welcome: please sign in

The following 706 words could not be found in the dictionary of 7 words (including 7 LocalSpellingWords) and are highlighted below:
ability   able   about   above   absolutely   accept   access   accomodate   according   account   actual   Adam   add   adding   addition   Additionally   adds   adjust   administrative   adopt   afford   affordable   after   again   against   agreed   akin   Akin   all   allow   allowances   allowed   allowing   allows   almost   along   alphabetical   already   also   alterative   Although   although   always   ameliorated   among   amount   amounts   an   and   anti   any   arbitrary   are   arguably   argue   around   as   As   ask   at   attainable   attract   attractive   automatically   available   average   avoid   Avoids   backups   bad   bandwidth   base   based   basically   basis   be   Because   because   been   before   beginning   being   belong   benefit   benefits   best   better   between   boundaries   boundary   Brainstorming   broader   budget   budgets   But   but   by   call   can   cannot   cap   capitalism   capitalistic   case   certain   change   changes   changing   charge   charity   Chlipala   choose   co   collaboration   collaborative   collaboratively   collective   collectively   colocation   commercial   commonly   communal   community   Compared   compared   compete   competition   complexity   compromise   compromising   con   Con   concrete   connections   Cons   cons   consideration   consume   contain   content   continue   continuing   contribution   cool   coop   Coop   cooperation   cooperative   Cooperative   corporations   correspond   cost   costs   could   cover   creates   criticisms   critique   culture   current   date   day   decide   decisions   decrease   decreased   deep   depending   Description   desirable   deter   determined   develop   did   differences   Different   different   differentiation   directly   discuss   discussed   disk   disposable   distance   distribution   dividing   do   domain   domains   donate   donated   donations   dramatically   draw   drawn   drive   drives   drop   dues   during   dynamic   each   Each   earnings   editing   either   elects   elegance   elitist   elsewhere   email   enable   encourage   enough   especially   Essentially   essentially   estimated   evaluated   evaluation   even   ever   every   everyone   evolution   exact   exactly   example   excessive   exclusive   existing   expectation   expenditures   expensive   experiencing   experimental   expertise   extraordinarily   extremely   extroardinarily   fact   fair   fall   far   Feature   feature   features   fees   felt   few   figure   Finally   find   first   flat   Flat   flexibility   flexible   focus   For   for   foresight   freedom   from   full   fund   future   generous   get   given   gives   giving   going   good   graphs   greater   grossly   had   hard   hardware   has   have   hcoop   he   help   helpful   here   hierarchical   hierarchy   high   higher   hits   hope   host   hosted   hosting   hour   how   However   hundreds   Hybrid   idea   ideas   ideological   if   If   implement   improve   in   In   included   includes   income   increase   increased   increases   individual   individualistic   individually   informally   infrastructure   inherently   instead   institutions   insufficient   interest   internal   internet   into   introductory   investments   irrelevant   is   issue   it   It   join   joining   just   Kennedy   kind   know   large   later   least   leave   less   Let   levels   likely   limit   limitations   limited   ll   long   longer   losing   low   lower   lowers   Lowest   lowest   maintenance   make   market   marketing   May   may   maybe   mean   meaningfully   means   Member   member   members   Members   membership   might   migration   minimal   minimum   modern   modified   modify   moment   monitoring   month   monthly   months   more   More   most   move   much   multiple   must   my   name   names   Nathan   nature   near   nearly   necessary   need   network   new   niche   no   normal   not   nothing   notice   noticeable   notion   numbers   objectively   of   offer   offered   offering   offerings   on   Once   once   one   ones   only   op   operating   opt   option   or   order   organization   organizations   other   others   our   out   outcome   overhead   own   package   packages   page   part   particular   parts   pay   paying   Payment   payments   pays   Peer   people   per   percentage   Perhaps   period   periodically   place   placed   plan   Plan   plans   Plans   please   pledge   plenty   pockets   point   police   policing   pool   portal   post   potentially   Predictable   price   prices   Pricing   primarily   Pro   probably   problems   professional   profit   program   proposals   Proposals   proposed   Pros   provide   provider   providing   pseudo   public   purpose   quality   question   raised   range   rate   Rate   Rates   rates   rather   re   real   really   reason   reasonable   receive   recognizes   reduce   redundant   reflect   reflects   regressive   reliability   remain   remember   Remember   repairs   reproducing   requests   requirements   resonates   resource   resources   respect   responsiveness   retained   reviewed   revised   rise   said   same   scale   schema   scheme   schemes   security   See   see   seems   self   server   servers   services   serving   set   sets   setting   settle   several   shares   Shares   short   should   shouldn   similar   simple   simplicity   simply   since   Since   single   site   sites   sliding   small   So   software   Some   some   something   sounds   space   standard   start   statistics   stricter   strong   structure   subject   subsidization   subsidize   subsidizing   substantial   suggests   summary   superficial   supplement   support   supports   sustainable   sustained   switch   system   systems   taking   temporary   Temporary   term   terminology   terms   than   that   That   The   the   their   them   themselves   then   There   there   therefore   These   these   they   think   thinking   this   This   those   though   thought   thousands   through   tied   tier   Tiered   tiered   tight   time   to   too   tools   top   traffic   transitional   trivial   truly   trying   turns   tweaked   uncooperative   unless   Unlike   unlikely   unlimited   Unnamed   unnecessary   until   up   update   upgrades   us   usage   use   used   user   users   uses   using   utilization   value   ve   very   volume   voluntary   want   wants   was   way   We   we   web   well   were   what   When   when   where   which   while   who   whole   will   Willingness   wish   wished   With   with   without   working   worry   would   You   you   zone   Zone   zones  

Clear message
Edit

PaymentPlanProposals

1. Payment Plan Proposals

Different ideas have been proposed about the best way to adjust member fees. This page will contain a summary of the plans that have been proposed. When adding or editing a plan here, remember that HCoop will have to 1) cover an increase in operating costs during our migration to a new infrastructure (although nearly all of the hardware that we need has been donated at this point) 2) figure out how to adjust costs on a longer-term basis once membership increases.

With that, the proposals (in alphabetical order, please update if you change the names of the plans :) ):

1.1. Flat-Rate

1.1.1. Description

Each member pays the same amount every month. Feature sets and bandwidth allowances are basically what we can support given our software tools and what our colocation plan gives us. Member sites may be re-evaluated at any time if their bandwidth or disk usage increases dramatically, and the cooperative at that time could decide to either charge the member more for their higher utilization or subsidize the site with existing member dues and resources.

This plan recognizes that some members may leave because of a temporary increase in the flat-rate price during our migration to a new infrastructure. For this reason, the plan can be modified for a short time to allow donations by some members to subsidize the dues of those who can't afford a higher flat-rate until the membership increases to allow the cooperative to once again be affordable for all of our members.

In this plan, the membership rate would settle (post server-migration) to something that included a budget for concrete operating costs as well as a fund for repairs and upgrades.

Although this plan would be rather expensive for a few months compared to commercial offerings, our quality of services should be higher because of the better-quality hardware and bandwidth that we will have access to. Additionally, we already offer a broader feature set than most commercial offerings and will continue this in our new infrastructure. Finally, it is felt that after prices settle, we could reduce our monthly costs to something that most members could accept, in the range of $5 - $8 per month, US. The exact rate that we settle on would be TBD at a later date and able to be revised later to reflect changing operating costs and estimated future expenditures.

1.1.2. Pros and Cons

1.2. Tiered Pricing

1.2.1. Description

Akin to standard professional hosting services, multiple hosting "plans" are offered for a flat rate.

Since we are a cooperative, these rates would be determined by the distribution of actual usage levels and tweaked as necessary. Rates could be set to enable some retained earnings for future investments or maintenance.

A simple compromise alterative is to simply offer an opt-in plan for the lowest-usage members at a flat rate. This was discussed in NathanKennedy 's email on this subject on hcoop-discuss.

1.2.2. Pros and Cons

1.3. Shares

1.3.1. Description

AdamChlipala suggests:

We implement a "sliding scale" scheme based on giving each member the option to pay as if he were multiple members. That means that the cost for a single pseudo-member (and a single real member who elects not to use this feature) is decreased.

It is my expectation that, in the short term, some of us will pledge rather large numbers of shares to help drive the minimum cost per member low enough to avoid losing current members and attract new members with limited budgets. However, in the long term, I hope that this feature can be tied informally to resource usage, where members "police" themselves and decide when it is fair to pay as multiple members. There would remain the option for those with plenty of disposable income to pledge greater amounts out of interest in the co-op, to decrease rates and make membership more attractive to the public.

1.3.2. Pros and Cons

1.4. Brainstorming/Hybrid Plans

1. Temporary "shares" with long-term modified flat-rate structure: The "shares" idea is cool and should get us through the short term until membership numbers increase. In addition, it may be helpful for "fund" drives in the future. But some have raised criticisms (see "cons" above) about this in the long term, and we can always accomodate users who want to donate more through individual donations. For this reason, we would use the "shares" program in the transitional period, and switch to a "modified flat-rate" program when our membership increases to sustainable levels.

This long-term schema would be primarily based on a flat-rate plan for most members. Because it is unlikely that more than a few members would have "extraordinarily high" usage (remember that with the new infrastructure this would mean that they're serving out thousands of requests per day on a sustained basis), we would offer a very reasonable base package for all members that includes a budget for repairs and upgrades. The part of the "tiered" program that we would adopt would be that all sites are able to be reviewed by any member at any time (we all have access to traffic/disk usage graphs and statistics), and the Cooperative will collaboratively decide if and when we need to ask for more resources from users hosting an extremely high-volume site.

This also allows us the flexibility of not setting an arbitrary boundary on certain resources and setting prices based on these boundaries, as these available resources are always going to change depending on the site in question and our network organization. Finally, this plan allows us the freedom to choose which sites we subsidize/support more than others based on our members' collective decisions (very likely taking into consideration the content and purpose of the site in question). Because of this, it should encourage collaboration among members instead of policing (either self-policing or policing of other members), and increase the communal nature of HCoop as a whole.

2. Unnamed plan 1: If we did need to offer a plan for a very low-volume site on an extremely tight budget ($3 - $5 per month), maybe we could just limit the user to the ability to host one zone on our servers per user account. This could be compromising between the "tiered" plan by allowing space for very low-budget users, while continuing to have the normal plan that supports multiple zones. These sites would also be able to be reviewed periodically for "extroardinarily high" usage which we could then charge them for if absolutely necessary, again, unless the coop wished to subsidize services. Perhaps we could call this an "introductory" hosting plan?

PaymentPlanProposals (last edited 2008-07-07 04:28:14 by localhost)