When I took this on I intended that it should result in a genuine community site - and maybe a bit more consensual than was DPReview. Here are some general principles:
1. Community Ownership
I don't want a single owner (or shareholders) that can sell the site to a corporation that closes it down when inconvenient. I propose that the legal embodiment of this site be a UK company limited by guarantee. That means that it will be a limited liability enterprise, and no-one will end up footing huge bills if something goes pear-shaped. This is a model used in the UK for many charities and community organisations. It has no shareholders, just members (more later) who have a stake for as long as their membership lasts. Without shareholders it can't be bought by a corporation without consent of the members. It has by law to have annual membership meetings and those elect company officers. I would propose that we have a fairly small board with named individuals taking on specific responsibilities within the operation. I will call this company the DPRevived Foundation (or just Foundation) hereafter.
2. Membership
One of the things that came across strongly in the discussions on the old forum was that free access was important. I propose that this should be maintained with DPRevived, but that there should be another class of members, which I will call 'partners'. Partners become members of the Foundation. To become a Partner people pay a fee, which helps to fund the site. They also take on a very small slice of the liability of the company (say 10 UKP, about 10 USD or EUR) in the event of the Foundation becoming insolvent (that's how a company limited by guarantee works) - this guarantee ceases when they cease to be members. I propose partnership be available in annual and life forms, and that those that have played a significant role in the foundation of DPRevived.com be awarded free life partnership (and maybe some others in future, at the discretion of the board of the time). All people undertaking responsible roles in the site should be partners and will be given free partnership for the duration of those roles. Partners will likely get some privileges, maybe some dedicated forums, publishing rights when we get content pages and so on. Suggestions welcome
5. Funding
Partnership subscriptions will provide some funding, but I think we'll need to take advertising, and possibly some paid services (such as for sale a la FM). I've used Google advertising in the past , it's not too onerous.
4. Terms, Conditions and rules
Yes, we'll need them. If anyone here has legal expertise and can contribute text - please!
My ideas, feel free to discuss, challenge and suggest alternatives.
March 26, 2023
66
-
-
Seems eminently sensible to me
On the subject of funding I am happy to have a conversation re an annual donation. I don't particularly want anything in return but as you note I don't want any fiscal liability either. You are welcome to conact me to discuss further -
Too me to. Except the bit about additional features for pay. That would create classes of users. Could we try something else first?
What about voluntary donations? Maybe enough people would pay. A star after your name or some other childish thing would be reward enough.
rodriguezPhoto suggested sponsorships. Worth to look into, I think.
Ads are fine with me as long as they aren't plastered all over the place and (all) for Amazon... 😜
-
Here is my main problem. I don't any more want a site run by one supremo or a corporation. So the idea is to have a self selecting set of people run it. Most people coming to a web site don't really want to be very involved, but some do. So really the point of paying is not to create a second class of user, but to if you like 'invest' in the site. Voluntary donations are fine, but I'm looking for a way of people taking on some responsibility.
-
OK. That's different.
You know, I think this will be good in the end. You deserve all our gratitude. And I dare say you have it. 💐
-
I'm glad that you like the idea. Maybe we shouldn't give the partners extra goodies, I'm uncomfortable with that myself.
-
Bob, it makes a lot of sense and I completely agree.
Some other ideas.
1. A full time, paid (minimum wage) staff will be needed, perhaps 1 or 2? some part time?, I'm not sure if relying on volunteers alone, long term is realistic.
2. To gain trust from "partners" and members in general, 100% transparency with money, that is a must. Honest to goodness is how you earn a loyal community.
3. A crowd funding campaign will be needed very soon, we are in a critical point and need that momentum to settle as THE DPR replacement. A mission statement needs to be elaborated for that purpose. People need to know what this will be all about. I think you are sort of doing it here but need to be formalized.
4. I agree that free access needs to be maintained but once the forum has reached critical mass you might want to limit some features on those accounts, the partner accounts get all the perks. But this is for future consideration, perhaps two years down the road. This is becomming standard practice, instead of the pure freemium model. We don't want another closure for lack of funds.
5. The legal location of this organization needs to be considered by taking a look at the pros and cons. UK, Canada, the USA or anywhere in the EU ? I have no clue.
6. I'd suggest the creation of a Task List that volunteers can take on. There are people who might want to contribute with something but not be too involved.
7.I was wondering if Misago would meet this site expectations, there are a bunch of Forum software out there that seems more robust, like XenForo, vBulletin, etc
Here is a list to start with.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_Internet_forum_softwareand again these are just brain storming ideas.
You and Alan are doing a great job. Thanks! -
I think the funding element is logical.
I'm happy to help with the site and also to look at how a blend of donations, crowdfunding, advertising may help and possibly at some point a partner to invest?
-
It's all brain storming.
1. Yes, it likely will need staff at some time, but it needs income before it has staff.
2. Yes, that is one of the advantages of the Limited Company by guarantee model that I put forward. It means that all members get to see the accounts.
3. Good idea. Yes the mission needs to be formalised before the statement. I'm trying hard to take contributions and not impose my views on everyone.
4. I'm going one way and another on partner perks. I think people are evenly divided on whether or not there should be classes of membership. Time to try out the poll software?
5. At the moment I've looked at UK legal organisation, because that's where I am. I don't know enough to evaluate the pros and cons of different jurisdictions. It's just much easier for me to do it in the UK jurisdiction, which is widely seen a safe at least for a couple of months more.
6. Yes, I'd thought the same. Volunteer task list is about number seven in my task list.
7. Don't know. It's what I went with for better or worse, and I think trying to change now would just cause more disruption when we can least afford it.All the best,
Bob -
That would be something for the community to decide, but I personally have my doubts. 'Partners' investing money often want something in return, then take over completely and close you down for not fitting their corporate business goals.
-
Good luck with this project, very hopeful it succeeds.
One website I spend too much time on is camerapricebuster.co.uk...
I think this site is sponsored by a variety of different retailers eg jessops, curry's, wex etc. Would it be worth a chat with some of these companies RE whether they'd be interested in paid links? -
I am sure you are over the top with your todo list but...any idea what start up costs will look like to create the foundation? I am sure there are some here who would be willing to contribute.
-
Hello Bob
Congratulation to the team who set up this site. I hope for the best and I am looking forward to participating to it. Here is my take on your proposal.
1. Community Ownership
I am not a legal expert and have no clue about the British laws but what you say sounds OK to me. Amazon pulling the plug on DPR was a very bad experience.
2. Membership
You are right free access is paramount to have traffic.
OTOH I am OK to help fund the site by paying a fee in the order of tens of $, £ or €. That's what I pay now and then to Wikipedia.
5. Funding
Ads are the way to go to fund a site like this. Amazon stupidily used one advertizer, itself, and discovered it's not enough.
4. Terms, Conditions and rules
I think it's a no brainer: use preexisting ones. There are standard.
Nick -
Bob, if you need any proof-reading done, I volunteer hereby for that task. I am a) English and b) known for being rather pedantic.
P.S. I do write in American English, so e.g. wouldn't be changing "color" to "colour" ...
best regards,
Ted.
-
Re jurisdiction there are several good reasons to pick the UK. The biggest being that it isn't the US - no disrespect but litigiousness in the US is 'out of control'. EU would also be OK. I am a Belgian citizen if needed for setting anything up in the EU
I think community funding/ crowdfunding is the best option. As you say Bob that could mean some kind of 'partner' status
Yes to volunteer task list and FIRST OFF WE NEED A MISSION STATEMENT
Currently no to paid staff but I am sure this will be needed down the line
On a slightly different note, one of the 'big' things on DPReview was the Challenges
Pollunit provides a ready to go option for creating photo challenges. It is paid but reasonable - from 324 eur per year for 20,000 particpants and 50mb uploads
-
Why not put a PP button up right away while people are in a giving mode? I'm sure there are legal matters with that too, but I think we can trust bob with the cash to start with. I think everyone agrees that donations is an OK way to get some money in?
-
Here's a suggestion for a mission statement:
"The purpose of Dprevived shall be to promote and provide a platform for the dissemination of information about, and polite discussions pertaining to photography related topics."
-
I understand 'polite' being there, though I think its shouldn't have to be. I mean, I could add 'technically correct' ;-) . I think it's a great start -and maybe others could comment, extend and change.
