Recently I answered a message regarding the free and paid membership levels:

Quotehow can you reconcile the two different groups?

It's mostly a matter of conscience. We aren't making difference in the treatments to each group other than content access. You have most certainly already interacted with both types of members.

Should we treat paying users differently? In the interactions with people we all should be treated the same.

If you would, we currently have not two, but several categories of members:

- Guests: only gets teaser posts and can't access certain areas (i.e. can't even know or see such areas as the private general board and soon the extra software by Ophis or me).

- Registered non-paying member: Can post around but still can't access private sections in full.

- Paying member: access to everything earned by means of the provided financial support.

- Full free member: a member that we'd be honored to have in our ranks offering their quality interactions and bringing activity that pushes the forum forward.

So, there is space for all in our forum. There are no special stars or distinctions under their name for paying or full members. I know for a fact that when such distinctions are in place there are immediate cracks in the group's cohesion and this is why we avoid them, in order to not even have a need to reconcile, because we all understand the most important thing is to support the place together. Technically (features/software), with financial support (subscription price) or with the quality interactions (that keep the forum in good flow).

Receive a big, heartfelt hug.

Victor

Bottom line is: we are attacking the "Achilles heels" of forum sustainability from the start.

We are building a well-oiled community from every angle: quality content, quality software and internal self-support; a winner for the years to come.

I'm also take the opportunity to place a subscribe button for those posters who were given the grant but wouldn't matter to put up with subscription price.

It's 100% opt-in of course, I do consider that bringing the main chunk of content to attract other members is already a lot; for instance asking to support with his constant posting AND financially every month I consider it to be over the top and that's why I'm not doing so, just if -and only if- those members want to choose it themselves, they can also have the choice/option.

They are already contributing more value than the one quantified by membership price 

Quote from: ewarwoowar on November 22, 2012, 02:39:18 PM
so, not everyone pays a subscription?

No. Those who don't get chopped posts and can't access several sections unless given the grant manually.

Also, later today there will be buttons for all active members to register as paying visibly.


We also have a large quota of "dormant members" who might in the future like to subscribe as things go more and more appealing and subscription enjoys more added value 

In the future we can charge for the framework, to organize and keep casino coordinates centralized, keep a database of harvested numbers from casinos and the like (basic/core stuff) and fellow friendly coders can charge a premium for their modules, so we work cooperatively and create our own "mini market", depending and controlled entirely by us.

-2013 is going to be an exciting and productive year for the community!

I'm about to put up a special URL so bot coders can provide extra incentives (releases/features) to people who subscribe to support here.

(Obviously coders who are this generous get their membership for free, since their contributions are worth more than a single subscription)

Quote from: ewarwoowar on November 22, 2012, 02:22:41 PM
does everyone not already pay a monthly subscription?

Some members support by posting plenty and actively... i.e. Johnlegend, Subby, and others.

We need their new posts in order to attract new subscribers so one could say their support is cornerstone to the forum as a whole.

It isn't a matter of who, but "how" (under which criteria).

Our very simple rules state:

"This is a space for posting bets, analyzing them and making conclusions"

So we aren't here to censor ways to play, but helping others make conclusions about them, testing results in hand.

They also state:

"- This is a peaceful space. We reserve the right to remove threads that are made (or turn into) "inflammable". "

It is self-explanatory.

Regarding the criterion for removal, rules say: "[...]including a member or thread not matching our site's light-hearted and productive spirit."

Neither me (admin) nor mods or members are exempt from those rules. We must agree there were things written today that do not align with those previously-laid criteria.

Agreed.

Indeed, it's not a matter of losing the monthly fee from the ads because there isn't any.


We can put up with them in the bottom, I guess since we're all saavy it will serve him for search engines and won't really disrupt us here. It's pretty clear they aren't part of the forum by being laid after the forum's layout/template, not to mention the 3rd-party ads advice.


So, I'll keep on doing my best as an admin so we can get past this. Right now the best course of action being the old adage: Let's move on.

Hello dear friends,

Some threads will be pruned under the question: is this constructive?

Many of them were "not matching our site's light-hearted and productive spirit." (excerpt from forum rules).

Today was a heated day, non-productive things were said; it's time to move on.

Guys, I suggest we have a time out to chill-out and discuss this later, when we are more calmed and can see things in a clearer light and heart.

We all say and make things that we reconsider later. Let's step a bit to reconsider them first at this time.

Quote from: malcop on November 21, 2012, 04:45:56 PM
but YouTube is not a site where people discuss ideas.

You have a point there 

Quote from: Gizmotron on November 21, 2012, 04:29:42 PM
That's how gizmotron was banned at the original VLS Roulette forum. I did myself in.

At times that's the last stand a user has...