ForProfit - Revision history

Mattie p: Protected "ForProfit" ([Edit=Allow only administrators] (indefinite) [Move=Allow only administrators] (indefinite))

2014-05-11T20:03:32Z

Protected "ForProfit" ([Edit=Allow only administrators] (indefinite) [Move=Allow only administrators] (indefinite))

← Older revision	Revision as of 20:03, 11 May 2014
(No difference)

Mattie p at 20:00, 11 May 2014

2014-05-11T20:00:03Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:00, 11 May 2014
Line 1:		Line 1:
			'''Update:'''This project will be non-profit and community-driven.

			'''Note:'''This page is archival

			'''Note:'''This page is a candidate for deletion.

	Here's a copy of my vision for the project, was sent around in one of the mailing list posts. Note that it puts "attract and keep readers" first, before "make money". The intent is to avoid trading off user satisfaction for money - the users come first.		Here's a copy of my vision for the project, was sent around in one of the mailing list posts. Note that it puts "attract and keep readers" first, before "make money". The intent is to avoid trading off user satisfaction for money - the users come first.

El Oscuro at 01:16, 11 February 2014

2014-02-11T01:16:32Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:16, 11 February 2014
Line 6:		Line 6:
	* I intend to listen to community feedback and do whatever makes the site better		* I intend to listen to community feedback and do whatever makes the site better
	* There will be monetization; however, this is secondary to the primary goal, which is to attract and keep readers.		* There will be monetization; however, this is secondary to the primary goal, which is to attract and keep readers.
	* Users will be monetized (ie we won't sell our user's contact info)		* Users ('''I think won't''') will be monetized (ie we won't sell our user's contact info)
	* We won't poach from Slashdot		* We won't poach from Slashdot

Islisis: /* Comments */

2014-02-08T04:40:39Z

Comments

← Older revision		Revision as of 04:40, 8 February 2014
Line 85:		Line 85:
	* I am curious why you are proposing this model rather than just hiring people, or profit-sharing. I see practical problems with its implementation: how can you be sure the site will ever make N times $1 million? What about people who work hard for six or twelve months and burn out before you hit the magic number -- they get nothing? What about someone who joins the team late? And so on. I respect the novelty of your idea but if I were one of three developers and you only(!) made $2 million the first year, I would feel kind of shafted working all year for nothing when there are $2 million sitting in the bank. Doubly so, if something bad happened and the site shut down without ever having paid anyone. [[User:Sir Garlon\|Sir Garlon]]		* I am curious why you are proposing this model rather than just hiring people, or profit-sharing. I see practical problems with its implementation: how can you be sure the site will ever make N times $1 million? What about people who work hard for six or twelve months and burn out before you hit the magic number -- they get nothing? What about someone who joins the team late? And so on. I respect the novelty of your idea but if I were one of three developers and you only(!) made $2 million the first year, I would feel kind of shafted working all year for nothing when there are $2 million sitting in the bank. Doubly so, if something bad happened and the site shut down without ever having paid anyone. [[User:Sir Garlon\|Sir Garlon]]
	*If it's for-profit, that'll always be the primary goal, regardless of any other suggestion. Has to be community driven and supported by donations. Also, the goal shouldn't be to attract people, but to aggregate the best content and discussions.		*If it's for-profit, that'll always be the primary goal, regardless of any other suggestion. Has to be community driven and supported by donations. Also, the goal shouldn't be to attract people, but to aggregate the best content and discussions.
	** Can I support idea to drive the site from community contributions and public donations. Take a page from kickstarter and offer an involved donation menu - be transparent about your ongoing costs etc and how much is recommended to keep things afloat. Some sort of small visual indicator of the overall status can be shown at the top of the main page. Donations can even be broken down into different goals if necessary.		** Can I support idea to drive the site from community contributions and public donations? Take a page from kickstarter and offer an involved donation menu - be transparent about your ongoing costs etc and how much is recommended to keep things afloat. Some sort of small visual indicator of the overall status can be shown at the top of the main page. Donations can even be broken down into different goals if necessary.

Islisis: /* Comments */

2014-02-08T04:40:18Z

Comments

← Older revision		Revision as of 04:40, 8 February 2014
Line 85:		Line 85:
	* I am curious why you are proposing this model rather than just hiring people, or profit-sharing. I see practical problems with its implementation: how can you be sure the site will ever make N times $1 million? What about people who work hard for six or twelve months and burn out before you hit the magic number -- they get nothing? What about someone who joins the team late? And so on. I respect the novelty of your idea but if I were one of three developers and you only(!) made $2 million the first year, I would feel kind of shafted working all year for nothing when there are $2 million sitting in the bank. Doubly so, if something bad happened and the site shut down without ever having paid anyone. [[User:Sir Garlon\|Sir Garlon]]		* I am curious why you are proposing this model rather than just hiring people, or profit-sharing. I see practical problems with its implementation: how can you be sure the site will ever make N times $1 million? What about people who work hard for six or twelve months and burn out before you hit the magic number -- they get nothing? What about someone who joins the team late? And so on. I respect the novelty of your idea but if I were one of three developers and you only(!) made $2 million the first year, I would feel kind of shafted working all year for nothing when there are $2 million sitting in the bank. Doubly so, if something bad happened and the site shut down without ever having paid anyone. [[User:Sir Garlon\|Sir Garlon]]
	*If it's for-profit, that'll always be the primary goal, regardless of any other suggestion. Has to be community driven and supported by donations. Also, the goal shouldn't be to attract people, but to aggregate the best content and discussions.		*If it's for-profit, that'll always be the primary goal, regardless of any other suggestion. Has to be community driven and supported by donations. Also, the goal shouldn't be to attract people, but to aggregate the best content and discussions.
			** Can I support idea to drive the site from community contributions and public donations. Take a page from kickstarter and offer an involved donation menu - be transparent about your ongoing costs etc and how much is recommended to keep things afloat. Some sort of small visual indicator of the overall status can be shown at the top of the main page. Donations can even be broken down into different goals if necessary.

Stan at 02:24, 8 February 2014

2014-02-08T02:24:48Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 02:24, 8 February 2014
Line 84:		Line 84:

	* I am curious why you are proposing this model rather than just hiring people, or profit-sharing. I see practical problems with its implementation: how can you be sure the site will ever make N times $1 million? What about people who work hard for six or twelve months and burn out before you hit the magic number -- they get nothing? What about someone who joins the team late? And so on. I respect the novelty of your idea but if I were one of three developers and you only(!) made $2 million the first year, I would feel kind of shafted working all year for nothing when there are $2 million sitting in the bank. Doubly so, if something bad happened and the site shut down without ever having paid anyone. [[User:Sir Garlon\|Sir Garlon]]		* I am curious why you are proposing this model rather than just hiring people, or profit-sharing. I see practical problems with its implementation: how can you be sure the site will ever make N times $1 million? What about people who work hard for six or twelve months and burn out before you hit the magic number -- they get nothing? What about someone who joins the team late? And so on. I respect the novelty of your idea but if I were one of three developers and you only(!) made $2 million the first year, I would feel kind of shafted working all year for nothing when there are $2 million sitting in the bank. Doubly so, if something bad happened and the site shut down without ever having paid anyone. [[User:Sir Garlon\|Sir Garlon]]
			*If it's for-profit, that'll always be the primary goal, regardless of any other suggestion. Has to be community driven and supported by donations. Also, the goal shouldn't be to attract people, but to aggregate the best content and discussions.

Sir Garlon: Moved my comment to the comments section. Facepalm

2014-02-07T14:16:46Z

Moved my comment to the comments section. *Facepalm*

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:16, 7 February 2014
Line 53:		Line 53:
	*It has been awhile since I have been in the website business. What is the non-intrusive advertising market like as far as compensation rates? I'd be against advertorials. It is bad enough that supposedly reputable places like CNN and CNBC are littered with them. Donations and Premium subscriptions are another cash flow stream that could make the site viable. Especially if we are transparent what donations are used for etc. -Nightbrood		*It has been awhile since I have been in the website business. What is the non-intrusive advertising market like as far as compensation rates? I'd be against advertorials. It is bad enough that supposedly reputable places like CNN and CNBC are littered with them. Donations and Premium subscriptions are another cash flow stream that could make the site viable. Especially if we are transparent what donations are used for etc. -Nightbrood

	* I am curious why you are proposing this model rather than just hiring people, or profit-sharing. I see practical problems with its implementation: how can you be sure the site will ever make N times $1 million? What about people who work hard for six or twelve months and burn out before you hit the magic number -- they get nothing? What about someone who joins the team late? And so on. I respect the novelty of your idea but if I were one of three developers and you only(!) made $2 million the first year, I would feel kind of shafted working all year for nothing when there are $2 million sitting in the bank. Doubly so, if something bad happened and the site shut down without ever having paid anyone. [[User:Sir Garlon\|Sir Garlon]]

	== Comments ==		== Comments ==
Line 82:		Line 82:
	** I like this idea. There are piles of resources online that will direct you in setting up a co-op. - Cactus		** I like this idea. There are piles of resources online that will direct you in setting up a co-op. - Cactus
	** I like the idea of a cooperative. This should ultimately be for the community and would remove the negative stigma attached to a conventional corporation. - Nightbrood		** I like the idea of a cooperative. This should ultimately be for the community and would remove the negative stigma attached to a conventional corporation. - Nightbrood

			* I am curious why you are proposing this model rather than just hiring people, or profit-sharing. I see practical problems with its implementation: how can you be sure the site will ever make N times $1 million? What about people who work hard for six or twelve months and burn out before you hit the magic number -- they get nothing? What about someone who joins the team late? And so on. I respect the novelty of your idea but if I were one of three developers and you only(!) made $2 million the first year, I would feel kind of shafted working all year for nothing when there are $2 million sitting in the bank. Doubly so, if something bad happened and the site shut down without ever having paid anyone. [[User:Sir Garlon\|Sir Garlon]]

Sir Garlon: Moved and re-phrased fairness comment

2014-02-07T14:13:24Z

Moved and re-phrased fairness comment

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:13, 7 February 2014
Line 44:		Line 44:
	* I'd be careful with assuming a 10% return. While long term history shows that to be the case, in the previous 10 years the S&P 500 has yielded under 8%. Additionally, if you are planning to deduct money out of the fund every year, one bad year can have catastrophic effects on the overall viability of the fund since you would be forced to liquidate assets at non-optimal prices. I would urge a more conservative measure. I would be happy look into these options with you as well since this is one of my areas of expertise. -Nightbrood		* I'd be careful with assuming a 10% return. While long term history shows that to be the case, in the previous 10 years the S&P 500 has yielded under 8%. Additionally, if you are planning to deduct money out of the fund every year, one bad year can have catastrophic effects on the overall viability of the fund since you would be forced to liquidate assets at non-optimal prices. I would urge a more conservative measure. I would be happy look into these options with you as well since this is one of my areas of expertise. -Nightbrood

	* I am curious why you are proposing this model rather than just hiring people, or profit-sharing. I see practical problems with its implementation: how do you decide who gets the first million, and after someone gets his million bucks, what incentive does he/she have to remain productive? I respect the novelty of your idea but if I were the third guy in line for an annuity and you only(!) made $2 million the first year, I would feel kind of shafted working all year for nothing when the guy next to me gets a payout for life. [[User:Sir Garlon\|Sir Garlon]]

	==Participation==		==Participation==
Line 53:		Line 52:

	*It has been awhile since I have been in the website business. What is the non-intrusive advertising market like as far as compensation rates? I'd be against advertorials. It is bad enough that supposedly reputable places like CNN and CNBC are littered with them. Donations and Premium subscriptions are another cash flow stream that could make the site viable. Especially if we are transparent what donations are used for etc. -Nightbrood		*It has been awhile since I have been in the website business. What is the non-intrusive advertising market like as far as compensation rates? I'd be against advertorials. It is bad enough that supposedly reputable places like CNN and CNBC are littered with them. Donations and Premium subscriptions are another cash flow stream that could make the site viable. Especially if we are transparent what donations are used for etc. -Nightbrood

			* I am curious why you are proposing this model rather than just hiring people, or profit-sharing. I see practical problems with its implementation: how can you be sure the site will ever make N times $1 million? What about people who work hard for six or twelve months and burn out before you hit the magic number -- they get nothing? What about someone who joins the team late? And so on. I respect the novelty of your idea but if I were one of three developers and you only(!) made $2 million the first year, I would feel kind of shafted working all year for nothing when there are $2 million sitting in the bank. Doubly so, if something bad happened and the site shut down without ever having paid anyone. [[User:Sir Garlon\|Sir Garlon]]

	== Comments ==		== Comments ==

Sir Garlon: /* Overall description: */ Comment on fairness of annuity-payout model

2014-02-07T14:08:30Z

Overall description:: Comment on fairness of annuity-payout model

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:08, 7 February 2014
Line 43:		Line 43:

	* I'd be careful with assuming a 10% return. While long term history shows that to be the case, in the previous 10 years the S&P 500 has yielded under 8%. Additionally, if you are planning to deduct money out of the fund every year, one bad year can have catastrophic effects on the overall viability of the fund since you would be forced to liquidate assets at non-optimal prices. I would urge a more conservative measure. I would be happy look into these options with you as well since this is one of my areas of expertise. -Nightbrood		* I'd be careful with assuming a 10% return. While long term history shows that to be the case, in the previous 10 years the S&P 500 has yielded under 8%. Additionally, if you are planning to deduct money out of the fund every year, one bad year can have catastrophic effects on the overall viability of the fund since you would be forced to liquidate assets at non-optimal prices. I would urge a more conservative measure. I would be happy look into these options with you as well since this is one of my areas of expertise. -Nightbrood

			* I am curious why you are proposing this model rather than just hiring people, or profit-sharing. I see practical problems with its implementation: how do you decide who gets the first million, and after someone gets his million bucks, what incentive does he/she have to remain productive? I respect the novelty of your idea but if I were the third guy in line for an annuity and you only(!) made $2 million the first year, I would feel kind of shafted working all year for nothing when the guy next to me gets a payout for life. [[User:Sir Garlon\|Sir Garlon]]

	==Participation==		==Participation==

Art at 13:40, 7 February 2014

2014-02-07T13:40:51Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:40, 7 February 2014
Line 1:		Line 1:
			Here's a copy of my vision for the project, was sent around in one of the mailing list posts. Note that it puts "attract and keep readers" first, before "make money". The intent is to avoid trading off user satisfaction for money - the users come first.

			* The purpose of the site will be to attract and keep readers.
			* The site is intended to make money
			* The site will hire people, and be a good employer
			* I intend to listen to community feedback and do whatever makes the site better
			* There will be monetization; however, this is secondary to the primary goal, which is to attract and keep readers.
			* Users will be monetized (ie we won't sell our user's contact info)
			* We won't poach from Slashdot


			(Monetization meaning largely what Slashdot does now: advertizing, merchandise, and job postings.)


			'''Note:''' this is only a proposal! This has never been done before, and I have no idea at this time whether it's feasible, or even legal.

	==Synopsis:==		==Synopsis:==

ForProfit - Revision history

Mattie p: Protected "ForProfit" ([Edit=Allow only administrators] (indefinite) [Move=Allow only administrators] (indefinite))

Mattie p at 20:00, 11 May 2014

El Oscuro at 01:16, 11 February 2014

Islisis: /* Comments */

Islisis: /* Comments */

Stan at 02:24, 8 February 2014

Sir Garlon: Moved my comment to the comments section. *Facepalm*

Sir Garlon: Moved and re-phrased fairness comment

Sir Garlon: /* Overall description: */ Comment on fairness of annuity-payout model

Art at 13:40, 7 February 2014

Sir Garlon: Moved my comment to the comments section. Facepalm