Posted on 06/23/2006 12:27:30 PM PDT by Berlin_Freeper
I am not certain what the legal ramifications would be in changing Free Republic from donations to a subscription service. It seems to me the switch may be detrimental to legal issues such as copyrights. If that is true I'd appreciate if someone could briefly explain that to me. However if that is not the case here is my suggestion:
I have been wondering about this for some time now and have not seen any discussions about it. So I would like to ask: Is it time for Free Republic to become an online subscription service?
Currently, the site is very antiquated. People can easily abuse the "add a keyword" feature and there seems to be a growing number of liberal trolls, foreigners and even pro-homosexual agenda-driven people infecting the site. In order to cut down on the undesirables and enhance FR at the same time, would it be advisable to start charging a monthly fee of about 15-30 bucks to be able to log into the site and post? There could also be different subscription levels like Basic, Premium or Platinum. That way, the more you pay the more features you have access to. Some of these extra-services could include storing photos or FR could be a conservative search engine for the web.
I have seen online sites where people can still read the boards for free. FR could do something like that so it would still be accessible to the Conservative public even if they are not paying members with posting priviledges.
Websites that rely heavily on banner and pop-up ads need as many hits as possible so for them restricting posting rights to subscribers might not be so desirable. However, Free Republic does not work like that. There are no ads other than some book links on the home page so the number of hits is not as crucial to the bottom line which is currently being paid for by donations.
Donations seem to be working well, but I am sure the cashflow could be improved. How many of you people honestly are put off donating money to FR because it is not what it should be? Especially in regards to the undesirable element that can be found throughout many of the threads. Wouldn't this change in format go a long way in eliminating the undesirables? I think so. Plus it would be neat to experience an upgraded more modern version of Free Republic.
Note: If you are a democrat troll, foreigner or pro-homosexual/lesbian then I am really not interested in your opinion and you should not be posting it to me (just the fact that I have to add this note is proof that something is not right).
Hahahahahaha
It was about 1 week after DeLay had publically resigned and the first time I had met him. His wife and my sister are friends.
I took a folder of the translated documents and didn't present them until about 3/4 of the way through dinner. My sister and his wife like to "yack" a bit and most of the conversation was about politics, liberals, and his recent stepping down from office. It was very interesting hearing it all from people who have been on Capitol Hill for 20 some years.
Eventually I warmed up and got the conversation to the documents. We discussed them a bit and I told him about 'jveritas' and that these guys are translating 24/7 night and day and DeLay said, "God Bless him." He took the docs and I asked if he could get them into the hands of anyone who could further get them into the public arena. He said he'd do what he could. I haven't heard anything but wasn't expecting him to call me about it either.
We also discussed the biased media and the indictments in Texas. It was very interesting to hear it straight from DeLay himself and his wife Christine. His wife Christine is very out going and very protective of her husband -- 20 years of politics you have to be.
I asked him why they (Republicans) allow the Democrats to spit out rope-a-dope lies such as "only the rich get tax cuts" and Christine jumped in and agreed that it made her mad that the Republicans don't fight back in that way. DeLay said that they do, but the media controls what gets out to the public and there is only so much you can do to counter them. He said there is a job to do beyond just fighting the media and they try and stay focused on that.
Anyway, not sure what his impression of the documents are at this time. It's a tough battle getting them out there no matter who you are. The media is right there to tear anything apart with their lies.
I assume there are already pay sites out there...Just join one...
if it became a pay site, it'd have legal contract ramifications on sitebrass' ability to ban paying users.
That's how the long lists of funny keywords originate. I often find these amusing although I have added keywords to other people's articles only once or twice.
I do believe that the decision would be Jim's. What is so hard to understand -- this is Jim Robinson's site. Send a big check and mind your own business.
I had forgotten about it until this thread.
To provide an outstanding service to our subscribers, we offer:
Sorry, I'm not in Berlin at the moment. But I think we know someone who is...
:0)
"I assume there are already pay sites out there...Just join one..."
Such as the NYT website.
"And shut out the 80-90% who may want to donate, but not pay for a subscription? No thank you."
I seriously disagree with your 80-90% estimate. I think most people who are already paying for a donation would not be so strongly against paying for a subscription. A subscription can even be charged quarterly or yearly and would then be like a donation. What's the big difference? The big difference is the people who pay get to play and the ones who don't get to watch so there would not be any real difference between donating money and paying a subscription.
Mike
I do, too. It would be closer to 98-99%. This site would be a ghost town.
You too? I always thought it was just me.
I think that the freedom to see and join in the discussion is one of the reasons for success. A lot of people found the site and glomped on during the 2000 election fiasco. How many of those would have paid to join in? How many good contributors would we have missed out on.
Even though I think a subscription fee is wrong, I would likely pay it if that is what Jim decided had to be done. And then I would worry about the exclusivity stifling the debate.
Nice checkup that. I disagree with the original post. But, the quality of a lot of the response, sadly, reveals a lack of actual reading and thinking - before firing off a one liner.
What is the backup site uRL anyhow?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.