When are transaction fees charged?  When you add money or when it is
assigned to a project?

On Tue, Aug 2, 2016 at 5:21 PM, Aaron Wolf <aa...@snowdrift.coop> wrote:
> On 08/02/2016 05:05 PM, mray wrote:
>> During the last meeting we discussed details about how the limit works.
>> I just want to voice my opinion on how the limit should work:
>> I strongly believe we should make the limit sacrosanct and not touch it
>> *never ever*. A decision by the user to set a monthly limit trumps
>> "hidden costs" always, no matter if we frame the limit as "pledge limit"
>> or "total limit" or whatever else. If payment fees and carried over
>> matches would break the limit we need to suppress it as usual: auto
>> un-match until there is no more problem.
>> If the user sets a limit she is free to set it higher if that is what
>> she wants! Crowdmatching itself already is a mechanism that asks to hand
>> over control, the remaining limit cannot be subject to be overridden by
>> even more rules.
>> What are your thoughts on this?
> I was mostly concerned about the idea that a one-time thing (a
> carry-over) would affect the ongoing thing (the suspension of pledges).
> Like if my pledges are $9 and I have a one-time $2 carry-over with a $10
> max, the idea that we *suspend* a pledge just so that we process the
> carry-over seems awkward and unfortunate. With the one-time carry-over
> processed, everything can go forward next month as is, if there's no
> changes.
> Having said that, and not having a problem with the carry-over going
> over max for myself as a patron, I think you are right, Robert.
> I generally oppose "hide the weirdness" in that I want people to see
> behind the curtains and know what's really going on (which is why I want
> the fees itemized for the patrons, not hidden in any way). But I accept
> that this is a case where the absolute hard max charge in any given
> month is going to just be the most comfortable, respectable experience
> for patrons.
> The question becomes: is it more annoying to have pledges suspended over
> a one-time carry-over or more annoying to get charged a little extra
> more than the max? I suspect it varies among patrons. I think this is a
> case where eventually having an *option* to say "allow carry-overs to go
> beyond my max so as to not suspend pledges" would be something some
> people would want. That said, I think it's a bad idea to get into this
> right now.
> I support going with Robert's view that we include fees and carry-overs
> in the total when determining suspensions in order to keep everything
> below the max that is set. I think that's the cleanest initial way to
> go. (Yes, that is a change from what I expressed in the meeting)
> Happy to hear others' views.
> _______________________________________________
> Discuss mailing list
> Discuss@lists.snowdrift.coop
> https://lists.snowdrift.coop/mailman/listinfo/discuss

@ james sheldon
@ http://www.jamessheldon.com
@ "those who fail to reread
@ are obliged to read the same story everywhere"
@ -- Roland Barthes, S/Z (1970)
@ voyager...@gmail.com
Discuss mailing list

Reply via email to