How Many Forums Are You A Paid Supporter To?

[lakeroadster]

I was just wondering.... how many of you folks are a paid supporter on other sites?

 

[Peartree]

Are you asking if I pay to use them, or if they pay me to contribute?

 

[lakeroadster]

Are you asking if I pay to use them, or if they pay me to contribute?

Supporter.. sorry. Any chance you could change the title for me?

 

[Sparky]

DISCLAIMER: I have nothing to do with this, and so it is not TRF asking.

 

[user 35280]

What other sites are there besides TRF and YORF?

 

[manixFan]

Based on the available answers, you should reword the question to: "For those of you who pay to support this forum, how many others do you also pay to support?" Your answers assume the respondent pays to support TRF, so the question should do the same.


Tony

 

[alexzogh]

I support several forums consistent with my hobbies, primarily to keep them independent and off of Facebook, or other walled gardens in which I am the primary product.

 

[user 35280]

facebox is a joke

 

[dr wogz]

facebox is a joke

it's a sad 'evolution' from what it was / what it originally was intended for..

 

[Marc_G]

There should be a "none" version. No hobby forum I am on requires a paid subscription; at this time I don't pay for any hobby forum.

PS I did pay for TRF one year, probably the first year it was an option. And i might again, some day.

 

[jqavins]

it's a sad 'evolution' from what it was / what it originally was intended for.

I doubt that. I suspect that it is exactly what it was always intended to eventually become, with the possible difference that it is more successful than anticipated. The plan always was, I suspect, to first rope people in and then sell them.

Anyway, just TRF. There are two others that I might, but one I haven't used enough, and the other has revenue from merchandise sales.

 

[ewomack]

From what I've read and heard, Facebook was conceived and created by marketers and advertisers for the express purpose of collecting information for marketing and advertising. It was wildly successful and insiders (so I've read) were shocked at how easily people gave up personal information that it used to take years of focus studies to collect. This is apparently how they make the bulk of their money. Facebook is a marketing platform disguised as a "community."

 

[tab28682]

I support TRF and I support RC Groups.

 

[MikeT]

RC Scale Builder. Worth every penny.

Mike

 

[neil_w]

From what I've read and heard, Facebook was conceived and created by marketers and advertisers for the express purpose of collecting information for marketing and advertising.

No, that's what it evolved into later.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Facebook

 

[ewomack]

No, that's what it evolved into later.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Facebook

That might be, I wasn't there so I don't really know for sure, but I have read/heard elsewhere that the public Facebook founding story, as found on Wikipedia, is a myth. But I don't really know. In any case, it's true that it is now an advertising platform.

 

[manixFan]

From what I've read and heard, Facebook was conceived and created by marketers and advertisers for the express purpose of collecting information for marketing and advertising. It was wildly successful and insiders (so I've read) were shocked at how easily people gave up personal information that it used to take years of focus studies to collect. This is apparently how they make the bulk of their money. Facebook is a marketing platform disguised as a "community."

That might be, I wasn't there so I don't really know for sure, but I have read/heard elsewhere that the public Facebook founding story, as found on Wikipedia, is a myth. But I don't really know. In any case, it's true that it is now an advertising platform.

Hmm, maybe you missed the various lawsuits by the co-founders who sued Zuckerberg? It was founded by college kids, not 'marketers and advertisers'. It's creation is very well documented. The lawsuits aren't a myth and they recount the creation, which pretty much mirrors what is found on Wikipedia and other sites.

Do you not believe or trust knowledge of events that happened because you weren't there?

https://www.businessinsider.com/how-mark-zuckerberg-booted-his-co-founder-out-of-the-company-2012-5https://www.smh.com.au/technology/f...nership-history-explained-20110415-1dgi5.htmlhttps://www.theguardian.com/technology/2011/jun/23/winklevoss-twins-end-facebook-lawsuit
You can believe what you want, but there has been so much written about the founding of Facebook and the lawsuits that it inspired that to call the Wikipedia article a myth is basically embracing an alternative set of facts that are not supported by physical evidence.

Sorry to rant but I am really tired of folks who take the attitude that they can dismiss reality with a simple platitude. But I'd be happy to read through any sources you can offer that have a different foundation story for Facebook. I dislike FB as much as anyone, and have nothing to do with it. But I dislike 'alternate facts' even more.


Tony

 

[lakeroadster]

How did this morph into a Facebook thread

 

[H_Rocket]

it's a sad 'evolution' from what it was / what it originally was intended for..

It was created so a bunch of horn dog ivy league college boys could rate girls.

 

[jimzcatz]

I follow several forums and pay for none.

 

[Hobie1dog]

zero