Btw, a more serious answer to this.. our money comes from two main sources: - People who both help out and show up regularly - People who rarely show up
If we were to raise the membership on people who are basically 'charitable' members, we'd be screwing them and likely lose a lot. So, to look at worst case scenarios, we lose half our members (who are charitable and come rarely, if ever), and gain no extra $$ from those who already come (because they're already helping). Effectively, we'd be shooting ourselves in the foot. Also, for something like a hackerspace, you can't pay people to help. Either they do or they don't. Financial incentives change what people's goals are, and that's not good. Ron On 2012-10-01 22:22, Mark Jenkins wrote: > Allow me to present /The Jenkins Plan/ . > (originally inspired by our pending electrical costs, but with a rant > inspired by the maid thread tacked on) > ------------------------- > > In order to raise the inevitable revenues Skullspace is going to need to > cover: > * the cost of electricity at some point (landlord can use exit clause > to force it on us with 6 months notice) > * the heating costs we're about to start bearing for the first time > * the cost of paying back a electrical-renovation loan > > We should raise our membership cost to $60 a month, but make it easy for > folks to drop back to $40 a month if they achieve any of the following > community service requirements: > 1) Serve on the board > 2) Have shown and will continue to show exceptional commitment to our > infrastructure (the Colin Stanners exemption), by designation by the board > or > 3) Organize or co-organize an event/happening once per month or > equivalent (e.g. 12 week class has you covered for a year). Non-member > attendees at most of these events must pay an entrance fee. > > Most of the members who would opt for community service would have to > quality under #3. The board would need to limit the number of people it > grants an exception to under #2. > > My wild guess is this amount of community event organizing would allow > us to boost our long term dependable member numbers from the > conservative 40 number I threw out before to 80. I also guess that 65% > of those 80 members would opt for offering community service (so around > 43 members each running or co-running events) > > So, membership revenues go from: > 40*40 = $1,600 > to > 0.65*80*40+0.35*80*60 = $3760 > > A $2,160 monthly boost in membership $$. Plus rental/event access fees > for non-member event attendance. > > > Notice that I didn't include cleaning and garbage as allowable volunteer > exemptions. > > I don't think we should put cleaning and garbage as "volunteer" actions > because they really do just suck. The #1 way to nuke your volunteers and > other supporters is to beg them to do crappy work that they're not > interested in just for the sake of keeping the organization afloat. > People hate sacrificing themselves for an abstract ideal. > > There should be an incentive for volunteering (such as reduction from > $60 to $40) and that volunteering experience should be rewarding and > worthwhile. We should be channeling our free time and talents into high > level hacker organizing and infrastructure that makes people who come by > say "cool, sign me up". > > If anyone out there is feeling pissed about the hours and hours they've > put into volunteer work that they hate doing, I would like to say > *stop*. Just fucking stop working yourself towards bitterness and don't > try to convert that feeling it into pushing other folks into volunteer > work they're not going to like doing or even start doing. > > Find ways to have fun and boost membership numbers/revenues at the same > time so you can look back and say "I'm glad I did all that work, that > was an awesome experience!". Don't waste a moment of time comparing your > contributions to others in a volunteer driven organization with member > dues -- contributions will *always* vary, and vary considerably, so we > have to focus on volunteer contributions where we don't end up carrying > about it and we should also charge folks who don't meet some minimal > standard of community organizing a higher member fee. (they'll keep > paying that fee when its matched by better service) > > Nobody should feel the weight of the organization personally on their > own shoulders as a personal burden. Let the organization adjust however > it needs to not having you bear such burdens -- fuck martyrdom. > > We can pay for shit that members aren't interested in doing by boosting > membership revenues with an increase in fees and a targeted community > service requirement where we ask folks who want to pay less to directly > help bring in and retain members. > > So "paying for shit" has got to continue with the cleaning and garbage > job where the evidence shows we lack a foolish martyr. Let's pay for it > with real cash and make structural adjustments if necessary to bring in > the revenue to pay for things like this. > > And I don't have a problem with us making an internal hire for things > like this. If volunteers are having fun with meaningful volunteering and > not comparing themselves to a member who happens to be paid for shit > work it shouldn't be a problem. (If volunteers are complaining then it > means they're volunteering on the wrong stuff that we ought to be paying > cash for) > > I do have a big problem with folks embracing the $40 per month price > point for cleaning and garbage just because it makes for convenient > bookkeeping. > > $40 per month is just waaay to little to pay anyone, outside or inside > for that job. > > I don't have an impression for how it went before, but I think we're > just begging for bad quality of service if we stick with slave pricing. > > There's a myth that when Henry Ford doubled the wages of his workers his > company became way more profitable because the workers could buy his own > product. > > In reality, Ford become more profitable because it was easier to get a > lot more productive work out those workers once they were paid more. > (with a higher wages each worker become more replaceable, crappy workers > who didn't improve could be terminated or replaced by attrition with > better workers who wouldn't have been available before because they > worked for higher pay elsewhere) > > (This is why the minimum wage increases in Manitoba, now $10.25/h > [growth well beyond inflation in the last 5 years] has not been a > employment numbers disaster -- employers with super cheap labour are > simply given an incentive to make better use of the labour they've got. > Apparently they teach about hidden potential every business is always > sitting on right away in business school. See the chapter on "fair pay" > from /Filthy Lucre: Economics for people who hate capitalism/ by Josheph > Heath for more info on this subject) > > So, I would like to beg Dave Curry to summon a little more personal > dignity and withdraw the offer for $40/month. Don't debase yourself that > badly Dave, ask us for at least $80/month! > > At $40/month we're just setting ourselves up for sub-par regardless of > who we pay, inside or outside. Something like $80/month isn't very high > either, but it might be enough to get us more or less consistently at a > minimal standard we can live with. > > Dave, if it comes to pass that you keep offering that price, the members > approve of it, *AND* you do end up doing a great job for so little > money, you'll have become a foolish martyr for the wrong cause. Don't. > Serriously, stick to the Skullitron. > > > Mark > _______________________________________________ > SkullSpace Discuss Mailing List > Help: http://www.skullspace.ca/wiki/index.php/Mailing_List#Discuss > Archive: https://groups.google.com/group/skullspace-discuss-archive/ _______________________________________________ SkullSpace Discuss Mailing List Help: http://www.skullspace.ca/wiki/index.php/Mailing_List#Discuss Archive: https://groups.google.com/group/skullspace-discuss-archive/
