Info Donations button poll

[somewhatfoolish]

Charities take donations - they're completely transparent about how their money is spent, and on what.

 

Are they fook; the RSPCA get proper shirty if you ask how much money they've pissed away on taking red-coated foxbotherers to court. In Scotland charitable trusts don't even have to publish abbreviated accounts, never mind full ones, plenty of 'charities' take the full piss because of this and the watchdog mostly doesn't give a shite. The antics of this clown and her personal benevolent society is a vanilla example of what can be got away with.

[drum]

Of course people should be able to ask questions and have a bit of a moan without any histrionics and overreacting. Surely we're robust enough to discuss the running of the forum without banning talk?

 

Everyone is entitled to my opinion, so here it is...

 

Put the donate button back. I can't think of one reason not to. It's not like mikeafter7 is publishing who's donated and who hasn't.

 

Have a link to a page or thread of the forum's outgoings that daveafter8 updates on a monthly basis. I wouldn't spend my hard earned running the forum for us all and don't expect anyone else to. There should be a whip round to cover it. It's enough that he gives up his time. He shouldn't be out of pocket.

 

If Dave finds he's raking in the donations over and above his outgoings he could (maybe should) remove the donate button for a couple of weeks.

 

While AS was offline, I read on one of the alternative forums that clicking eBay links generates income. Is this actually a thing? Maybe we can all generate more income for the forum doing stuff like that?

 

There's nothing wrong with a bit of open and frank debate and it shouldn't lead to nastiness, ganging up, or flouncing. Autoshite is meant to be a pleasant diversion from grim reality, not grim reality.

[trigger]

Well said.

[Ghosty]

I'm finally in a place where I can afford to chip in a few quid, and for all this place has helped me in life (quite a bit!) I'd like to throw a few quid in the pot every now and then, it's only fair.

[Pillock]

That's not a bad idea. Can we somehow turn all the eBay links into affiliate links so generation a few pence every time we click one?

 

As a bonus, there'll also be a report of how much was generated with it so it's nice and clear if anyone wants to know.

 

Sent from my VIE-L09 using Tapatalk

[Skizzer]

I have a monthly PayPal donation set up. It's probably less than AS is worth to me, as one of my main sources of both entertainment and training. I don't care if DaveB makes a profit on it, though I strongly suspect he doesn't (especially if you factor in time spent).

 

That said, I do worry that we are entirely reliant on Dave's goodwill, health and solvency for the community's existence. This is neither normal nor good, and is unsustainable. We need a continuity plan, urgently. Total reliance on one person is, frankly, unprofessional. Someone (mods?) needs a handover pack so we can set up quickly with a professional host if we need to.

 

This is a much bigger concern than cost transparency. Banging on about the cost is an aggravating distraction from this real issue: if you don't want to pay, don't pay. If you do, do. It's that simple.

[RayMK]

Donate button?  Yes.

 

This is a very popular forum and, by its nature, it attracts a large enough sample of the population to guarantee a range of opinions on how the show should be run, some of which will be considered extreme.

 

Considerable effort is put in to running the forum. I applaud that voluntary effort and do not see the need to vet costs or even wish to know what they are.  Dave47 can shout if he falls short and people can donate if they wish to.  I have not got the slightest interest or concern if donations exceed outgoings, though holidays in the Bahamas may attract questions from the Inland Revenue, so best to stick to Skegness. 

 

This is not the only forum that I visit but it is by far the best.  Its occasional down time is more of a headache to Dave47 than to us addicts who need a fix several times a day.  He is the one who has to jack it up, fix faults, carry out preventative maintenance and get it going again.  If I, as a volunteer, was faced with some of the disparaging remarks when doing this, albeit from a minority, I would have jacked it in.  

 

Contingency plans:  Back up on your own computer any posts that you would be upset to lose.  

 

Note: This is my opinion.  You are entitled to yours but if it differs from mine it is clearly wrong and I'll have to disagree   . 

[chodweaver]

I like the donate button. I like that NotDave tells us when the coffers are low and that people can choose whether to donate and how much. I wouldn't be comfortable with the idea of an annual fee, unless in the future the donate button proves to not raise enough to support NotDave's efforts. I like to feel that NotDave has enough safeguards in place to stop the site disappearing overnight and from what he has said recently, I believe this is the case.

 

Sent from my BV6000 using Tapatalk

[Captain Furious]

When someone approaches you in the street shaking the bucket for help for heros, save the children, the air ambulance or whatever your chosen charity might be, do you ask to fully audit their accounts before considering a donation?

 

I honestly don't get what part of it being voluntary people aren't getting, it's not like you're being asked to donate on the threat of expulsion.

 

For the record I haven't donated yet because I still class myself as a relative newcomer, but each like of this post will help save forums at risk of extinction. #1like1prayer

[BorniteIdentity]

Why would you be so anti donation but pro enforced membership fee. That's very strange.

 

It was just a suggestion.  As is always the case in life, I'm wrong and the other bloke is right.  Sorry.  (But hey - read it again, and you'll see it wasn't an enforced method I was advocating)

 

No. It is not a club.

 

As above about being constantly wrong.  I was just suggesting that "there's another way".  I'm pleased to see the result is an overwhelmingly positive one for you and your way of thinking.  

[Guest Breadvan72]

My concern is NOT about money and I don't want to see accounts.  I have donated in the past.  I might donate in the future.  

 

My concern IS that the whole thing depends on the skills, the availability, and, to be frank, the temperament of one person.

 

If anyone suggests another way of running things, the following things tend to happen -

 

(1) Dave expresses unhappiness, often in quite trenchant terms.  He appears to decline suggestions that he might be assisted by one or more other people who have the requisite skill set.  He appears  (mistakenly in my opinion) to form the view that any comment about the present arrangements is a personal criticism of him, and/or an attempt to take over the place, or something of that sort.  

 

(2) Dave sometimes says words to the effect of "put your money where your mouth" is, to which some of us who by good luck have a few spare quid say "OK, I will"; or "you do the IT work" to which some of us who have the IT skills say "OK, we are happy to help".  

 

Those of us who do not have the skills but could help with money may wish to know if we are sending enough money, need to send more, and so on.  Those of who have the skills may wish to know a bit more about the IT so that they can deploy their skills to help out, without thereby taking over.    

 

But we are all just told to shut up.  

 

It is suggested that only one person can work on the IT.  It is suggested that if more than one person gets involved, the IT will break.  Meanwhile, the system stays as it is, and the IT breaks.  That's OK, because stuff breaks. What is maybe a tad surprising is that fixing the broken stuff may take several days and be accompanied by a fair amount of what I think can fairly be termed huffiness.  

 

(3) Some members make tetchy or even angry comments to and about anyone suggesting that the present system might be altered a bit in order to ease the burden on Dave and to reduce forum outages.   Some go as far as to call for bans on those expressing concerns about the present system.

 

(4) Any attempt at debating a more stable system for the running of the forum is at worst shouted down and at best discouraged.

 

None of this is hugely important, as this is just a internet place for talking about old cars.   I think, however, that it would be a pity if the forum were to close, or to lose a large chunk of its past content, because of one or a combination of factors such as  Dave becoming unwell, Dave losing enthusiasm for the tasks that he undertakes, Dave encountering a technical challenge that, despite his excellent IT skills, he has difficulty with, and so on.

 

I support there being a donation button.   I probably won't make any more donations while the system remains as it is, but I might change my mind on that.  I dunno.  

 

I don't think that Dave is spaffing the loot.  I do think that we could do with a clearer and more effective support system to give Dave an occasional well earned rest and the occasional help in pushing the broken down car when it breaks down.  

[BavarianRetro]

Unusually, I agree with every word of that.

 

I don't care - and I don't think anyone cares - if "Dave" makes a very tidy living out of Autoshite. Good luck to him.

 

But I think seeking donations and then taking the huff when asked to provide even the most basic breakdown of income/expenditure over a given period, gives off a poor vibe.

 

We don't know if donations fall short of, match or exceed expenditure. If we are told, more may donate. People might even be minded to donate purely so that "Dave" does get some cash back for the time and effort put in.

 

"Guys over the past six months we've taken £1000 in donations. Thanks very much. Our out of pocket running expenses were £1200. I've taken nothing for my time.", would be more likely to elicit donations than, "Why do you want to know? What's it got to do with you? If you think you can do better, you do it. " That attitude tends people towards view that you don't want people to know the true figures because then they'll stop donating.

[DodgyBastard]

Can we have have another choice on the poll for the people who don't actually give a fuck about a donation button?

 

Sent from my F5321 using Tapatalk

[Danblez]

 

That said, I do worry that we are entirely reliant on Dave's goodwill, health and solvency for the community's existence. This is neither normal nor good, and is unsustainable. We need a continuity plan, urgently. Total reliance on one person is, frankly, unprofessional. Someone (mods?) needs a handover pack so we can set up quickly with a professional host if we need to.

 

This is a much bigger concern than cost transparency. Banging on about the cost is an aggravating distraction from this real issue: if you don't want to pay, don't pay. If you do, do. It's that simple.

Many times this!

[Sheefag]

Why is profit such a dirty word? I personally don't care if Dave makes £90,000 a year out of it.

 

It's his train set, we're all guests here and if he chooses to run in whatever way he wants, that's entirely up to him.

 

Ask yourself, if Autoshite disappeared tomorrow, how much would you pay to get it back.

 

I have various suppliers that I've used for years, I don't feel like I own any part of them however.

[BorniteIdentity]

I have various suppliers that I've used for years, I don't feel like I own any part of them however.

 

Nicely put.  

 

But if you own a forum...and you have no users... do you actually have a forum?

 

Sorry, but I stand by this.  It might be Dave's thing, but with no content it's not really a thing is it?  Therefore I think that's why I feel that a bit of this place is me (if not mine).

 

However, it's pretty clear I'm in a minority.  Of one.

[Sheefag]

It's a small business with customers, just like any other small business.

I run my company as a benign dictatorship by necessity. I consult with my staff because they're smart but the major decisions are all mine, I've tried the community/committee approach and it just doesn't work.

In my humble opinion, a forum barely any different.

[Captain Furious]

I might be interested in stepping up if the salary is £90k a year

 

Other than that I'm still failing to see the issue, feels like concerns that Dave is making money out of 'our' work loosely disguised as concerns about his workload/health/continuity of service etc

 

If he is, good, I don't work for free either.

[Sheefag]

Why is profit for effort such a dirty concept to some anyway?

[Twiggy]

The latest results speak for themselves: 90 for, 4 against.  Methinks the question has been answered and the thread needs to be locked.

[trigger]

 

 

It's his train set, we're all guests here and if he chooses to run in whatever way he wants, that's entirely up to him.

I think this is were a lot of people are going wrong, with all respect to Dave, it isn't his trainset, it's Richard Lawson's and Nick O'Neill's, Dave has just took on the roll of main admin to keep the forum rolling as we never really had any active admin before and was having a lot of issues with spammers and hackers like i said yesterday.

[Cavcraft]

Not sure who's suggested people be banned for voicing an opinion?

All we have here are the same arguments we had the other day. Same people, same opinion. The result will almost certainly end up the same, e.g. more people falling out.

 

I'll say this though: if you haven't donated then why complain? Isn't this just like looking at a television appeal for help, moaning about the reasons and thus not giving your money?

Mike has spied his arse, but one or two of his detractors seem to be living in a greenhouse with a stockpile of pebbles.

[Guest Breadvan72]

Cavcraft, please read this thread, and also some of your own comments on other threads about the subject. A very few members (not you) have suggested that those who dissent from the view that all is fine should be banned.  You have not suggested this, but you have dropped some hints.    

 

Your disparaging comments about the members who are raising concerns or who share concerns  (BTW, look at how many likes the posts by those of us whom some may perceive as troublemakers are receiving) are disappointing, as I had thought you to be a reasonable person who can see that arguments have two or more sides.

 

We are told that AS is a community.  Some of us are trying to do what a community would do when one its members is struggling with a task.  That is: trying to help.  For this we get shouted at.  I don't mind being shouted at.  I get shouted at for a living.  But it seems a bit of a rum do.

 

I reiterate that I have no IT skills, but I know enough about how small organisations look after their IT to venture the opinion that looking after the IT should never be a task left just to one person.  I reiterate that i have in the past made some very modest donations to the forum.  I may make donations again, but at present my enthusiasm for doing so is at a somewhat low ebb.  If there was a sensible move afoot to set up some new IT backup system, I would offer, say, £200 towards the cost of that on a sort of yobfunding crowdbanging basis.. 

 

I would not care if Dave was making so much money from AS that he could buy a gold plated Allegro twice a week.  

 

I would care if Dave were having to make do and mend because the stuff costs him 1200 and he only gets 1000.

 

I would also care if Dave became so ill, so grumpy, so trapped under a heavy item of furniture, or so overwhelmed by a techie problem that the whole thing went Foom and stayed Foom.

[Longblackcoat]

Not sure who's suggested people be banned for voicing an opinion?

All we have here are the same arguments we had the other day. Same people, same opinion. The result will almost certainly end up the same, e.g. more people falling out.

 

I'll say this though: if you haven't donated then why complain? Isn't this just like looking at a television appeal for help, moaning about the reasons and thus not giving your money?

Mike has spied his arse, but one or two of his detractors seem to be living in a greenhouse with a stockpile of pebbles.

 

OK, and just for argument's sake, what about those who have contributed? I've made it very clear that I don't care how the money's spent, but there will be those who do, and I'd suggest that there's more chance of keeping everyone happy if BavarianRetro's suggestions (post 73 above) were followed.

 

We're not talking about a lot of money - from what DaveThatIsn'tDave said yesterday, the total cost in a year might come to £1500. Lots for one person, sod-all if shared out. So make it easy to get a few quid here and there by keeping the donate button, encourage a view that if you make a sale though the site you drop a tenner to the fund, that sort of thing. 

 

We know the rough cost (others can argue that it's too much, but I have no way of judging and it doesn't seem silly to me), so really all we need is some rough measure of donations. So long as income and expenditure are more or less in line, I really can't see an issue. That's for those who care - my personal stance is that Dave can pocket the lot so long as the place keeps on running. 

[BorniteIdentity]

Really all we need is some rough measure of donations. 

 

Can we get one of those things they have outside churches that need a new roof?

 

 

Ideally more phallic and beige.

[brownnova]

It appears we are at a tipping point. It's a question of what is autoshite. (Sounds all philosophical)

 

If it's a forum where a few blokes can natter about rusty old rammel then it's fine to be mainly run by one guy and funded by donations. It's only if we turn it into something more that we have to begin to question ourselves/funding/running. But with the size of the forum is it more than just a forum that we want? Then we'd need a committee/membership/AGM etc. I'm not sure I see much appetite for that, although maybe I'm wrong. What does AS want to be???

 

Because I'm not sure there's a halfway house which some people seem to want.

 

If Dave/Mike needs help he should feel comfortable asking for it, if he needs more money to cover costs he should feel comfortable asking for it. Not saying that there should never be any questions, but one or two tones on here recently (on many sides of whatever arguments there are) don't make this easy.

 

This place is generally so friendly. And the people I've met in person are spot on. Let's not ruin things.

[daveb47]

Ok last post then lock,many thanks to the supporters.

Electric leyland owns autoshite but i do all the admin duties without any help from him.

Would like to make it clear that i run this forum for fun/something to do & not for profit.

Vey occasionally make small profit but any  thing over goes towards running second server which hosts autoshite.info & fahl.us forums.

And allso dailly backups from here as from later today.

In view of support i will be re-enstating Donate function later today.