The Self-Spamming Engine? Paying for posts! Brilliant or foolish!

I received an email today from a major photography forum that offers me 10 cents for every qualifying post up to $100 per year! Nill Toulme wryly remarked to the effect that he was surprised that his $0.02 could be worth $0.10!

Well one can earn $100 per year that way, no doubt. However that means 1000 post per year. At that rate one might be working very hard.

When that happens on a daily basis it means that the site is no longer a forum representing the thoughts of people derived from their interest in photography, but rather the thoughts dug up to earn money.

Now maybe I'm missing something, but how is this of value?

Asher

It seems very odd to me. I wasn't kidding when I remarked that I initially thought it was a slightly late April Fool joke.

Nill
~~
www.toulme.net

Nill Toulme said:

It seems very odd to me. I wasn't kidding when I remarked that I initially thought it was a slightly late April Fool joke.

Nill
~~
www.toulme.net

Click to expand...

Well, I didn't think that (but probably should have) but did think it seems a strange case of trying to keep a forum alive by any means.

Diane

Nill Toulme said:

It seems very odd to me. I wasn't kidding when I remarked that I initially thought it was a slightly late April Fool joke.

Click to expand...

Well, I got the same email invitation today, April 3rd, so it's a bad joke at best.

Bart

Asher Kelman said:

Now maybe I'm missing something, but how is this of value?

Asher

Click to expand...

It is of value to the website owners, as it generates (free) content. More content means more page views, which means more ad revenue. (There was no mention of site name, so I am assuming that this is the site's business model)

I doubt it is of real value to the poster, as it seems a lot of work for very little money (which is covered by a portion of the ad revenue).

I guess it may be of value to the readers, as it is alluded that the posts need to be "qualified" based on content.

Feel free to compare and contrast with the model on this site. Why would I bother to post this comment for free, when I could potentially get $0.10 for it elsewhere?
Because I feel part of a community here where the sharing of ideas is key to it's success. Quite frankly, $0.10 isn't enough incentive for my time taken to read this post and edit a response.

It's interesting to look at the origins of that website. It started as a well-run professional photography forum. It became highly regarded. Something might have happened we were not told about. Perhaps a lawsuit from someone, who knows! Anyway, then people we being banned left and right. Threads we closed for arguing or mention of something that had a religious connotation or contained rumors etc. We never really knew, but I'm sure the owners had a lot of real issues to deal with too that were not disclosed. So I felt for them too since they had contributed so much in the past.

Now the shock came, "Impending Sale, serious offers only!"

Then when the fora were sold, people were told that there was a charge to see the content people had labored to contribute. IOW, people were locked out from content.

They did alter the model. However, the drive to expand at all costs puzzles me, since in the long run, the content would appear to drop in qiuality. Also what kind of person would post?

Civilization seem to have a growth curve too and then may implode out of their own weight. Perhaps this does not apply to the internet?

What keeps other mammoth photography website from the same fate?

Asher

Sad, isn't it?
That forum has been a milestone in the transition from film to digital, talking about my experience.

I think the new owner made some qualified errors, not about the charge only, but the way too, the "old" archive, aka. fora, and some existing members were handled. Therefore the step down was just a matter of time. The value of a forum are the posts of the members, the more qualified, the better for the forum.

I' ve no proof, but I really think >Something might have happened<, too.

Still, there, I started to "know" of some of you, Asher as a example.
But I had a nick, not my realname, there.

yea it was a great forum going back about 5 years. Frequented by photographers with substance who contibuted some useful info. Mostly the guys whose opinion was most valuable left or got banned. Co incidentally today I was looking back on a post there from years ago & came across one of the pros I admired, I flicked him an email & invited the "Guy" over here.

Cheers,

Paul

Well Paul,

We're happy to recruit great guys. People you know are likely to bring good experience to the website.

Wer'e are beginning to expand non-Canon areas such as Nikon, Leica and Pentax and even LF and film photography.

Slow but sure!

Asher