Ah, semantics...

Past tense equally applies here to the date of composing the thread topic [now 3 days old] as it may seem to you to apply to a decision already having been made.

If Stardock were to adopt Sponsoring they had to undertake to make it visible to all.

If reasonable argument and an alternative solution can be had here then Sponsoring may not be necessary/suitable, hence the public discussion.

Good old English Comprehension....like statistics it can be [mis] interpreted to suit any outcome...

For me it goes to the end of 'V'. After all is said and done, beyond terrible acts of revenge, he still knew that the future lay with the community that had so badly failed in the past. It always comes back to someone trying again....and having faith in others to try again.


To be clear, I have no problem with discrete advertising that brings revenue to the site, while maintaining the spirit of the phrase "not hinder etc. etc.", with all the subjective checks & balances that entails. Nor do I mind a total revisit of the subscription package if that's thought preferable. As has been noted, subscribers are in the main, that demographic that have already illustrated a willingness to make web-based purchases. As a group we do have added value to advertisers and I understand that, It is an asset and it should be explored.

My one objection was stated clearly. I'm happy to speak further to it publicly or privately if asked, but don't feel any need to do so.

I don't think semantics around logo, brand, advertise, sponsor etc. will survive the synonym game. They will be found too often to be interchangeable and in my mind lack sufficient 'clear blue water' to make the distinction useful.

In the face of that, once you take this step and place a commercial logo/brand on the sidebar, are you comfortable with promoting the site as 'ad-free' for subscribers?

I think we can survive looking at that squarely, re-defining where necessary and then moving on, with less damage than will be caused by trying to sidestep the issue.

One of the recurring concerns, is the theme of the slippery slope, it speaks to issues of trust and can become corrosive. The responses have been assurances based on conviction & belief. I absolutely believe in the veracity of that intent, throughout both Wincustomize & Stardock.. I also believe the best way of propping up that intent, is to be clear about what/if any mechanisms/commitments are being proposed in order to support those assertions.

For example, it is possible to commit to restraining the commercial slots to certain areas, to restrict the sponsors image to a certain size etc.. such areas of agreement should be do-able. Such a framework could easily recognise that a particularly lucrative, long term sponsorship deal, may want to press at the edges of agreed boundaries, and have built in ,the facility for Zoomba to return to subscribers and request special attention for such a deal.

Given the choice, I prefer to fight to be part of a thread that was recognised as proposing a positive development, through facing head on the challenges of change; rather than dancing around an issue that risks being remembered as the beginning of a slippery slope, in which through the disingenuous use of semantics, the edges became blurred.

Certainly not on a one to one basis and definitely not on a direct cost basis in which they would also be the bulk of any cost increases. If not true, then why have subscribers in the first place? Would you prefer that we were all non-subscribers?



Too much of a twist for me. Your doing this for the subscribers? Without being rude, who asked for more goodies and enhancements in the first place? They do not seem to be a key motivation for anyone to join at least from the comments here. It is understood that your motivation is to bring WC closer to break even if not achieve same, thereby increasing the profitability of Stardock. Increased productivity through the partial allocation of Stardock Design resources to make "goodies" and site improvements fits nicely into that and is as it should be. It seems a bit of a stretch to suggest that this is being done to better serve the subscribers as a primary motivation.





Agreed!

I understand that Zoomba can not fully respond for reasons of confidentiality. So, enough from me as well.

While I still think it sounds like an acceptable means to help the site, has anyone given any thought to a contingency plan? Or a long term plan?

What if the extra revenue from the sponsorships doesn't balance up the account as noted in the first point (operating costs).

What if the costs are met for only a short period of time (there's that slippery slope thing)?

And if not a short period of time, covering the shortfall will most likely be limited due the reasons aufisch and kenwas spoke of earlier; increasing non-subscriber base with subscribers and advertisers being a slower growing revenue base than non-subscribers.

Clearly, something needs to be done, but I think it is a mistake to look at this plan of sponsors as a magic bullet that will solve all the revenue woes for all time.

I'm not a big fan of flashy/flashing ads, but the idea of a sponsor logo doesn't seem too bad. If it is necessary to make sure the site can continue to exist, I have no problem with it.

One thing bothers me though. I understand that Wincustomize.com wants to reward subscribers by making special suites available to them. However I don't see any need to hire professional stardock skinners to design those suites. I won't speak for myself as I only uploaded one sysmetrix theme to this site so far, but there are several skinners here who are on a par with the professionals or even better. I assume most of them are happy to do the same just for fun, some recognition, or maybe a bonus of some sort (access all content for free or something like that).

Hell, I'll volunteer right now before the queue starts to form.

Just my 2 cents. Please excuse my bad english. It's not exactly my main language.

Xavier Saenen

EDIT :

Just to make sure I'm not mistaken : I'm not a subscriber, simply because I don't work hard enough to be able to afford a credit card, and am not aware of any website where you can pay any sort of membership via bank transfer nowadays. I can't buy most Stardock products for the same reason, so I can't skin them either.
And I'm one of those few people who refuse to use illegal software (apart from software being released by one certain very large and influential company, but that's a whole different story). I like the concept of wincustomize.com and try to contribute, abeit by submitting my work rather than funding the site.

I would first like to say Thank You to everyone who has posted on this thread. Not only has it been a very interesting read but also a very civil one. This fact and the quality products ( free & purchased) that I use are the reasons that I will continue to call this place home.

One *flaw that I do see in Zoomba's statement is the reference to only 1 sponsor or 1 discreet ad that we the subscribers would see. Take a look into the future. The facts are that as others have stated, is that costs will always increase. So I would expect that it will become necessary to have more than 1 sponsor as costs increase. So how about getting that out of the way now? Acknowledge that it may in fact occur so that we are not having the same discussion in the future. I would expect that discussion would be more heated as people would then be taking quotes from this thread.

It definitely is very bad timing to start a subscription drive and in the middle of it change the terms of it.

But in the end I will always support within reason ways to increase revenue for this site so that I do not have to pay more to enjoy what I have now. I understand the push to try to get more subscribers by including more premium skins. Read through and responded to a poll asking what would either keep me subscribing or cause me to subscribe. I do really like Mr. Supra4's idea of having some of those premium skins come from the community skinners. Maybe having a contest would be a great way to initiate this.

Clearly the benefits of this site are too good to pass up even for non-subscribers who see all of the ads. And I do not have an answer other than to lower the download amount. So whether it be though taxes that I pay or some sponsored ads that I must see we will always be paying for others.

ps. Mr. Supra4 there is no need to use either a credit card or paypal to purchase products or subscribe to the site. I do not use either, instead I pay by using a money order. After ordering simply choose *other ways to pay, (do not recall if that is the exact wording) Simply printout or write up the order form, fill it in and include your money order made out in US funds. As soon as Stardock receives it, you will receive an e-mail with a link to download your purchases.

It's My Secret

Sorry to bring this back, but In the interest of completeness and accountability, I needed to return and review this statement.

Members were actively encouraged to promote subscriptions to other people off-site, including friends and family. We were linked back to the charity page which amongst the FAQ section, stated "What do I get for my subscription?You get ad-free browsing," . It wasn't qualified in any way. These were the terms we were invited to use as sales points.

While I don't feel that there's anything in the realisation of the proposed change that if implemented, need necessarily cause additional surfing issues for subscribers. I do feel that the principle of putting members in the position of promoting a benefit that hasn't even made it to the end of this drive without being up for review, isn't acceptable, and however unlikely it is to happen again, should be challenged as a matter of course.


While this poll has sought to review the way subscribers understand the site is to be experienced, which would differ from the original understanding - I felt a need to add this for clarity:-

That subject to working within a set of guidelines, which - while never offered here, (variations of which are generally available around the web *see below for example), I wanted to acknowledge that the presence of a commercial logo as part of a sponsorship deal, may be said not to constitute an advertisement.

Consequently, within the terms of the previous sentence, I wanted to state that there is no 'corporate' reason why Wincustomize shouldn't have used the term 'ad-free' as a sales point and any suggestion of fault or error by myself was inappropriate.


* Example of limitations of use

· No comparative statements (e.g. the best, bigger, faster).
· No qualitative statements which involve subjective evaluation of quality (e.g. fine, great, rich, superb).
· No price information (including "free").
· No call to action statements which direct the audience: to call, to visit, to try,to compare.
· No inducement to buy statements which direct the audience to purchase the product (e.g. free trial period, 2 for 1).

Well, ya never know if this subject will return in one form or another - and I likes to pay me dues and takes me knocks......

Tks.