If we ever get proper privacy legislation, or harsher penalties for companies that get hacked and lose customer data, or anything that blocks widespread data collection and monetization, you'll be paying 50 bucks a year for your favorite chatrooms and messageboards and be happy about the bargain you're getting.
There's no motivation without the surveillance to give away all of this work for free. When you do stuff peer-to-peer, it always costs money if you want it to be sustainable. Like for example, a book club. Either everyone is going to take a turn hosting, or everyone is going to give the host a few bucks/bring snacks/wine/etc. (or you're going to go to some commercial space that sells food and drink, and buy food and drink.)
None of the options are free. Peer-to-peer (as opposed to sponsor/consumer) will never be free. We should support models like this, not act like we somehow deserve better.
I'm with you that people should be paying for services with money instead of their private data. If you were running a Slack/Discord alternative and wanted to charge for it, I'd support you. Maybe not 50 Euros support you up front, but I'd support you. You only need a few thousand users to make something like 10 Euros a year a lucrative side project, and I'm sure you could get people to pay more if you earned any trust at all first.
Where you lost me is that I don't need your help getting people together to talk about books. Sure, that's worth bringing some snacks, in person, which might add up to 50 Euros over the course of a year, but doing it on the internet with a bunch of unknown randos makes the value go down, not up. And putting a fixed price on it means you get less interesting people: on the one end, it excludes the broke intern who needs the mentoring the most, and on the other end, that senior, experienced, well-thought-out guy who brings a fuckton of knowledge to the table brings more value than the host just by opening his mouth.
Where you really go off the rails is this: "There's no motivation without the surveillance to give away all of this work for free." Yes, there is, actually. I don't know what it is about some people on Hacker News who can't comprehend that there are other motivations besides money. If you're only motivated by money, I don't want to be around you, let alone go to your book club.
If you gave the service away for free and allowed people to be anonymous, there would be no private data that needed managing. In the 90s, a major proportion of websites on the internet had forums like that, which people set up on a weekend (think phpBB). What the hosting provider charges is small change.
If you do charge, you suddenly have sensitive data to manage, either eating into your profit or creating a liability for you and taking away from people's privacy if you don't do it right. So much so, that it might even generate a loss at 50 bucks per year.
This is the business version of, "well actually I could do this in a weekend."
The potential for one decent connection for future jobs/coworkers (referral bonuses!)/cofounders is very high with something like this. 50 euro is fine. If it's too high, the market will signal that. If it isn't, it will fill up.
The best book clubs I've been in are ones where the members had to pay something to be in it. I think everything should be done to get the people who sign up to actually show up and participate, and part of that equation is usually charging everyone a little bit, especially if the people in the group aren't already friends.
There are actual people working to curate the content, manage the community, etc. And as such, they charge an amount for the work they're doing. If you think the price does not meet the value, then you can... just not pay it.
Are people actually curating the content? The website sounds like the members are the ones suggesting books. It is unclear to me what managing needs to be done if the members are pairing up on their own.
> I also believe that paying for something brings more commitment, so this is why we have decided to introduce a small fee for joining the community.
Absolutely. People that are willing to pay are more serious and generally more likely to positively contribute. Paying is a way to signal that to oneself, even.
This group is limited to 30 people. It's not a subreddit with tens of thousands of users.
It is 30 people. If someone's an asshole you ban them. It's hardly a fulltime job. The fact that you took their money could actually complicate your ability to ban them if they really get upset.
I have discord servers of gaming friends that have as many people. I've also managed game servers (like Ark servers) with hundreds of strangers. It's not that bad. Bad people venture in sometimes and you just kick them out. Small communities like this mostly self-regulate because they are so small, people's individual reputation actually means something.
We want to initially limit only to 30 spots to see how we could manage the community and the online events. We will evaluate if it makes sense to open more spots in the future.
The idea is to create "online coffee chats" where everyone is able to participate.
I have used Circle with other communities and I can say that the experience is much better than using slack or discord.
pessimizer|2 years ago
There's no motivation without the surveillance to give away all of this work for free. When you do stuff peer-to-peer, it always costs money if you want it to be sustainable. Like for example, a book club. Either everyone is going to take a turn hosting, or everyone is going to give the host a few bucks/bring snacks/wine/etc. (or you're going to go to some commercial space that sells food and drink, and buy food and drink.)
None of the options are free. Peer-to-peer (as opposed to sponsor/consumer) will never be free. We should support models like this, not act like we somehow deserve better.
kerkeslager|2 years ago
Where you lost me is that I don't need your help getting people together to talk about books. Sure, that's worth bringing some snacks, in person, which might add up to 50 Euros over the course of a year, but doing it on the internet with a bunch of unknown randos makes the value go down, not up. And putting a fixed price on it means you get less interesting people: on the one end, it excludes the broke intern who needs the mentoring the most, and on the other end, that senior, experienced, well-thought-out guy who brings a fuckton of knowledge to the table brings more value than the host just by opening his mouth.
Where you really go off the rails is this: "There's no motivation without the surveillance to give away all of this work for free." Yes, there is, actually. I don't know what it is about some people on Hacker News who can't comprehend that there are other motivations besides money. If you're only motivated by money, I don't want to be around you, let alone go to your book club.
gyulai|2 years ago
If you gave the service away for free and allowed people to be anonymous, there would be no private data that needed managing. In the 90s, a major proportion of websites on the internet had forums like that, which people set up on a weekend (think phpBB). What the hosting provider charges is small change.
If you do charge, you suddenly have sensitive data to manage, either eating into your profit or creating a liability for you and taking away from people's privacy if you don't do it right. So much so, that it might even generate a loss at 50 bucks per year.
arunkant|2 years ago
mattgreenrocks|2 years ago
The potential for one decent connection for future jobs/coworkers (referral bonuses!)/cofounders is very high with something like this. 50 euro is fine. If it's too high, the market will signal that. If it isn't, it will fill up.
jacobrussell|2 years ago
cush|2 years ago
uoaei|2 years ago
gppeixoto|2 years ago
leglock|2 years ago
miguelbemartin|2 years ago
You can find some examples here: https://community.circle.so/c/showcase/
We are using Circle for organising it and it costs us money, additionally, it will also take time to organise and moderate the community.
I also believe that paying for something brings more commitment, so this is why we have decided to introduce a small fee for joining the community.
mattgreenrocks|2 years ago
Absolutely. People that are willing to pay are more serious and generally more likely to positively contribute. Paying is a way to signal that to oneself, even.
mtlynch|2 years ago
jacurtis|2 years ago
It is 30 people. If someone's an asshole you ban them. It's hardly a fulltime job. The fact that you took their money could actually complicate your ability to ban them if they really get upset.
I have discord servers of gaming friends that have as many people. I've also managed game servers (like Ark servers) with hundreds of strangers. It's not that bad. Bad people venture in sometimes and you just kick them out. Small communities like this mostly self-regulate because they are so small, people's individual reputation actually means something.
miguelbemartin|2 years ago
theshrike79|2 years ago
I can create a free Discord for this right now and it'll cost me (and the people joining it) exactly 0€
pessimizer|2 years ago
But the reality is that you haven't.
miguelbemartin|2 years ago
The idea is to create "online coffee chats" where everyone is able to participate.
I have used Circle with other communities and I can say that the experience is much better than using slack or discord.
maccard|2 years ago
stocknoob|2 years ago