> Would you contribute to support GRcade?

So a gesture of thanks to people isn't acceptable because of its potential to cause minimum fuss. If someone does pull that trick then publicly out them for the dick they are and I'll happily cover their donation if it stops that gooseberry fool.

It's not a deal breaker but we recognise all Kinds of roles on here. What's wrong with acknowledging people who are prepared to commit to payment for the forums upkeep?

I think it would be a nice gesture. That's all.

It's something I still think about and you're right, we could call people out on waving their money around if they are breaking the rules and think they are allowed to do that because they have disposable income.

I also don't think a gesture of thanks is the same thing as giving a badge to people to wear that essentially says, "I have disposable income". I do personally thank everyone that sends donations to us.

But the fact the super low-key way we've accepted donations in the past has already riled people up the wrong way when it comes to moderation policies doesn't bode well for adding transparency to that.

I don't really like the idea of chastising people unless they pull some really bad gooseberry fool, because it tends to just make things worse.

I'm not totally stuck in the mud with regards to my attitude with this, but at the very least I would want to have a clear consensus that members don't mind seeing people around with the badge and don't feel less inclined to argue or report that person because they know they are making financial contributions. And people have said when we have had that debate in the past that they would feel uncomfortable about it. I don't know what the sentiment is about that these days, but it's always kind of irked me when I see this on other forums. When there are very few signals about somebody on a social platform like forums, especially when new to a site, alongside their writing, it can have a huge impact of your perception on that individual just like postcounts and "thanks" and "upvotes" do, and that very easily devalues other members who for whatever reason haven't attracted such accolades. They shouldn't be any less valued, whether that's in the eyes of the administration, new members, regulars or themselves, in my view.

Alternatively, I have thought about privately sending out cool stuff to people who contribute regularly, even if I would pretty much lose money in the process of doing that. That might be better to have something physical as a token of thanks instead of adding credentials to their online persona that others in a very divisive societal manner (monetary means) are not capable of having, and I would do the same thing for people that contribute in other, non-financial ways.

Just for balance I have zero interest in any kind of recognition, either IRL or on the forum, for providing a donation toward server costs etc. Even before considering the fact that the perception of such things has caused problems in the past I just don't see what function it serves.

A thanks and the fact that this place continues to exist is good enough in my view!

Can I have a monocle on my Avatar as well?

Denster wrote:What's wrong with acknowledging people who are prepared to commit to payment for the forums upkeep?

I am under the impression that as soon as something is given in return for a donation (be it a profile title or whatever) it is no longer a donation but a payment for "digital goods", and that carries additional responsibilities on the part of the receiver, such as dealing with VATMOSS. I used to play a browser game that was run on a single ad + donations, and it used to be that if you donated you'd get your IP limit lifted and have a "this player has donated" tag on your profile. A few years ago, when the EU law changed, the creator stopped allowing donations from within the EU but outside the UK.

I'm sure Gecko knows way more about things like that and maybe that isn't a concern for us, I just thought there were reasons like that for keeping donations strictly that.

I already mentioned the tax reasons but glossed over that because I didn't expect anyone to take that seriously, although HMRC can be very picky on what is considered a "perk" or "benefit in kind" making the proceeds taxable. HMRC are wising up to this sort of stuff with the digital economy and so are other governments; look at Twitch donations, I had to fill out a whole bunch of forms just to enable that because it implicates cross-border payments that count as revenue which for which the IRS requires 30% to be withheld to pay state taxes: https://help.twitch.tv/s/article/amazon ... uage=en_US

I can't remember whether we qualified for US witholding but it is still extra headache which isn't needed.

This means that the IRS is literally already monitoring any potential revenue for twitch with my personal tax information and most people don't really consider "cheers" on Twitch a form of income but the IRS does, they claim it is in "return for rendering of professional services" which is providing the stream. The US government is literally aware that GRcade is a Thing and they might want tax from it. The same thing could be applied to us providing the forum or any kind of differential to normal "free' use, under UK tax legalisation well. I don't know as I'm not an accountant or tax lawyer.

Of course you can be liable for these filings and not do them, but I believe in being a good citizen and don't want to deal with those kinds of questions should they arise. It definitely isn't worth the risk for a relatively tiny website like this. It might be different if we made loads of money from ads like Neogaf did and therefore justified but we don't.

We're not registered as a proper club or society or company at the moment so if it complicates my personal liability or tax filings I'm probably not going to do it.

Looking at this long term, sometimes these things aren't picked up on until years later, for example I have to keep tax records for 6 years on an ongoing basis. If I get audited and HRMC raise questions about these payments, I might be looking at a tax bill for hundreds of pounds because they retroactively decided this was taxable revenue collected in return for digital goods/product/service/literally anything they determine, and if I don't pay it they will fine and eventually sue me for it (as well as potentially fine me for not reporting it in the first place).

I've been weighing this up and I guess I personally wouldn't have a problem in principle with some small, tasteful gesture of thanks -- like a donator rank, or a monthly thanks thread where donators are credited.

...Except if it were the case that that counts as a purchase for tax reasons. Then it wouldn't be worth the extra legalities IMO.

There were a couple of incidents in the past where someone was like "HOW DARE YOU WARN ME??? DON'T YOU KNOW I PAY FOR THIS FORUM???" so I guess the mods do have to be clear that donators are still just normal members, even if that's common sense to most people.

Like I say, it's something we could do anyway but I'd rather err on the side of caution with these things.

I'm pretty "lawfully good" I'm afraid, except when it comes to minor accounts of intoxication. I could take all payments in cash and have no public record of anything but I, err, far outweigh my obligations in most cases. I rather enjoy making government departments "shut the hell up" with lots of documents when I can.. but at least that makes us very safe when it comes to unwanted questions.

I think donating £2 a month and keeping the forum going should be reward enough in itself.

I'd say differently if there was a tier system, that way those who donate more get a badge or something, but for those with less spare cash they can just be happy enough that their contribution is keeping the place going.

I wouldn't be looking for any recognition or badge or rank, it's not necessary and seems a bit self-congratulatory to me.

I wrote:I don't think I would tbh.

Not if I didn't get a silly title above my username (possibly something like "Robot House!").

This wasn't an entirely serious post btw.

I'd probably make an occasional donation but wouldn't want to commit to a monthly direct debit.

no marks or recognition at all please - dont want people to feel like there's 2 ranks of forumites.

Karl_ wrote:There were a couple of incidents in the past where someone was like "HOW DARE YOU WARN ME??? DON'T YOU KNOW I PAY FOR THIS FORUM???"

:thinkingemoji:

People already get a free c-bomb at someone they don't like if they pay for the forum, I think thats quite enough...

I would be happy to chuck a monthly quid or so in the general direction of GRcade, as I do pop in regularly for a bit of a lurk.

I'd say no to recognition for donors also. The site staying up is the "reward". If you give donors a title or a different coloured name, you're basically adding economic class divisions to the forum make up. That seems like a bad move.

I'm all for creating a class system of users. Those who pay the most can enjoy immunity from moderation and an exclusive area open only to them as elite citizens. Annual perks could include a banning of their choice.

Those who pay the least can be publicly ridiculed and routinely tormented for the amusement of the upper classes.

...

Yeah let's not give recognition or perks of any kind. The reward is that the forum continues to function. I would seriously question the character of someone who would only donate for additional benefit.

I think over the years I’ve been treated pretty badly over all so no, I wouldn’t pay for it.

Photek wrote:I think over the years I’ve been treated pretty badly over all so no, I wouldn’t pay for it.

I think Denster's idea came from a good, positive thought; on paper, it would seem cool to have an "indicator" of some sort for those who help to financially support GRcade. However, unfortunately I feel that it would be possible for such an indicator to became a contentious point should that person ever be involved in any kind of "disagreement"; and, lets face it, we all diagree with certain comments in GR at some point :-) .

Opening post details wrote:> There would be no "benefits" to paying - beyond seeing GRcade continue to be up and running! - so folk would not become owners, mods, exempt from rules, entitled to meet (meat?) Gecko every Wednesday night, or anything else. It would be a voluntary, no-contract payment

I feel that the key point is that the benefit wil be seeing GR continuing to run; if folk are in a position to contribute - even £1 a month is ace! - then that would be a great situation.

Photek wrote:I think over the years I’ve been treated pretty badly over all so no, I wouldn’t pay for it.

It's a shame you feel that way, Photek. I myself have been involved in a couple of heated points over the years here due to disagreements in discussions, and I'm sure that many others have, too. I find that a wee break and then forgetting about - usually fairly minor upon reflection - things that have passed usually helps. GRcade is never going to be 100% fair in 100% of disagreements; lets face it, no-one has time to delve into the detail of every argument that takes place. As you have the desire to keep posting, I'm hoping that there could at least be a chance that you'll help to bring about a positive vibe.

> Would you contribute to support GRcade?

Would you contribute to support GRcade?

Who is online

Affiliates