Non-Subscribers

[koban]

My, my... someone's got an attitude this morning. :chuckle:

Maybe he "sat on a Possum" :chuckle:

 

[SOTK]

Nobody is mad, just questioning your sense of propriety and decency.

Exactly.

 

[erinmarie]

Really though, Billybob wasn't telling anyone the HAD to subscribe, he was just asking why they didn't...

Without sounding silly, I don't have much extra money to spend, and I have a subscription, which I renew yearly. It just seems like the right thing to do to support the site I know wouldn't be available without the support of subscribers....

 

[Granite]

:Commie:

:yawn:

:cheers:

There, I just bought ya a beer!

 

[Zakath]

...Without sounding silly, I don't have much extra money to spend, and I have a subscription, which I renew yearly...

And a number of people are quite glad you do, Erin.

 

[beanieboy]

Nobody is mad, just questioning your sense of propriety and decency.

This site promotes christianity. I am Buddhist.
Does it make sense for me to help contribute to that?

This site promotes name calling, because Jesus called people names.
Buddhism teaches that one should be pure of word.

This site supports the idea that the best way to love someone is to hate them, and that love and hate are not exclusive.
Buddhism rejects this idea, so to give money to it would be to support it, so I must decline.

This site often promotes strife and discord.
Buddhism promotes creating peace and harmony within people. To give money to the site would be to fuel the strife.

So, generally, I can't support it for ethical reasons.

 

[SOTK]

It's not much to ask?

" :vomit: You make me puke, faggot! Say, can you pitch in a few bucks"?

Why not just make it a requirement?
If you are going to give people a choice: A)Pay B)Don't Pay - you can't get mad when they choose Don't Pay.

What is it that "make subscription to the site necessary for access" that you oppose?

I think that you realize that if you do that, you have to sucker atheists to give you money so that you can scream at them, and tell them that they are going to hell. Not a good sell.

You have to convince non-christians to pay for a site that has a double standard that favors christians. Not a good sell.

You have to convince non-chrisitans that it is ok for them to be constantly insulted, or called some foul names by really angry people, and do nothing but turn the other cheek, which is a price to pay in itself - and then pay the service. A bad sell.

You aren't getting money, because the site isn't a good enough product, and maybe, it isn't worth a few bucks to continue in the line that it is going. Many people who have been on this site and paid nothing have left in disgust for the other site (yes, you know the one).

So, if people are leaving when it's free, you're doing something wrong.

Beanie,

If this place bothers you so much, why have you been active here so much. Why do you keep coming back?

Whether you see it or not, you support TOL by simply just participating here. So, in essence, if you think TOL is all about insulting and all that other stuff, you could, in a sense, say that you support all that by participating here.

Seriously, if you really felt that way, you wouldn't come here at all. But, you do, and you must find some enjoyment by being here. Not only that, but as I said, you feel you have something to say- something to add.

If you are going to be here, the decent thing to do would be to contribute. That's all I'm saying.

 

[Thirsty_Possum]

Maybe he "sat on a Possum" :chuckle:

Hey! Don't you be dragging us possums into this! I'm a subscriber, afterall.

 

[allsmiles]

No, Kat keeps me occupied most of the time, I just wondered why people who post thousands of times don't subscribe. Do you pay for cable TV? Electricity? Ineternet service?

nope, and you welsh on your taxes.

 

[allsmiles]

if you are going to give people a choice: A)Pay B)Don't Pay - you can't get mad when they choose Don't Pay.

Beanie, using their god and the adam and eve story as a model, given a choice if the prefered selection is not chosen, even when granting the person deciding the freedom of choice, they'll still get miffed.

kind of like a "taking my ball and going home" sort of thing, except they have no where to go.

 

[koban]

Hey! Don't you be dragging us possums into this! I'm a subscriber, afterall.

Now Thirsty - 'round hereabouts, that's just a euphemism for monthly, um, um ...Beer deliveries.


:cheers:

 

[Zakath]

nope, and you welsh on your taxes.

Hey! Not to be slighting the Welsh with your racist epithets.

 

[beanieboy]

Really though, Billybob wasn't telling anyone the HAD to subscribe, he was just asking why they didn't...

Without sounding silly, I don't have much extra money to spend, and I have a subscription, which I renew yearly. It just seems like the right thing to do to support the site I know wouldn't be available without the support of subscribers....

I watch silly shows for entertainment, like "So You Think You Can Dance" or "American Idol" or "America's Next Teen Model" because they are so cheesy.

Do I send the station money? I don't even have cable.
It's free. And I watch it.
I could subscribe to cable.
I could send the station money.

But, does it seem worth it to me to send money to support programs like "America's Next Teen Model"? No. It's silly, and I laugh about it with my friends.

Were this an edifying place, were I to see transformation of people, of people working together to help others, I would be drawn to give, even though I have little as well.

But instead, people post that God wanted the people to die in the Tsunami, rather than have compassion for the survivors. There is post after post about some tragic news - some woman killed her baby in nowhere I've heard of Arkansas, and for some reason, we all need to be informed. Or people vent their anger on people they want to kill.
It's generally negative.

I have to sift through all of that to reach the insight of the others that I mentioned.
The majority of the posts are cereal filler of angry christians whose only happiness comes from telling people how much they hate them, and that's just sad. Why would anyone want to fuel that?

 

[Gerald]

Nobody is mad, just questioning your sense of propriety and decency.

Appealling to "propriety and decency" to get somebody to fork over money for a free service.

No wonder they kicked you out of the Money Grubbers League... :chuckle:

 

[Zakath]

Now Thirsty - 'round hereabouts, that's just a euphemism for monthly, um, um ...Beer deliveries.


:cheers:

Too late. He got mad and left in a huff...

... wonders just what does a "huff" look like, anyway... and how does one leave in one...

:think:

 

[beanieboy]

Beanie,

If this place bothers you so much, why have you been active here so much. Why do you keep coming back?

Whether you see it or not, you support TOL by simply just participating here. So, in essence, if you think TOL is all about insulting and all that other stuff, you could, in a sense, say that you support all that by participating here.

Seriously, if you really felt that way, you wouldn't come here at all. But, you do, and you must find some enjoyment by being here. Not only that, but as I said, you feel you have something to say- something to add.

If you are going to be here, the decent thing to do would be to contribute. That's all I'm saying.

I disagree.

If I also called people idiot at the drop of a hat, or worse, I would be contributing to the problem.

What I do is argue the other side, and it supports TOL in a way that it makes it engaging, but doesn't support its agenda. To give money supports the sites policies, that I don't agree with.

So, am I supporting TOL by posting? Depends on how you look at it.
Perhaps Knight is supporting alternatives to Christianity by allowing non-christians to post here, or supporting not paying by allowing people to post for free.

 

[beanieboy]

If you are going to be here, the decent thing to do would be to contribute. That's all I'm saying.

I think the decent thing for you to do would be to pay me for the time I spent writing posts.
Should we say $5/post, depending on length?

We have a free paper called the City Pages.
They pay people to write articles, reviews, etc. They don't pay to write it. They are paid.
People can read it for free.

I suppose it would be decent if we threw City Pages a buck or two, but they are self sufficient, supported by advertising. TOL, on the otherhand, is asking for a handout, and asking posters to pay them.

Self sufficiency.

Look into it.

 

[beanieboy]

Beanie, using their god and the adam and eve story as a model, given a choice if the prefered selection is not chosen, even when granting the person deciding the freedom of choice, they'll still get miffed.

kind of like a "taking my ball and going home" sort of thing, except they have no where to go.

This is the kind of insigt that I'm talking about.

Freewill: Pay or don't - but we will shame you if you don't choose the one we want.

I'm comfortable with a Subscriber Only Access. What's preventing it from happening?

 

[SOTK]

I think the decent thing for you to do would be to pay me for the time I spent writing posts.
Should we say $5/post, depending on length?

We have a free paper called the City Pages.
They pay people to write articles, reviews, etc. They don't pay to write it. They are paid.
People can read it for free.

I suppose it would be decent if we threw City Pages a buck or two, but they are self sufficient, supported by advertising. TOL, on the otherhand, is asking for a handout, and asking posters to pay them.

Self sufficiency.

Look into it.

You know what, whatever floats your boat. All of what you have posted is nothing more than pure justification. If you are looking for validation, it won't come from me.

 

[beanieboy]

You know what, whatever floats your boat. All of what you have posted is nothing more than pure justification. If you are looking for validation, it won't come from me.

I'm not looking for justification.

I made a suggestion that you simply charge everyone many times.
What's the problem with that solution?