operate. (I didn't mention attendance at all last semester: it's not because my feelings about absenteeism changed, it's because I decided to "accept what is" in dealing with large numbers of people). This will improve the tenor of the operation, achieve the goal of generating some revenue, and allow attention to turn to other things. The Astromart ads which ask for donations could make their pitch and also have a reminder that high volume users will be charged if they don't make some kind of contribution (and I'm thinking yeah you could let someone get away with a $10 or 15 individual donation or 5 pack purchase to escape a $25 charge, for example).
Anyhow that's the way I see it. Obviously it's not my business to run but I do think there are some parallels with my own "business." I talked over my situation once with a student who as a lieutenant in the Army and asked, "How the hell do you teach people to take their rifles apart and put them together again and pay attention?" He pointed out that he had options that I don't: curtailing weekend passes, give me 50 push ups, run a mile, etc., and that even then, those don't work all the time, which is why they invented the dishonorable discharge (and Army prison). He pointed out that I can't do those things and would just have to organize my operation accordingly. In this I think my situation and Astromart's have some similarities. I think it is possible to set up a participation structure that is part cheap and free and part voluntary--organizations like the Sierra club do it, they have dues, they also let people come on hikes without being members, even lots of hikes, which is interesting, because they have substantial insurance costs associated with their organized activities. And then there are also lifetime members and sustaining members and all of that. Astromart is not alone with this issue.
regards
Greg N
Let me share some thoughts. I teach at a university and some years ago, tired of having about a 40 to 50% absenteeism rate, implemented some tough attendance rules wherein high absenteeism led to lower grades and even fails. My teacher evaluations plummeted during this period. (Incidentally, in most public universities, about 40 to 50% of the undergraduates never get a degree. There's an obvious correlation, and my absenteeism is no worse or better than most other courses offered by other instructors.)
What the students "got" out of my attendance tirades at the beginning of the semester was that I was in a kind of war-of-judgment against them and that I resented them. They resented me back. Not all students resented me, but enough to affect my popularity numbers in end-of-the-semester survey sheets. In fact some students applauded the policies because they felt non-attendance dragged down the quality of their own experience. So this situation is very similar to what is going on here, except that we're talking small contributions instead of attendance.
Then I went to a group that counsels teachers on campus how to improve their pedagogy and I was advised to substitute very rapid no-make-up quizzes for attendance. I gave up ranting about attendance and just said there would be quizzes once a week. They were fairly easy and quick to grade, and at the end of the semester I had a good participation metric. I didn't have to lecture the students and my popularity numbers went up.
Incidentally, not being "at war with my students who were blowing off the rules" made me feel better too. I was more relaxed about the entire class room operation and ceased to focus on trying to squeeze something out those who simply weren't going to put out, and were in fact quite self-righteous about their right not to.
But in the end I got a system which gives me an attendance metric and the students got an instructor who was not lecturing them about attendance. So here's the question I put to you all: how can you do something similar?
Because we need to break this down one step at a time. First of all, it is to the advantage of the committed members who contribute to the site to have all the ones who are, in the context of donations, considered non-payers. That's because we as sellers want the largest possible number of "certified" buyers. It is in our interest to have this place be reputed to be *the* friendly, safe place to come to buy and sell. (This objective is not being met as well as one might hope.) We have to remember:
Feeloaders contribute by providing numbers
By providing word of mouth
By occasionally getting more involved and becoming contributors
By occasionally buying
by occasionally selling
So, in this sense, the objection voiced by non-payers that they should be allowed to "feel good about themselves" is pretty much the same as my students who didn't want to come to class but didn't want me lecturing them about attendance. When you get into that situation, it's a conflict that cannot be won. When one puts out resentment one gets resentment back, never mind who's right. It's that simple. The strategy is not good business (and not good pedagogy).
I would suggest that Astromart management consider what it is that is the sorest source of grievance: namely, high volume advertisers who don't contribute. Since new members now have to give credit card information, it would be fairly easy to arrange the TOS to exact a fee when certain thresholds are passed. Thirty ads per year (or whatever, I won't set the policy) with a standard one time joining fee for example is a generous allotment that gives the vast hoi polloi the chance to get their feet wet in selling and draws people here so that the higher volume sellers have a market. That's a good thing, right? If management feels that someone who has had 200 ads and made no contribution is gaming the system, then management should have a rule: if you reach the 100 or 200 ad threshold and don't contribute, you automatically get charged some amount.
If the person has paid some amount before reaching that threshold--even if it is small--then the person does not get charged the threshold amount. I envision providing people with an automated notice, sent to their registered account and also to their Amart mail facility, that they were nearing the threshold where they would be charged if they did not make a voluntary contribution.
So you could have TOS which gets some money out of high volume users and you could also run an operation where many people would be operating at very small, almost free costs and that is good for building up the size of the buyer base which is in everyone's interest.
I am basing my suggestion here on the observation that most of the negative energy is directed at the many non-contributors who have made many dozens or even hundreds of ads. The solution is to find terms of service which allows the people managing the operation to feel comfortable that the system is not being exploited, and that, like many other operations of this kind, the low volume participants get a good deal for free (or for $12) while others get tapped on the shoulder and told it's time to pay in. Not all ads on Craigs' list are free, I'm told. If management feels comfortable with the business model it won't fall into the trap of criticizing the customer base which is absolutely a no-win situation.
Incidentally, I'd like to remind Astromart that some users will post an ad, delete it, re-post (maybe because they've got pics and want to start at the "top of the line"), or re-post because they are lowering their price. These people will think that they are "running one ad," which to astromart may look like three.
Certainly there is something that could be done about this: have a lifetime count of ads posted and ads deleted either in the membership display option (for everyone to see) or displayed privately to the member (on the left in the "my account" section). It could be accompanied by a "free ads remaining" indicator which would make it plain when a user was coming up on the threshold to either voluntarily contribute or get charged.
In other words, it should be possible to set up a system which meets the goals of large membership and making sure significant users kick in. And then when this is done one need not ever criticize individuals for not contributing again, one understands the system one has designed, and lets it operate. (I didn't mention attendance at all last semester: it's not because my feelings about absenteeism changed, it's because I decided to "accept what is" in dealing with large numbers of people). This will improve the tenor of the operation, achieve the goal of generating some revenue, and allow attention to turn to other things. The Astromart ads which ask for donations could make their pitch and also have a reminder that high volume users will be charged if they don't make some kind of contribution (and I'm thinking yeah you could let someone get away with a $10 or 15 individual donation or 5 pack purchase to escape a $25 charge, for example).
Anyhow that's the way I see it. Obviously it's not my business to run but I do think there are some parallels with my own "business." I talked over my situation once with a student who as a lieutenant in the Army and asked, "How the hell do you teach people to take their rifles apart and put them together again and pay attention?" He pointed out that he had options that I don't: curtailing weekend passes, give me 50 push ups, run a mile, etc., and that even then, those don't work all the time, which is why they invented the dishonorable discharge (and Army prison). He pointed out that I can't do those things and would just have to organize my operation accordingly. In this I think my situation and Astromart's have some similarities. I think it is possible to set up a participation structure that is part cheap and free and part voluntary--organizations like the Sierra club do it, they have dues, they also let people come on hikes without being members, even lots of hikes, which is interesting, because they have substantial insurance costs associated with their organized activities. And then there are also lifetime members and sustaining members and all of that. Astromart is not alone with this issue.
regards
Greg N
"Scope will get you through times of no money better than money will get you through times of no scope." --Freewheelin' Franklin
