Hi Rhizomers:
I am hoping to start a discussion here on Raw about Rhizome's financial
situation and a possible solution. This email is rather long, but I'd
appreciate it if you'd take the time to read it through, give it some
thought, and let me know what you think.
First, some background information. It will cost about $400,000 to operate
Rhizome.org this year. Here's how we spend it: $6,000 on administrative
fees (mostly processing credit card gifts); $122,000 on operating expenses
(phone, rent, web hosting, office supplies, etc.); $177,000 on payroll
costs (salaries, health insurance, payroll taxes, etc.); $93,000 on
professional fees (writers, commissions, consultants, etc.). These numbers
may seem high to some of you, but we actually run a very lean, efficient
operation. It simply costs a lot of money to run a nonprofit organization
that offers as many programs to as many people as we do.
In the past, most of our revenue has come from foundations, but foundation
support is shrinking. We had hoped to make up the difference through earned
income from web hosting and online education, but those services are
getting off to a slow start. We have also, as you surely know, tried asking
for voluntary contributions. But so far this year only about 1% of our
19,000 members have made gifts.
The Rhizome Board of Directors met for its quarterly meeting last Friday.
The main topic was how to solve our financial problems. I proposed putting
the organization into hibernation mode. This would entail shutting down the
office, laying off the staff and discontinuing most of our programs. We
would keep the web site up, ask the SuperUsers to continue to publish
texts, and keep Raw online. But everything else would stop: no more Digest
or Net Art News, no more commissions, no more events. We'd stop adding new
projects to the ArtBase, stop improving the web site (we have a long list
of bugs to fix and features to add) and stop planning new programs.
The Board felt that hibernation would be a big mistake. Once we went into
hibernation, they argued, it would be very hard to re-emerge and rebuild
momentum. Foundations would lose confidence in us (not to mention the fact
that we wouldn't have anyone to write the grants). Most important, our
ability to fulfill our mission would be compromised.
Then someone suggested charging a membership fee. This idea has been
proposed before, and I have always opposed it. Rhizome is for everyone, I
argued, not just for those who can afford it. I argued that we'd lose
thousands of members and that our community would become less diverse.
Then we looked at the numbers. The gap between our expenses and what we can
raise from foundations, the government, earned income and other sources is
about $100,000. That's about $5 per member. If every member gave $5,
Rhizome would be financially stable. We could continue to grow and serve
the community.
The board argued that we pay to subscribe to magazines, to enter museums
and to see performances. We pay to attend festivals and conferences. Why
shouldn't we pay for Rhizome? Because it's online?
Consider this hypothetical scenario. Let's say we introduced a
sliding-scale membership fee starting at $11 per year with "thank you
gifts" (T-shirts, etc.) at higher levels. By paying $11 a year (or more if
you could afford it), you get access to everything: Raw, Rare, Digest, Net
Art News, the Calendar, Opportunity Listings, ArtBase, Commissions, etc.
Maybe we'd keep Raw free. Maybe we'd give new memebers a free trial period
so they could check out the goods before they have to pay.
Would you pay the fee?
What do you think about the idea of a sliding-scale membership fee for
Rhizome.org? Good idea? Bad idea?
Do you think it would be better to go into hibernation?
I am eagerly awaiting your responses.
Sincerely,
Mark
Membership fee?
-
Type: discussion
Comments
At 05:34 PM 24/10/2002 -0400, you wrote:
>Would you pay the fee?
yes, it if was 5 bucks.
. . …. …..
pro][tean][.lapsing.txt
.
.
www.cddc.vt.edu/host/netwurker/
http://www.hotkey.net.au/~netwurker/
http://www.hotkey.net.au/~netwurker/display.myopia.swf
…. . .??? …….
Mark,
You MUST fix the bugs on the web site before the fee is instituted.
It's extremely buggy on anything other than IE/Win. I volunteer to
rewrite the front-end in clean, contemporary xhtml/css.
I don't see a problem with the fee, but I contribute more than the
proposed fee every year voluntarily.
I would be interested in what people who would be totally against the
fee have to say. esp those who take advantage of raw. but i don't see
why you would keep RAW free, it's a service like any other.
what about all the people who are happily syndicating Net Art News? do
they keep it for free (as it functions sorta like an ad for rhiz)?
On Thursday, October 24, 2002, at 05:34 PM, Mark Tribe wrote:
> Hi Rhizomers:
>
> I am hoping to start a discussion here on Raw about Rhizome's
> financial situation and a possible solution. This email is rather
> long, but I'd appreciate it if you'd take the time to read it through,
> give it some thought, and let me know what you think.
>
> <snip>
Why not. But I don't think $5.00 a year will really do it. Do you?
-e.
Mark Tribe wrote:
> Hi Rhizomers:
>
> I am hoping to start a discussion here on Raw about Rhizome's
> financial situation and a possible solution. This email is rather
> long, but I'd appreciate it if you'd take the time to read it through,
> give it some thought, and let me know what you think.
>
> First, some background information. It will cost about $400,000 to
> operate Rhizome.org this year. Here's how we spend it: $6,000 on
> administrative fees (mostly processing credit card gifts); $122,000 on
> operating expenses (phone, rent, web hosting, office supplies, etc.);
> $177,000 on payroll costs (salaries, health insurance, payroll taxes,
> etc.); $93,000 on professional fees (writers, commissions,
> consultants, etc.). These numbers may seem high to some of you, but we
> actually run a very lean, efficient operation. It simply costs a lot
> of money to run a nonprofit organization that offers as many programs
> to as many people as we do.
>
> In the past, most of our revenue has come from foundations, but
> foundation support is shrinking. We had hoped to make up the
> difference through earned income from web hosting and online
> education, but those services are getting off to a slow start. We have
> also, as you surely know, tried asking for voluntary contributions.
> But so far this year only about 1% of our 19,000 members have made gifts.
>
> The Rhizome Board of Directors met for its quarterly meeting last
> Friday. The main topic was how to solve our financial problems. I
> proposed putting the organization into hibernation mode. This would
> entail shutting down the office, laying off the staff and
> discontinuing most of our programs. We would keep the web site up, ask
> the SuperUsers to continue to publish texts, and keep Raw online. But
> everything else would stop: no more Digest or Net Art News, no more
> commissions, no more events. We'd stop adding new projects to the
> ArtBase, stop improving the web site (we have a long list of bugs to
> fix and features to add) and stop planning new programs.
>
> The Board felt that hibernation would be a big mistake. Once we went
> into hibernation, they argued, it would be very hard to re-emerge and
> rebuild momentum. Foundations would lose confidence in us (not to
> mention the fact that we wouldn't have anyone to write the grants).
> Most important, our ability to fulfill our mission would be compromised.
>
> Then someone suggested charging a membership fee. This idea has been
> proposed before, and I have always opposed it. Rhizome is for
> everyone, I argued, not just for those who can afford it. I argued
> that we'd lose thousands of members and that our community would
> become less diverse.
>
> Then we looked at the numbers. The gap between our expenses and what
> we can raise from foundations, the government, earned income and other
> sources is about $100,000. That's about $5 per member. If every member
> gave $5, Rhizome would be financially stable. We could continue to
> grow and serve the community.
>
> The board argued that we pay to subscribe to magazines, to enter
> museums and to see performances. We pay to attend festivals and
> conferences. Why shouldn't we pay for Rhizome? Because it's online?
>
> Consider this hypothetical scenario. Let's say we introduced a
> sliding-scale membership fee starting at $11 per year with "thank you
> gifts" (T-shirts, etc.) at higher levels. By paying $11 a year (or
> more if you could afford it), you get access to everything: Raw, Rare,
> Digest, Net Art News, the Calendar, Opportunity Listings, ArtBase,
> Commissions, etc. Maybe we'd keep Raw free. Maybe we'd give new
> memebers a free trial period so they could check out the goods before
> they have to pay.
>
> Would you pay the fee?
>
> What do you think about the idea of a sliding-scale membership fee for
> Rhizome.org? Good idea? Bad idea?
>
> Do you think it would be better to go into hibernation?
>
> I am eagerly awaiting your responses.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Mark
> + new media rugby
> -> post: [email protected]
> -> questions: [email protected]
> -> subscribe/unsubscribe: http://rhizome.org/preferences/subscribe.rhiz
> -> give: http://rhizome.org/support
> +
> Subscribers to Rhizome are subject to the terms set out in the
> Membership Agreement available online at http://rhizome.org/info/29.php
>
Its time to talk about industry mergers. Forget the membership fees, very few
will pay. If you are about to fold, either fold, or start a capital campaign
to raise 7 figures. Fold or Bold.
joseph
Quoting Mark Tribe <[email protected]>:
> Hi Rhizomers:
>
> I am hoping to start a discussion here on Raw about Rhizome's financial
> situation and a possible solution. This email is rather long, but I'd
> appreciate it if you'd take the time to read it through, give it some
> thought, and let me know what you think.
>
> First, some background information. It will cost about $400,000 to operate
> Rhizome.org this year. Here's how we spend it: $6,000 on administrative
> fees (mostly processing credit card gifts); $122,000 on operating expenses
> (phone, rent, web hosting, office supplies, etc.); $177,000 on payroll
> costs (salaries, health insurance, payroll taxes, etc.); $93,000 on
> professional fees (writers, commissions, consultants, etc.). These numbers
> may seem high to some of you, but we actually run a very lean, efficient
> operation. It simply costs a lot of money to run a nonprofit organization
> that offers as many programs to as many people as we do.
>
> In the past, most of our revenue has come from foundations, but foundation
> support is shrinking. We had hoped to make up the difference through earned
> income from web hosting and online education, but those services are
> getting off to a slow start. We have also, as you surely know, tried asking
> for voluntary contributions. But so far this year only about 1% of our
> 19,000 members have made gifts.
>
> The Rhizome Board of Directors met for its quarterly meeting last Friday.
> The main topic was how to solve our financial problems. I proposed putting
> the organization into hibernation mode. This would entail shutting down the
> office, laying off the staff and discontinuing most of our programs. We
> would keep the web site up, ask the SuperUsers to continue to publish
> texts, and keep Raw online. But everything else would stop: no more Digest
> or Net Art News, no more commissions, no more events. We'd stop adding new
> projects to the ArtBase, stop improving the web site (we have a long list
> of bugs to fix and features to add) and stop planning new programs.
>
> The Board felt that hibernation would be a big mistake. Once we went into
> hibernation, they argued, it would be very hard to re-emerge and rebuild
> momentum. Foundations would lose confidence in us (not to mention the fact
> that we wouldn't have anyone to write the grants). Most important, our
> ability to fulfill our mission would be compromised.
>
> Then someone suggested charging a membership fee. This idea has been
> proposed before, and I have always opposed it. Rhizome is for everyone, I
> argued, not just for those who can afford it. I argued that we'd lose
> thousands of members and that our community would become less diverse.
>
> Then we looked at the numbers. The gap between our expenses and what we can
> raise from foundations, the government, earned income and other sources is
> about $100,000. That's about $5 per member. If every member gave $5,
> Rhizome would be financially stable. We could continue to grow and serve
> the community.
>
> The board argued that we pay to subscribe to magazines, to enter museums
> and to see performances. We pay to attend festivals and conferences. Why
> shouldn't we pay for Rhizome? Because it's online?
>
> Consider this hypothetical scenario. Let's say we introduced a
> sliding-scale membership fee starting at $11 per year with "thank you
> gifts" (T-shirts, etc.) at higher levels. By paying $11 a year (or more if
> you could afford it), you get access to everything: Raw, Rare, Digest, Net
> Art News, the Calendar, Opportunity Listings, ArtBase, Commissions, etc.
> Maybe we'd keep Raw free. Maybe we'd give new memebers a free trial period
> so they could check out the goods before they have to pay.
>
> Would you pay the fee?
>
> What do you think about the idea of a sliding-scale membership fee for
> Rhizome.org? Good idea? Bad idea?
>
> Do you think it would be better to go into hibernation?
>
> I am eagerly awaiting your responses.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Mark
>
> + new media rugby
> -> post: [email protected]
> -> questions: [email protected]
> -> subscribe/unsubscribe: http://rhizome.org/preferences/subscribe.rhiz
> -> give: http://rhizome.org/support
> +
> Subscribers to Rhizome are subject to the terms set out in the
> Membership Agreement available online at http://rhizome.org/info/29.php
Yeah, I was thinking a big fatty music CD, all proceeds to Rhizome, I'd
donate a song'r two.
>From: [email protected]
>Reply-To: [email protected]
>To: Mark Tribe <[email protected]>
>CC: [email protected]
>Subject: Re: RHIZOME_RAW: Membership fee?
>Date: Fri, 25 Oct 2002 05:45:52 +0000
>
>Its time to talk about industry mergers. Forget the membership fees, very
>few
>will pay. If you are about to fold, either fold, or start a capital
>campaign
>to raise 7 figures. Fold or Bold.
>
>joseph
>
>
>Quoting Mark Tribe <[email protected]>:
>
> > Hi Rhizomers:
> >
> > I am hoping to start a discussion here on Raw about Rhizome's financial
> > situation and a possible solution. This email is rather long, but I'd
> > appreciate it if you'd take the time to read it through, give it some
> > thought, and let me know what you think.
> >
> > First, some background information. It will cost about $400,000 to
>operate
> > Rhizome.org this year. Here's how we spend it: $6,000 on administrative
> > fees (mostly processing credit card gifts); $122,000 on operating
>expenses
> > (phone, rent, web hosting, office supplies, etc.); $177,000 on payroll
> > costs (salaries, health insurance, payroll taxes, etc.); $93,000 on
> > professional fees (writers, commissions, consultants, etc.). These
>numbers
> > may seem high to some of you, but we actually run a very lean, efficient
> > operation. It simply costs a lot of money to run a nonprofit
>organization
> > that offers as many programs to as many people as we do.
> >
> > In the past, most of our revenue has come from foundations, but
>foundation
> > support is shrinking. We had hoped to make up the difference through
>earned
> > income from web hosting and online education, but those services are
> > getting off to a slow start. We have also, as you surely know, tried
>asking
> > for voluntary contributions. But so far this year only about 1% of our
> > 19,000 members have made gifts.
> >
> > The Rhizome Board of Directors met for its quarterly meeting last
>Friday.
> > The main topic was how to solve our financial problems. I proposed
>putting
> > the organization into hibernation mode. This would entail shutting down
>the
> > office, laying off the staff and discontinuing most of our programs. We
> > would keep the web site up, ask the SuperUsers to continue to publish
> > texts, and keep Raw online. But everything else would stop: no more
>Digest
> > or Net Art News, no more commissions, no more events. We'd stop adding
>new
> > projects to the ArtBase, stop improving the web site (we have a long
>list
> > of bugs to fix and features to add) and stop planning new programs.
> >
> > The Board felt that hibernation would be a big mistake. Once we went
>into
> > hibernation, they argued, it would be very hard to re-emerge and rebuild
> > momentum. Foundations would lose confidence in us (not to mention the
>fact
> > that we wouldn't have anyone to write the grants). Most important, our
> > ability to fulfill our mission would be compromised.
> >
> > Then someone suggested charging a membership fee. This idea has been
> > proposed before, and I have always opposed it. Rhizome is for everyone,
>I
> > argued, not just for those who can afford it. I argued that we'd lose
> > thousands of members and that our community would become less diverse.
> >
> > Then we looked at the numbers. The gap between our expenses and what we
>can
> > raise from foundations, the government, earned income and other sources
>is
> > about $100,000. That's about $5 per member. If every member gave $5,
> > Rhizome would be financially stable. We could continue to grow and serve
> > the community.
> >
> > The board argued that we pay to subscribe to magazines, to enter museums
> > and to see performances. We pay to attend festivals and conferences. Why
> > shouldn't we pay for Rhizome? Because it's online?
> >
> > Consider this hypothetical scenario. Let's say we introduced a
> > sliding-scale membership fee starting at $11 per year with "thank you
> > gifts" (T-shirts, etc.) at higher levels. By paying $11 a year (or more
>if
> > you could afford it), you get access to everything: Raw, Rare, Digest,
>Net
> > Art News, the Calendar, Opportunity Listings, ArtBase, Commissions, etc.
> > Maybe we'd keep Raw free. Maybe we'd give new memebers a free trial
>period
> > so they could check out the goods before they have to pay.
> >
> > Would you pay the fee?
> >
> > What do you think about the idea of a sliding-scale membership fee for
> > Rhizome.org? Good idea? Bad idea?
> >
> > Do you think it would be better to go into hibernation?
> >
> > I am eagerly awaiting your responses.
> >
> > Sincerely,
> >
> > Mark
> >
> > + new media rugby
> > -> post: [email protected]
> > -> questions: [email protected]
> > -> subscribe/unsubscribe: http://rhizome.org/preferences/subscribe.rhiz
> > -> give: http://rhizome.org/support
> > +
> > Subscribers to Rhizome are subject to the terms set out in the
> > Membership Agreement available online at http://rhizome.org/info/29.php
>+ new media rugby
>-> post: [email protected]
>-> questions: [email protected]
>-> subscribe/unsubscribe: http://rhizome.org/preferences/subscribe.rhiz
>-> give: http://rhizome.org/support
>+
>Subscribers to Rhizome are subject to the terms set out in the
>Membership Agreement available online at http://rhizome.org/info/29.php
_________________________________________________________________
Get faster connections
I'm glad someone else is bringing up the bugs on the rhizome web site.
I've been mentioning this and was told no one else was having the same
sort of problems. I agree this has to be done- if Rhizome is going to be
a pay service there will be a higher expectation.
Concerning charging for raw, I think charging for raw is a reasonable
idea, and for the sake of reaching out and being idealistic, what if we
waived fees for Raw for those who donate intellectual capital? For
example, if you make a piece and it is donated to the artbase, or if you
print something that the superusers deem as publishable, etc, etc, it
could earn you credits towards using services at rhizome. Or if you are
a super user. It has to be a small portion of the overall subscriber
base. Not to mention that at this point, if those people didn't donate
money then there is something bad happening.
This would accomplish two things: 1. make rhizome raw worth paying money
for, (for the lurkers) 2. reward people for doing more than issuing
inane personal assaults at one another, (a problem which seems to be
diminishing) and 3. something about idealism. Isn't there a central
government organization dedicated to giving money away to idealists?
There must be some place with nea funding that's doing something like
that. [It seems to me that the more serious and realist rhizome has
become, the less money it's had? Maybe idealism is not so bad a thing
after all.]
I'm with TWhid on keeping NAN free for all who want it, as an
advertisement of sorts.
Cheers,
-e.
t.whid wrote:
> Mark,
>
> You MUST fix the bugs on the web site before the fee is instituted.
> It's extremely buggy on anything other than IE/Win. I volunteer to
> rewrite the front-end in clean, contemporary xhtml/css.
>
> I don't see a problem with the fee, but I contribute more than the
> proposed fee every year voluntarily.
>
> I would be interested in what people who would be totally against the
> fee have to say. esp those who take advantage of raw. but i don't see
> why you would keep RAW free, it's a service like any other.
>
> what about all the people who are happily syndicating Net Art News? do
> they keep it for free (as it functions sorta like an ad for rhiz)?
>
>
> On Thursday, October 24, 2002, at 05:34 PM, Mark Tribe wrote:
>
>> Hi Rhizomers:
>>
>> I am hoping to start a discussion here on Raw about Rhizome's
>> financial situation and a possible solution. This email is rather
>> long, but I'd appreciate it if you'd take the time to read it
>> through, give it some thought, and let me know what you think.
>>
>> <snip>
>
>
> + new media rugby
> -> post: [email protected]
> -> questions: [email protected]
> -> subscribe/unsubscribe: http://rhizome.org/preferences/subscribe.rhiz
> -> give: http://rhizome.org/support
> +
> Subscribers to Rhizome are subject to the terms set out in the
> Membership Agreement available online at http://rhizome.org/info/29.php
>
An annual fee is fine. I would be willing to pay up to say $15. But what
about access to the Artbase? I think that should remain free. I think some
of us who have work in the Artbase look at it as sort of a venue for our
work. I for one get lot's of hits on my site from Rhizome and am concerned
about what might happen if only paying members were allowed access to the
Artbase. And yes, I think Raw should be free. I think it attracts a lot of
curious people who just want to find out what the new media art scene is
about or up to and I doubt that they're willing to pay for it.
Pall
—– Original Message —–
From: "Mark Tribe" <[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, October 24, 2002 2:34 PM
Subject: RHIZOME_RAW: Membership fee?
> Hi Rhizomers:
>
> I am hoping to start a discussion here on Raw about Rhizome's financial
> situation and a possible solution. This email is rather long, but I'd
> appreciate it if you'd take the time to read it through, give it some
> thought, and let me know what you think.
>
> First, some background information. It will cost about $400,000 to operate
> Rhizome.org this year. Here's how we spend it: $6,000 on administrative
> fees (mostly processing credit card gifts); $122,000 on operating expenses
> (phone, rent, web hosting, office supplies, etc.); $177,000 on payroll
> costs (salaries, health insurance, payroll taxes, etc.); $93,000 on
> professional fees (writers, commissions, consultants, etc.). These numbers
> may seem high to some of you, but we actually run a very lean, efficient
> operation. It simply costs a lot of money to run a nonprofit organization
> that offers as many programs to as many people as we do.
>
> In the past, most of our revenue has come from foundations, but foundation
> support is shrinking. We had hoped to make up the difference through
earned
> income from web hosting and online education, but those services are
> getting off to a slow start. We have also, as you surely know, tried
asking
> for voluntary contributions. But so far this year only about 1% of our
> 19,000 members have made gifts.
>
> The Rhizome Board of Directors met for its quarterly meeting last Friday.
> The main topic was how to solve our financial problems. I proposed putting
> the organization into hibernation mode. This would entail shutting down
the
> office, laying off the staff and discontinuing most of our programs. We
> would keep the web site up, ask the SuperUsers to continue to publish
> texts, and keep Raw online. But everything else would stop: no more Digest
> or Net Art News, no more commissions, no more events. We'd stop adding new
> projects to the ArtBase, stop improving the web site (we have a long list
> of bugs to fix and features to add) and stop planning new programs.
>
> The Board felt that hibernation would be a big mistake. Once we went into
> hibernation, they argued, it would be very hard to re-emerge and rebuild
> momentum. Foundations would lose confidence in us (not to mention the fact
> that we wouldn't have anyone to write the grants). Most important, our
> ability to fulfill our mission would be compromised.
>
> Then someone suggested charging a membership fee. This idea has been
> proposed before, and I have always opposed it. Rhizome is for everyone, I
> argued, not just for those who can afford it. I argued that we'd lose
> thousands of members and that our community would become less diverse.
>
> Then we looked at the numbers. The gap between our expenses and what we
can
> raise from foundations, the government, earned income and other sources is
> about $100,000. That's about $5 per member. If every member gave $5,
> Rhizome would be financially stable. We could continue to grow and serve
> the community.
>
> The board argued that we pay to subscribe to magazines, to enter museums
> and to see performances. We pay to attend festivals and conferences. Why
> shouldn't we pay for Rhizome? Because it's online?
>
> Consider this hypothetical scenario. Let's say we introduced a
> sliding-scale membership fee starting at $11 per year with "thank you
> gifts" (T-shirts, etc.) at higher levels. By paying $11 a year (or more if
> you could afford it), you get access to everything: Raw, Rare, Digest, Net
> Art News, the Calendar, Opportunity Listings, ArtBase, Commissions, etc.
> Maybe we'd keep Raw free. Maybe we'd give new memebers a free trial period
> so they could check out the goods before they have to pay.
>
> Would you pay the fee?
>
> What do you think about the idea of a sliding-scale membership fee for
> Rhizome.org? Good idea? Bad idea?
>
> Do you think it would be better to go into hibernation?
>
> I am eagerly awaiting your responses.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Mark
>
> + new media rugby
> -> post: [email protected]
> -> questions: [email protected]
> -> subscribe/unsubscribe: http://rhizome.org/preferences/subscribe.rhiz
> -> give: http://rhizome.org/support
> +
> Subscribers to Rhizome are subject to the terms set out in the
> Membership Agreement available online at http://rhizome.org/info/29.php
Hi Mark,
I have a couple of points and suggestions that come out of your
message that I'd like to raise - please excuse the long email. I don't talk
much but when I do, it's difficult to put the lid back on…
The first thing is that I feel that a membership fee is definitely
reasonable but perhaps this should be $10 (based on 50% take up) a
year (?) which should still be accessible to most users. I do think with
all organizations there becomes a point where it cannot continue to run
on goodwill and grants and the choice becomes:
1) to accept the corporate (and everything that comes with it - I don't
hold with joseph's 'bold or fold')
2)to cut and trim the services/staff/projects (hibernation)
3)charge for what you doing.
The third seems be the lesser of the three 'evils' as it allows rhizome to
run without accountability to anyone except its own members. I can see
the attractiveness of 'hibernation' and in some ways, getting the
membership to take responsibility for their environment could be a very
positive thing. What worries me is what seems to happen is a small
number of people end up doing all the work to keep the thing running
but then, the rest enjoy the continued presence and remain uninvolved
(while the few burn out - and for no money). Also would possible
funders increase/continue future funding when it has been 'proved' that
rhizome can 'work' with a reduced remit and volunteer-based set-up? It
seems more likely that funders would see a membership fee as a
positive sign that rhizome is seeking to become self-supporting and
their money would be used to fund new initiatives, work and writing
rather than (the badly needed but funding un-friendly) office supplies
and pay-rolls…
Whilst the board of directors is looking at these points I would also like
to take this opportunity to raise some related issues to do with funding
and also the strategies rhizome recently has put into place (partly to
raise money).
Firstly the web hosting packages,
Although this is a good package and the hosting company seem fine,
I'm wondering if it could be targeted better to the meet the needs of the
'starving artists' who I would guess would claim to make up quite a
considerable amount of the rhizome membership. After all there are lots
of ISPs out there, why choose to go through rhizome?
What is being offering seems to me to be a nice, sensible business
package for web hosting. The trouble is that many of the the users of
rhizome probably aren't running 'nice, sensible' projects or if they are
(or using web hosting for their own businesses) by the time they join
rhizome they are already sorted with their own tried and trusted ISP.
Perhaps, what the users of rhizome really need (and what would make
rhizomes packages 'different') is a package targeted specifically for
net. artworks/projects.
By this I mean, that when producing a small/medium web-based
work/projects in my own experience, what I can't afford is a monthly
outgoing, even when as little as $14 (which seems the minimum on this
account). Many of the web hosting companies now provide a 'bottom-
rung' package That is a one off payment including 1-2 yr domain
registration and setup and $0 monthly hosting and (typically) 20 -40
MB space. No frills no service (outside basic tech support and
forwarding email accounts) but ideal for web based artworks as the fee
is small and you can be set upand be online in 24hrs. I myself currently
have 3 projects set up like this. For example my cyber-kitchen (which
involves 72 artists) has cost me in total
go girl go!
i disagree. if we pay a fee it has to be all or nothing.
liza
>An annual fee is fine. I would be willing to pay up to say $15. But what
>about access to the Artbase? I think that should remain free. I think some
>of us who have work in the Artbase look at it as sort of a venue for our
>work. I for one get lot's of hits on my site from Rhizome and am concerned
>about what might happen if only paying members were allowed access to the
>Artbase. And yes, I think Raw should be free. I think it attracts a lot of
>curious people who just want to find out what the new media art scene is
>about or up to and I doubt that they're willing to pay for it.
>
>Then someone suggested charging a membership fee. This idea has been
>proposed before, and I have always opposed it. Rhizome is for
>everyone, I argued, not just for those who can afford it. I argued
>that we'd lose thousands of members and that our community would
>become less diverse.
I want to go on record to say that I have proposed this before to
Tribe and basically was publicly scolded for even thinking about it
:-}
The issue here is not whether a fee is prudent but what will the
mandate be? Are you charging a fee just to survive or are you doing
it because you want to build a future? There are many things to take
into consideration like future funding. If Rhizome takes this
opportunity and goes about charging, I see it as a necessary and
absolutely ground breaking statement on the realities of netArt.
By Rhizome taking this step it would through the veil off the fallacy
that you can do this kind of project for nothing. As the community
grows, so do the technology and resources needed and that does not
come cheap. Do organizations like the Rockefeller understand that?
Look, they are judging netArt pieces (made in Java) in old iMacs with
233 mhz so I don't think a lot of these people care whether an extra
server or an XML clean-up of the site costs money (and yes, I am
fucking biting the hand that has fed me).
The whole situation is grim. Here at Napier central we are trying to
figure out where the income is going to come from but so do many many
people in NYC. We have neighbors who run the gamut of incomes, from
stockbrokers and ad people to nannies and waiters and many have been
out of a job for over a year. So it is not just Rhizome that's
hurting, everybody in NYC has been hurting even before 9/11. The
attack just made matters worse.
I say go for it. And do yourself a favor and just start at $5 dollar.
Go as high as you want. Make different memberships, just like the
museums. You do not have to reinvent the wheel.
One special request –make sure your by-laws are accessible to
everyone and please post all financials just like the 501©
guidelines advice. Rhizome is already in the income bracket (over
250K) that calls for such posting of information to all users/members
of the organization. Also, I would love it if Rhizome opened its
board meeting to the membership.
Best,
Liza Sabater-Napier
i'll pay. although i think the sliding scale should be based on where one
lives. americans and west europeans should pay more while folks from less
affluent regions should pay less (or free).
david goldschmidt
—– Original Message —–
From: "Mark Tribe" <[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, October 24, 2002 5:34 PM
Subject: RHIZOME_RAW: Membership fee?
> Hi Rhizomers:
>
> I am hoping to start a discussion here on Raw about Rhizome's financial
> situation and a possible solution. This email is rather long, but I'd
> appreciate it if you'd take the time to read it through, give it some
> thought, and let me know what you think.
>
> First, some background information. It will cost about $400,000 to operate
> Rhizome.org this year. Here's how we spend it: $6,000 on administrative
> fees (mostly processing credit card gifts); $122,000 on operating expenses
> (phone, rent, web hosting, office supplies, etc.); $177,000 on payroll
> costs (salaries, health insurance, payroll taxes, etc.); $93,000 on
> professional fees (writers, commissions, consultants, etc.). These numbers
> may seem high to some of you, but we actually run a very lean, efficient
> operation. It simply costs a lot of money to run a nonprofit organization
> that offers as many programs to as many people as we do.
>
> In the past, most of our revenue has come from foundations, but foundation
> support is shrinking. We had hoped to make up the difference through
earned
> income from web hosting and online education, but those services are
> getting off to a slow start. We have also, as you surely know, tried
asking
> for voluntary contributions. But so far this year only about 1% of our
> 19,000 members have made gifts.
>
> The Rhizome Board of Directors met for its quarterly meeting last Friday.
> The main topic was how to solve our financial problems. I proposed putting
> the organization into hibernation mode. This would entail shutting down
the
> office, laying off the staff and discontinuing most of our programs. We
> would keep the web site up, ask the SuperUsers to continue to publish
> texts, and keep Raw online. But everything else would stop: no more Digest
> or Net Art News, no more commissions, no more events. We'd stop adding new
> projects to the ArtBase, stop improving the web site (we have a long list
> of bugs to fix and features to add) and stop planning new programs.
>
> The Board felt that hibernation would be a big mistake. Once we went into
> hibernation, they argued, it would be very hard to re-emerge and rebuild
> momentum. Foundations would lose confidence in us (not to mention the fact
> that we wouldn't have anyone to write the grants). Most important, our
> ability to fulfill our mission would be compromised.
>
> Then someone suggested charging a membership fee. This idea has been
> proposed before, and I have always opposed it. Rhizome is for everyone, I
> argued, not just for those who can afford it. I argued that we'd lose
> thousands of members and that our community would become less diverse.
>
> Then we looked at the numbers. The gap between our expenses and what we
can
> raise from foundations, the government, earned income and other sources is
> about $100,000. That's about $5 per member. If every member gave $5,
> Rhizome would be financially stable. We could continue to grow and serve
> the community.
>
> The board argued that we pay to subscribe to magazines, to enter museums
> and to see performances. We pay to attend festivals and conferences. Why
> shouldn't we pay for Rhizome? Because it's online?
>
> Consider this hypothetical scenario. Let's say we introduced a
> sliding-scale membership fee starting at $11 per year with "thank you
> gifts" (T-shirts, etc.) at higher levels. By paying $11 a year (or more if
> you could afford it), you get access to everything: Raw, Rare, Digest, Net
> Art News, the Calendar, Opportunity Listings, ArtBase, Commissions, etc.
> Maybe we'd keep Raw free. Maybe we'd give new memebers a free trial period
> so they could check out the goods before they have to pay.
>
> Would you pay the fee?
>
> What do you think about the idea of a sliding-scale membership fee for
> Rhizome.org? Good idea? Bad idea?
>
> Do you think it would be better to go into hibernation?
>
> I am eagerly awaiting your responses.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Mark
>
> + new media rugby
> -> post: [email protected]
> -> questions: [email protected]
> -> subscribe/unsubscribe: http://rhizome.org/preferences/subscribe.rhiz
> -> give: http://rhizome.org/support
> +
> Subscribers to Rhizome are subject to the terms set out in the
> Membership Agreement available online at http://rhizome.org/info/29.php
>
> Mark,
You have already heard my opinion…But I have more to add based on your post.
I agree with the others that the artbase (or some incarnation of it) should remain open to the public. I am sure the artists with work in the base have Rhizome on their resume with a link to their work. Rhizome is well known, so this access is meaningful to these artists.
Also, you could always leave a limited number of guest spaces open on the site… Maybe even just 10-20 guests slots… So people can come in and see what Rhizome is all about… (In the scenario where the artbase is 'members-only' this would allow artists to still be able to refer their work on Rhizome to non-members)
Perhaps you could have these guest slots "sponsored" by those in the community who could afford to send in a little more $$$… Or, instead of getting a "thank you gift" for membership, have a choice of sponsoring a guest spot. Or, why not ask for an extra,optional $1 from every member to support these spots in the interest of keeping Rhizome available to the public, if even in a limited capacity. (I think most people who are willing to become members would just add that extra buck…)
Enough of my 2 cents worth! (I am up to about a buck-50 by now…)
Hey Jess,
>I have a couple of points and suggestions that come out of your
>message that I'd like to raise - please excuse the long email. I don't ta=
lk
>much but when I do, it's difficult to put the lid back on…
Yeah right :-)
You know we all await your words of wisdom…
<snip>
>Firstly the web hosting packages,
>Although this is a good package and the hosting company seem fine,
>I'm wondering if it could be targeted better to the meet the needs of the
>'starving artists' who I would guess would claim to make up quite a
>considerable amount of the rhizome membership.
I am a writer who gets paid very little for her articles. Last big
check was $50. I have to choose (and maybe so do you) between
$15/month web hosting and diapers (still need those for the little
one). Unless rhizomers are willing to clean the poop off my floor,
you know which one is my choice. It's not so much that we are
starving but many are living had to mouth (and clothed baby loins
too).
>After all there are lots
>of ISPs out there, why choose to go through rhizome?
>What is being offering seems to me to be a nice, sensible business
>package for web hosting.
completely agree.
>The trouble is that many of the the users of
>rhizome probably aren't running 'nice, sensible' projects or if they are
>(or using web hosting for their own businesses) by the time they join
>rhizome they are already sorted with their own tried and trusted ISP.
Exactly. Nothing short of free web hosting is going to make the
resident netArtist switch to another ISP.
>Perhaps, what the users of rhizome really need (and what would make
>rhizomes packages 'different') is a package targeted specifically for
>net. artworks/projects. By this I mean, that when producing a
>small/medium web-based
>work/projects in my own experience, what I can't afford is a monthly
>outgoing, even when as little as $14 (which seems the minimum on this
>account). Many of the web hosting companies now provide a 'bottom-
>rung' package That is a one off payment including 1-2 yr domain
>registration and setup and $0 monthly hosting and (typically) 20 -40
>MB space. No frills no service (outside basic tech support and
>forwarding email accounts) but ideal for web based artworks as the fee
>is small and you can be set upand be online in 24hrs. I myself currently
>have 3 projects set up like this. For example my cyber-kitchen (which
>involves 72 artists) has cost me in total
On Fri, 25 Oct 2002, Max Herman wrote:
> Yeah, I was thinking a big fatty music CD, all proceeds to Rhizome, I'd
> donate a song'r two.
That'd be very generous of you.
`, . ` `k a r e i' ? ' D42
Then someone suggested charging a membership fee. This idea has been
proposed before, and I have always opposed it. Rhizome is for
everyone, I argued, not just for those who can afford it. I argued
that we'd lose thousands of members and that our community would
become less diverse.
I want to go on record to say that I have proposed this before to
Tribe and basically was publicly scolded for even thinking about it
:-}
i'm guessing this isn't mark's idea. he does have a board to answer to…
and he's mentioned before that the board has brought it up and he
shoots it down every time, seems that things may be a bit more
desperate this time.
i am not optimistic about a fee. perhaps keeping the site free but
opting for a shareware model. annoying waits and pop ups might get
people to contribute, esp. if it's only 5-10 USD.
salon.com gets some 3 million unique visits a month, yet they only
had 50k members the last time they made it public (few months back)
what's the percentage? 1.5%?
on the other hand, kur5hin.org made a plea for membership and scored
35k USD in under 2 weeks.
it's hard to tell what will happen. perhaps a marketing consultant
along with a consultant in art institutional fund-raising would be a
wise investment.
–
<twhid>
http://www.mteww.com
</twhid>
— Renee Vaverchak <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Mark,
>
> You have already heard my opinion…But I have more
> to add based on your post.
>
> I agree with the others that the artbase (or some
> incarnation of it) should remain open to the public.
> I am sure the artists with work in the base have
> Rhizome on their resume
RESUME is the key word here. I wonder what Van Gogh
put on his resume? Pretty soon Im gonna hit the BIG
TIME.
Personally I think that there are some people who
are running rhizome that are completely full of s**t.
One of the authorities at rhizome once emailed me
asking if I would write an article for rhizome and
suggested that I would be payed for it and even gave
me a per-word quote for the article( that was quite
modest btw ). When the article was finished this
person tried to make it out that she was doing me a
favor by publishing it and that I should not only be
happy with no payment at all, but that I should HOST
the article myself. If this is the kind of thing that
Rhizome supports as an organization, I will kindly
play the fiddle while it burns to the ground.
with a link to their work.
> Rhizome is well known, so this access is meaningful
> to these artists.
>
> Also, you could always leave a limited number of
> guest spaces open on the site… Maybe even just
> 10-20 guests slots… So people can come in and see
> what Rhizome is all about… (In the scenario where
> the artbase is 'members-only' this would allow
> artists to still be able to refer their work on
> Rhizome to non-members)
>
> Perhaps you could have these guest slots "sponsored"
> by those in the community who could afford to send
> in a little more $$$… Or, instead of getting a
> "thank you gift" for membership, have a choice of
> sponsoring a guest spot. Or, why not ask for an
> extra,optional $1 from every member to support these
> spots in the interest of keeping Rhizome available
> to the public, if even in a limited capacity. (I
> think most people who are willing to become members
> would just add that extra buck…)
>
> Enough of my 2 cents worth! (I am up to about a
> buck-50 by now…)
__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Y! Web Hosting - Let the expert host your web site
http://webhosting.yahoo.com/
hola, mark, et al.
just a note to agree with what most have said, here. first off, big
big bugs are creeping all over rhizome. especially after the
redesign… those need to be fixed, regardless.
i, too, voluntarily donate much more than $5 per year to the rhiz,
but i fear that requiring a subscription fee would scare folks away.
the raw_talkers of the more abrasive ilk, i think, would probably be
glad to pay $5 a year to keep up the abuse–and would defend their
right to "free speech" as a result of their equal paid-member
status… ?? just a guess…
i'd agree with eryk that a "rewards" or karma-type system would be a
good idea, in offering premium services, above the basic member
fee… rare could easily be a paid service.
i agree that access to artbase should be free. it's exposure for the
artists and i can say that i frequently use it, as a curator &
writer, to research work & contact people–though maybe you'd say i
should pay for that, it's a professional and critical opportunity for
the artists for this kind of resource to be free…
but, all in all, i think that the best scenario would be to keep
everything free and just have folks send their $5.27777+ checks to
rhizome regularly… obviously that's not happening at the level that
you need it, but i think that the hibernate or pay-sub scenario
closes you off to other compromises…
~marisa
_________________
Marisa S. Olson
Associate Director
SF Camerawork
415. 863. 1001
Tribe and all,
Let me clarify this.
Rhizome can choose to go the Salon.com way of having certain content
for free and then make juicier parts available for a fee. I'm not
sure that making RAW free would be such a great idea because it is
probably the single most used service offered by Rhizome. Having RAW
open to anybody but not the website is going to split Rhizome into
two communities. Do we really want that?
As it is, I have to remind myself to go to the website because my
contact is through the list. So, if people are going to pay to
support the website but not the list, guess which one will have the
highest subscription.
Still, let's say that RAW remains free but the membership would allow
people to join e-lists that deal with issues in coding, design or
critical theory. More streamlined lists, with a better focus. The
question is, can Rhizome support that with the resources it has now?
I doubt it.
Anyhow, an additional 2 cents.
liza
>i disagree. if we pay a fee it has to be all or nothing.
>
>liza
>
>>An annual fee is fine. I would be willing to pay up to say $15. But what
>>about access to the Artbase? I think that should remain free. I think some
>>of us who have work in the Artbase look at it as sort of a venue for our
>>work. I for one get lot's of hits on my site from Rhizome and am concerned
>>about what might happen if only paying members were allowed access to the
>>Artbase. And yes, I think Raw should be free. I think it attracts a lot of
>>curious people who just want to find out what the new media art scene is
>>about or up to and I doubt that they're willing to pay for it.
>>
>+ new media rugby
>-> post: [email protected]
>-> questions: [email protected]
>-> subscribe/unsubscribe: http://rhizome.org/preferences/subscribe.rhiz
>-> give: http://rhizome.org/support
>+
>Subscribers to Rhizome are subject to the terms set out in the
>Membership Agreement available online at http://rhizome.org/info/29.php
<body>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial"><span style="font-size:10pt">Hi Liza, good to hear you going for
it again too!</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> </span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> <soapbox></span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> There is too
much poverty and suffering just outside my East Village </span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> door for me to
really care about a "starving" artist. Cash or </span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> resource strapped
is a whole 'nother ball game. If you don't have the </span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> means, most likely
you can't do the art –and it don' much matter how </span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> little or how
much you need.</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> </soapbox></span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial"><span style="font-size:10pt">soapbox agreed. </span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial"><span style="font-size:10pt">Though I'm using the 'starving artist'
term flippantly, there is often talk how many artists
are divided between their 'jobs' and their 'art'. I know that all artist want to do is make art
(and this is no way a solution to that) but could paying artists to teach and share
knowledge (outside of the institutions that can so easily take over and leave no time
outside marking papers) be a way that at least some income can be earned by them and
rhizome doing what they do best? I don't have the economic terminology to put this well,
but if rhizomes greatest commodities are say a)the art b) the variety of skills c)
people/labour. Utilizing the second two must come high on the agenda when looking at
generating finances…? </span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> </span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> There is talk
about creating a CodeBase but with what Rhizome is </span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> going through,
the project is on hold. With the CodeBase Rhizome </span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> could have another
incentive for people to join for a fee.> </span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial"><span style="font-size:10pt">Not being a coder i'm afraid I'm still
sitting on the fence swinging my legs when it comes
to this (utilizing commodity a?) </span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> I guess it has
not happened because they do not have the resources. </span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> Tribe can answer
that. But this is a point you have brought to the </span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> fore on and on
again and Mark Tribe, who has sit on more than one </span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> granting panel,
could take note of this.</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial"><span style="font-size:10pt">What resources (in all fairness I've
not spoken to Mark about this so I may be jumping
the gun)?? I know a stack of colleges (and I'm sure many artists wanting to learn more
about rhizome/net art, 'meet' the people etc) that would jump at getting their art/media
students involved in a 'virtual internship' working for rhizome doing just that..for no
money but the cv credit and experience. Our local galleries and arts organisation have
almost half their admistration/publicity run in this way, with 1 -3 month student 'work
placements' with a specified agenda. The resources we would need are a well
structured 'brief' (eg basic outline could be to identify media/art/digital agencies, contact
and promote rhizome) and someone to co-ordinate the 'interns' over email. I still think
rhizome just isn't thinking global enough, ironically consider how much influence it has
on global artists. </span></font></div>
<div align="left"><br></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> So how can Rhizome
and netArtists have access to resources from </span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> around the world
in order to do what they do best –build a </span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#7f0000"><span style="font-size:10pt">> world-wide community
through art. That is the heart of the dilemma.</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial"><span style="font-size:10pt">I think (if you will excuse the v
bad pun) widening the net would help. And particularly, I
think we need advocate in the various countries speaking to the major funding bodies to
tell them to bloody well get with the times. (This is after spending a week talking to the
arts boards who refuse look at virtual collaborative projects because I have never
physically 'met' my collaborators). The arts council is currently offering awards for artists
of up to £28,000 to collaborate with scientists so money is not THAT tight. We just need
to convince them of the legitimacy of the work… (oh, that's ok then I thought it would be
</span></font><font face="Arial"><span style="font-size:10pt"><i>hard:</i>-)</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial"><span style="font-size:10pt">enough rambling. Good words
Liza.</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial"><span style="font-size:10pt">j.</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial"><span style="font-size:10pt"> o</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial"><span style="font-size:10pt">/^ rssgallery.com</span></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial"><span style="font-size:10pt"> ][</span></font></div>
</body>
Absolutely, yes! And the higher the better.
The 12hr-ISBN-JPEG Project >>>> since 1994 <<<<
+ + + serial ftp://ftp.eskimo.com/u/b/bbrace
+ + + eccentric ftp://ftp.idiom.com/users/bbrace
+ + + continuous hotline://artlyin.ftr.va.com.au
+ + + hypermodern ftp://ftp.rdrop.com/pub/users/bbrace
+ + + imagery ftp://ftp.pacifier.com/pub/users/bbrace
News: alt.binaries.pictures.12hr alt.binaries.pictures.misc
alt.binaries.pictures.fine-art.misc alt.12hr
. 12hr email
subscriptions => http://bbrace.laughingsquid.net/buy-into.html
. Other | Mirror: http://www.eskimo.com/~bbrace/bbrace.html
Projects | Reverse Solidus: http://bbrace.laughingsquid.net/
| http://bbrace.net
{ brad brace } <<<<< [email protected] >>>> ~finger for pgp
Rhizome has been really important to me. I have
learned a lot from it plus I got a real sense of a
body of people with similar concerns ( *community*
always seems a tad twee) engaged in a sometimes vastly
irritating but always for me addictive dialogue about
art and it's relationship to the world.
In my ideal world of course it would be funded
generously but if it's not then I for one am certainly
willing to pay a fee to make sure I can get my fix.
I tend to agree with those who think access to the
artbase should be general and free( because it's our
calling card to the wider world). Everything else, in
this imperfect world, I would be happy to cough up
for.
I do take David's point however. It would be a tragedy
if a world which is happy to fund war but not art
forced those without spare cash whether in the USA or
Europe or elsewhere to quit the list and the site.
So I suggest that those of us who can afford it pay
double whatever rate is decided so that free
membership is available to anyone who declares (
privately) an inability to pay the membership fee and
that this system is instituted entirely on trust. A
sort of 'twinning' arrangement.
$15 (Pall's suggestion) doesn't strike me as an
unreasonable basic annual fee. Tonight I spent a fiver
( =$7.50?) on a bottle of wine. I'd certainly be
comfortable with paying $30 p.a for something I value
a lot under the system I've described.
regards
Michael
— David Goldschmidt <[email protected]> wrote:
> i'll pay. although i think the sliding scale should
> be based on where one
> lives. americans and west europeans should pay more
> while folks from less
> affluent regions should pay less (or free).
>
> david goldschmidt
>
> —– Original Message —–
> From: "Mark Tribe" <[email protected]>
> To: <[email protected]>
> Sent: Thursday, October 24, 2002 5:34 PM
> Subject: RHIZOME_RAW: Membership fee?
>
>
> > Hi Rhizomers:
> >
> > I am hoping to start a discussion here on Raw
> about Rhizome's financial
> > situation and a possible solution. This email is
> rather long, but I'd
> > appreciate it if you'd take the time to read it
> through, give it some
> > thought, and let me know what you think.
> >
> > First, some background information. It will cost
> about $400,000 to operate
> > Rhizome.org this year. Here's how we spend it:
> $6,000 on administrative
> > fees (mostly processing credit card gifts);
> $122,000 on operating expenses
> > (phone, rent, web hosting, office supplies, etc.);
> $177,000 on payroll
> > costs (salaries, health insurance, payroll taxes,
> etc.); $93,000 on
> > professional fees (writers, commissions,
> consultants, etc.). These numbers
> > may seem high to some of you, but we actually run
> a very lean, efficient
> > operation. It simply costs a lot of money to run a
> nonprofit organization
> > that offers as many programs to as many people as
> we do.
> >
> > In the past, most of our revenue has come from
> foundations, but foundation
> > support is shrinking. We had hoped to make up the
> difference through
> earned
> > income from web hosting and online education, but
> those services are
> > getting off to a slow start. We have also, as you
> surely know, tried
> asking
> > for voluntary contributions. But so far this year
> only about 1% of our
> > 19,000 members have made gifts.
> >
> > The Rhizome Board of Directors met for its
> quarterly meeting last Friday.
> > The main topic was how to solve our financial
> problems. I proposed putting
> > the organization into hibernation mode. This would
> entail shutting down
> the
> > office, laying off the staff and discontinuing
> most of our programs. We
> > would keep the web site up, ask the SuperUsers to
> continue to publish
> > texts, and keep Raw online. But everything else
> would stop: no more Digest
> > or Net Art News, no more commissions, no more
> events. We'd stop adding new
> > projects to the ArtBase, stop improving the web
> site (we have a long list
> > of bugs to fix and features to add) and stop
> planning new programs.
> >
> > The Board felt that hibernation would be a big
> mistake. Once we went into
> > hibernation, they argued, it would be very hard to
> re-emerge and rebuild
> > momentum. Foundations would lose confidence in us
> (not to mention the fact
> > that we wouldn't have anyone to write the grants).
> Most important, our
> > ability to fulfill our mission would be
> compromised.
> >
> > Then someone suggested charging a membership fee.
> This idea has been
> > proposed before, and I have always opposed it.
> Rhizome is for everyone, I
> > argued, not just for those who can afford it. I
> argued that we'd lose
> > thousands of members and that our community would
> become less diverse.
> >
> > Then we looked at the numbers. The gap between our
> expenses and what we
> can
> > raise from foundations, the government, earned
> income and other sources is
> > about $100,000. That's about $5 per member. If
> every member gave $5,
> > Rhizome would be financially stable. We could
> continue to grow and serve
> > the community.
> >
> > The board argued that we pay to subscribe to
> magazines, to enter museums
> > and to see performances. We pay to attend
> festivals and conferences. Why
> > shouldn't we pay for Rhizome? Because it's online?
> >
> > Consider this hypothetical scenario. Let's say we
> introduced a
> > sliding-scale membership fee starting at $11 per
> year with "thank you
> > gifts" (T-shirts, etc.) at higher levels. By
> paying $11 a year (or more if
> > you could afford it), you get access to
> everything: Raw, Rare, Digest, Net
> > Art News, the Calendar, Opportunity Listings,
> ArtBase, Commissions, etc.
> > Maybe we'd keep Raw free. Maybe we'd give new
> memebers a free trial period
> > so they could check out the goods before they have
> to pay.
> >
> > Would you pay the fee?
> >
> > What do you think about the idea of a
> sliding-scale membership fee for
> > Rhizome.org? Good idea? Bad idea?
> >
> > Do you think it would be better to go into
> hibernation?
> >
> > I am eagerly awaiting your responses.
> >
> > Sincerely,
> >
> > Mark
> >
> > + new media rugby
> > -> post: [email protected]
> > -> questions: [email protected]
> > -> subscribe/unsubscribe:
> http://rhizome.org/preferences/subscribe.rhiz
> > -> give: http://rhizome.org/support
> > +
> > Subscribers to Rhizome are subject to the terms
> set out in the
> > Membership Agreement available online at
> http://rhizome.org/info/29.php
> >
>
> + new media rugby
> -> post: [email protected]
> -> questions: [email protected]
> -> subscribe/unsubscribe:
> http://rhizome.org/preferences/subscribe.rhiz
> -> give: http://rhizome.org/support
> +
> Subscribers to Rhizome are subject to the terms set
> out in the
> Membership Agreement available online at
http://rhizome.org/info/29.php
=====
http://www.somedancersandmusicians.com/
__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Y! Web Hosting - Let the expert host your web site
http://webhosting.yahoo.com/
I offered this bafore, but I'd let Rhizome sell the First Edition to raise
cashola. No cut for me truly.
>From: Michael Szpakowski <[email protected]>
>Reply-To: Michael Szpakowski <[email protected]>
>To: David Goldschmidt <[email protected]>, [email protected], Mark Tribe
><[email protected]>
>Subject: Re: RHIZOME_RAW: Membership fee?
>Date: Fri, 25 Oct 2002 16:41:51 -0700 (PDT)
>
>Rhizome has been really important to me. I have
>learned a lot from it plus I got a real sense of a
>body of people with similar concerns ( *community*
>always seems a tad twee) engaged in a sometimes vastly
>irritating but always for me addictive dialogue about
>art and it's relationship to the world.
>In my ideal world of course it would be funded
>generously but if it's not then I for one am certainly
>willing to pay a fee to make sure I can get my fix.
>I tend to agree with those who think access to the
>artbase should be general and free( because it's our
>calling card to the wider world). Everything else, in
>this imperfect world, I would be happy to cough up
>for.
>I do take David's point however. It would be a tragedy
>if a world which is happy to fund war but not art
>forced those without spare cash whether in the USA or
>Europe or elsewhere to quit the list and the site.
>So I suggest that those of us who can afford it pay
>double whatever rate is decided so that free
>membership is available to anyone who declares (
>privately) an inability to pay the membership fee and
>that this system is instituted entirely on trust. A
>sort of 'twinning' arrangement.
>$15 (Pall's suggestion) doesn't strike me as an
>unreasonable basic annual fee. Tonight I spent a fiver
>( =$7.50?) on a bottle of wine. I'd certainly be
>comfortable with paying $30 p.a for something I value
>a lot under the system I've described.
>regards
>Michael
>
>
>
>— David Goldschmidt <[email protected]> wrote:
> > i'll pay. although i think the sliding scale should
> > be based on where one
> > lives. americans and west europeans should pay more
> > while folks from less
> > affluent regions should pay less (or free).
> >
> > david goldschmidt
> >
> > —– Original Message —–
> > From: "Mark Tribe" <[email protected]>
> > To: <[email protected]>
> > Sent: Thursday, October 24, 2002 5:34 PM
> > Subject: RHIZOME_RAW: Membership fee?
> >
> >
> > > Hi Rhizomers:
> > >
> > > I am hoping to start a discussion here on Raw
> > about Rhizome's financial
> > > situation and a possible solution. This email is
> > rather long, but I'd
> > > appreciate it if you'd take the time to read it
> > through, give it some
> > > thought, and let me know what you think.
> > >
> > > First, some background information. It will cost
> > about $400,000 to operate
> > > Rhizome.org this year. Here's how we spend it:
> > $6,000 on administrative
> > > fees (mostly processing credit card gifts);
> > $122,000 on operating expenses
> > > (phone, rent, web hosting, office supplies, etc.);
> > $177,000 on payroll
> > > costs (salaries, health insurance, payroll taxes,
> > etc.); $93,000 on
> > > professional fees (writers, commissions,
> > consultants, etc.). These numbers
> > > may seem high to some of you, but we actually run
> > a very lean, efficient
> > > operation. It simply costs a lot of money to run a
> > nonprofit organization
> > > that offers as many programs to as many people as
> > we do.
> > >
> > > In the past, most of our revenue has come from
> > foundations, but foundation
> > > support is shrinking. We had hoped to make up the
> > difference through
> > earned
> > > income from web hosting and online education, but
> > those services are
> > > getting off to a slow start. We have also, as you
> > surely know, tried
> > asking
> > > for voluntary contributions. But so far this year
> > only about 1% of our
> > > 19,000 members have made gifts.
> > >
> > > The Rhizome Board of Directors met for its
> > quarterly meeting last Friday.
> > > The main topic was how to solve our financial
> > problems. I proposed putting
> > > the organization into hibernation mode. This would
> > entail shutting down
> > the
> > > office, laying off the staff and discontinuing
> > most of our programs. We
> > > would keep the web site up, ask the SuperUsers to
> > continue to publish
> > > texts, and keep Raw online. But everything else
> > would stop: no more Digest
> > > or Net Art News, no more commissions, no more
> > events. We'd stop adding new
> > > projects to the ArtBase, stop improving the web
> > site (we have a long list
> > > of bugs to fix and features to add) and stop
> > planning new programs.
> > >
> > > The Board felt that hibernation would be a big
> > mistake. Once we went into
> > > hibernation, they argued, it would be very hard to
> > re-emerge and rebuild
> > > momentum. Foundations would lose confidence in us
> > (not to mention the fact
> > > that we wouldn't have anyone to write the grants).
> > Most important, our
> > > ability to fulfill our mission would be
> > compromised.
> > >
> > > Then someone suggested charging a membership fee.
> > This idea has been
> > > proposed before, and I have always opposed it.
> > Rhizome is for everyone, I
> > > argued, not just for those who can afford it. I
> > argued that we'd lose
> > > thousands of members and that our community would
> > become less diverse.
> > >
> > > Then we looked at the numbers. The gap between our
> > expenses and what we
> > can
> > > raise from foundations, the government, earned
> > income and other sources is
> > > about $100,000. That's about $5 per member. If
> > every member gave $5,
> > > Rhizome would be financially stable. We could
> > continue to grow and serve
> > > the community.
> > >
> > > The board argued that we pay to subscribe to
> > magazines, to enter museums
> > > and to see performances. We pay to attend
> > festivals and conferences. Why
> > > shouldn't we pay for Rhizome? Because it's online?
> > >
> > > Consider this hypothetical scenario. Let's say we
> > introduced a
> > > sliding-scale membership fee starting at $11 per
> > year with "thank you
> > > gifts" (T-shirts, etc.) at higher levels. By
> > paying $11 a year (or more if
> > > you could afford it), you get access to
> > everything: Raw, Rare, Digest, Net
> > > Art News, the Calendar, Opportunity Listings,
> > ArtBase, Commissions, etc.
> > > Maybe we'd keep Raw free. Maybe we'd give new
> > memebers a free trial period
> > > so they could check out the goods before they have
> > to pay.
> > >
> > > Would you pay the fee?
> > >
> > > What do you think about the idea of a
> > sliding-scale membership fee for
> > > Rhizome.org? Good idea? Bad idea?
> > >
> > > Do you think it would be better to go into
> > hibernation?
> > >
> > > I am eagerly awaiting your responses.
> > >
> > > Sincerely,
> > >
> > > Mark
> > >
> > > + new media rugby
> > > -> post: [email protected]
> > > -> questions: [email protected]
> > > -> subscribe/unsubscribe:
> > http://rhizome.org/preferences/subscribe.rhiz
> > > -> give: http://rhizome.org/support
> > > +
> > > Subscribers to Rhizome are subject to the terms
> > set out in the
> > > Membership Agreement available online at
> > http://rhizome.org/info/29.php
> > >
> >
> > + new media rugby
> > -> post: [email protected]
> > -> questions: [email protected]
> > -> subscribe/unsubscribe:
> > http://rhizome.org/preferences/subscribe.rhiz
> > -> give: http://rhizome.org/support
> > +
> > Subscribers to Rhizome are subject to the terms set
> > out in the
> > Membership Agreement available online at
>http://rhizome.org/info/29.php
>
>
>=====
>http://www.somedancersandmusicians.com/
>
>__________________________________________________
>Do you Yahoo!?
>Y! Web Hosting - Let the expert host your web site
>http://webhosting.yahoo.com/
>+ new media rugby
>-> post: [email protected]
>-> questions: [email protected]
>-> subscribe/unsubscribe: http://rhizome.org/preferences/subscribe.rhiz
>-> give: http://rhizome.org/support
>+
>Subscribers to Rhizome are subject to the terms set out in the
>Membership Agreement available online at http://rhizome.org/info/29.php
_________________________________________________________________
Unlimited Internet access – and 2 months free!
Hi Mark
Well I was wondering when this was going to happen. Seeing the amazing
growth of your organization since I've been a part of Rhizome has been
interesting and I will say it is an integral part my art practice. Rhizome
is quite an acomplishment in such a short time for a non-profit
organization.
Here are my feelings on this issue based on my own work with struggling
non-profits. I agree shutting the doors would be a big mistake but I think
Rhizome has to consolidate some of its enterprises or at least put some on
hold.
What was the founding mission statement in the business plan?
Has Rhizome expanded its mission from that original statement?
—-
Raw, Calendar, and Opportunity listings for the most part can run themselves
through the software that has already been designed. Big thumbs up by the
way the new architecture is impressive. But now that the software is in
place. Does Rhizome need to continue developing the site, very expensive
right?
Rare should go although it probably doesn't cost much to operate
Digest of course stays
—-
Net Art News: I'm sure with a little hunting Rhizome can find a primary
corporate sponsor. I'm sure providing this content service for Rhizome is
very costly. What about the Magazine "Art News"? Can ArtBase be consolidated
into New Art News?
—-
Put all commissions on hold.
Do not do any events without complete sponsorship to cover all costs.
—-
What does etc. mean? and how much does it cost?
—-
You say,
"It simply costs a lot of money to run a nonprofit organization that offers
as many programs to as many people as we do."
Does Rhizome have to offer so many programs?
Maybe its time for all of us to take a survey defining how we use Rhizome.
Out of the 19,000 members how many people actually could be considered
active viewer/users vs. Passive viewers vs. someone who checked it out and
signed up and forgot about it.
As for me, I primarily only use Raw and very rarely goto the website.
Net Art News is cool and I think you all are doing your homework and for the
most part the writing is really good.
Bring back the splash art and have artists donate their work again.
What about getting in bed with Eyebeam (http://www.eyebeam.org/)
Its a good match and a museum.
Please note this was a personal brainstorm after a day at work.
In addition, I just donated $11 to Rhizome through the website.
Can I get my T-shirt in Black please.
What about selling limited edition artist t-shirts?
Anyway….I feel Rhizome is something that should not end and needs to be
supported.
Good luck
Cheers
Lee
on 10/24/02 5:34 PM, Mark Tribe at [email protected] wrote:
> Hi Rhizomers:
>
> I am hoping to start a discussion here on Raw about Rhizome's financial
> situation and a possible solution. This email is rather long, but I'd
> appreciate it if you'd take the time to read it through, give it some
> thought, and let me know what you think.
>
> First, some background information. It will cost about $400,000 to operate
> Rhizome.org this year. Here's how we spend it: $6,000 on administrative
> fees (mostly processing credit card gifts); $122,000 on operating expenses
> (phone, rent, web hosting, office supplies, etc.); $177,000 on payroll
> costs (salaries, health insurance, payroll taxes, etc.); $93,000 on
> professional fees (writers, commissions, consultants, etc.). These numbers
> may seem high to some of you, but we actually run a very lean, efficient
> operation. It simply costs a lot of money to run a nonprofit organization
> that offers as many programs to as many people as we do.
>
> In the past, most of our revenue has come from foundations, but foundation
> support is shrinking. We had hoped to make up the difference through earned
> income from web hosting and online education, but those services are
> getting off to a slow start. We have also, as you surely know, tried asking
> for voluntary contributions. But so far this year only about 1% of our
> 19,000 members have made gifts.
>
> The Rhizome Board of Directors met for its quarterly meeting last Friday.
> The main topic was how to solve our financial problems. I proposed putting
> the organization into hibernation mode. This would entail shutting down the
> office, laying off the staff and discontinuing most of our programs. We
> would keep the web site up, ask the SuperUsers to continue to publish
> texts, and keep Raw online. But everything else would stop: no more Digest
> or Net Art News, no more commissions, no more events. We'd stop adding new
> projects to the ArtBase, stop improving the web site (we have a long list
> of bugs to fix and features to add) and stop planning new programs.
>
> The Board felt that hibernation would be a big mistake. Once we went into
> hibernation, they argued, it would be very hard to re-emerge and rebuild
> momentum. Foundations would lose confidence in us (not to mention the fact
> that we wouldn't have anyone to write the grants). Most important, our
> ability to fulfill our mission would be compromised.
>
> Then someone suggested charging a membership fee. This idea has been
> proposed before, and I have always opposed it. Rhizome is for everyone, I
> argued, not just for those who can afford it. I argued that we'd lose
> thousands of members and that our community would become less diverse.
>
> Then we looked at the numbers. The gap between our expenses and what we can
> raise from foundations, the government, earned income and other sources is
> about $100,000. That's about $5 per member. If every member gave $5,
> Rhizome would be financially stable. We could continue to grow and serve
> the community.
>
> The board argued that we pay to subscribe to magazines, to enter museums
> and to see performances. We pay to attend festivals and conferences. Why
> shouldn't we pay for Rhizome? Because it's online?
>
> Consider this hypothetical scenario. Let's say we introduced a
> sliding-scale membership fee starting at $11 per year with "thank you
> gifts" (T-shirts, etc.) at higher levels. By paying $11 a year (or more if
> you could afford it), you get access to everything: Raw, Rare, Digest, Net
> Art News, the Calendar, Opportunity Listings, ArtBase, Commissions, etc.
> Maybe we'd keep Raw free. Maybe we'd give new memebers a free trial period
> so they could check out the goods before they have to pay.
>
> Would you pay the fee?
>
> What do you think about the idea of a sliding-scale membership fee for
> Rhizome.org? Good idea? Bad idea?
>
> Do you think it would be better to go into hibernation?
>
> I am eagerly awaiting your responses.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Mark
>
> + new media rugby
> -> post: [email protected]
> -> questions: [email protected]
> -> subscribe/unsubscribe: http://rhizome.org/preferences/subscribe.rhiz
> -> give: http://rhizome.org/support
> +
> Subscribers to Rhizome are subject to the terms set out in the
> Membership Agreement available online at http://rhizome.org/info/29.php
I donate art to Rhizome, music, images, etc. The CD Idea is preaty good and
has worked for other nonprofit org like, Lumpen Magazine in Chicago.
http://www.lumpen.com/
on 10/25/02 2:12 AM, Max Herman at [email protected] wrote:
>
>
>
> Yeah, I was thinking a big fatty music CD, all proceeds to Rhizome, I'd
> donate a song'r two.
>
>
>
>> From: [email protected]
>> Reply-To: [email protected]
>> To: Mark Tribe <[email protected]>
>> CC: [email protected]
>> Subject: Re: RHIZOME_RAW: Membership fee?
>> Date: Fri, 25 Oct 2002 05:45:52 +0000
>>
>> Its time to talk about industry mergers. Forget the membership fees, very
>> few
>> will pay. If you are about to fold, either fold, or start a capital
>> campaign
>> to raise 7 figures. Fold or Bold.
>>
>> joseph
>>
>>
>> Quoting Mark Tribe <[email protected]>:
>>
>>> Hi Rhizomers:
>>>
>>> I am hoping to start a discussion here on Raw about Rhizome's financial
>>> situation and a possible solution. This email is rather long, but I'd
>>> appreciate it if you'd take the time to read it through, give it some
>>> thought, and let me know what you think.
>>>
>>> First, some background information. It will cost about $400,000 to
>> operate
>>> Rhizome.org this year. Here's how we spend it: $6,000 on administrative
>>> fees (mostly processing credit card gifts); $122,000 on operating
>> expenses
>>> (phone, rent, web hosting, office supplies, etc.); $177,000 on payroll
>>> costs (salaries, health insurance, payroll taxes, etc.); $93,000 on
>>> professional fees (writers, commissions, consultants, etc.). These
>> numbers
>>> may seem high to some of you, but we actually run a very lean, efficient
>>> operation. It simply costs a lot of money to run a nonprofit
>> organization
>>> that offers as many programs to as many people as we do.
>>>
>>> In the past, most of our revenue has come from foundations, but
>> foundation
>>> support is shrinking. We had hoped to make up the difference through
>> earned
>>> income from web hosting and online education, but those services are
>>> getting off to a slow start. We have also, as you surely know, tried
>> asking
>>> for voluntary contributions. But so far this year only about 1% of our
>>> 19,000 members have made gifts.
>>>
>>> The Rhizome Board of Directors met for its quarterly meeting last
>> Friday.
>>> The main topic was how to solve our financial problems. I proposed
>> putting
>>> the organization into hibernation mode. This would entail shutting down
>> the
>>> office, laying off the staff and discontinuing most of our programs. We
>>> would keep the web site up, ask the SuperUsers to continue to publish
>>> texts, and keep Raw online. But everything else would stop: no more
>> Digest
>>> or Net Art News, no more commissions, no more events. We'd stop adding
>> new
>>> projects to the ArtBase, stop improving the web site (we have a long
>> list
>>> of bugs to fix and features to add) and stop planning new programs.
>>>
>>> The Board felt that hibernation would be a big mistake. Once we went
>> into
>>> hibernation, they argued, it would be very hard to re-emerge and rebuild
>>> momentum. Foundations would lose confidence in us (not to mention the
>> fact
>>> that we wouldn't have anyone to write the grants). Most important, our
>>> ability to fulfill our mission would be compromised.
>>>
>>> Then someone suggested charging a membership fee. This idea has been
>>> proposed before, and I have always opposed it. Rhizome is for everyone,
>> I
>>> argued, not just for those who can afford it. I argued that we'd lose
>>> thousands of members and that our community would become less diverse.
>>>
>>> Then we looked at the numbers. The gap between our expenses and what we
>> can
>>> raise from foundations, the government, earned income and other sources
>> is
>>> about $100,000. That's about $5 per member. If every member gave $5,
>>> Rhizome would be financially stable. We could continue to grow and serve
>>> the community.
>>>
>>> The board argued that we pay to subscribe to magazines, to enter museums
>>> and to see performances. We pay to attend festivals and conferences. Why
>>> shouldn't we pay for Rhizome? Because it's online?
>>>
>>> Consider this hypothetical scenario. Let's say we introduced a
>>> sliding-scale membership fee starting at $11 per year with "thank you
>>> gifts" (T-shirts, etc.) at higher levels. By paying $11 a year (or more
>> if
>>> you could afford it), you get access to everything: Raw, Rare, Digest,
>> Net
>>> Art News, the Calendar, Opportunity Listings, ArtBase, Commissions, etc.
>>> Maybe we'd keep Raw free. Maybe we'd give new memebers a free trial
>> period
>>> so they could check out the goods before they have to pay.
>>>
>>> Would you pay the fee?
>>>
>>> What do you think about the idea of a sliding-scale membership fee for
>>> Rhizome.org? Good idea? Bad idea?
>>>
>>> Do you think it would be better to go into hibernation?
>>>
>>> I am eagerly awaiting your responses.
>>>
>>> Sincerely,
>>>
>>> Mark
>>>
>>> + new media rugby
>>> -> post: [email protected]
>>> -> questions: [email protected]
>>> -> subscribe/unsubscribe: http://rhizome.org/preferences/subscribe.rhiz
>>> -> give: http://rhizome.org/support
>>> +
>>> Subscribers to Rhizome are subject to the terms set out in the
>>> Membership Agreement available online at http://rhizome.org/info/29.php
>> + new media rugby
>> -> post: [email protected]
>> -> questions: [email protected]
>> -> subscribe/unsubscribe: http://rhizome.org/preferences/subscribe.rhiz
>> -> give: http://rhizome.org/support
>> +
>> Subscribers to Rhizome are subject to the terms set out in the
>> Membership Agreement available online at http://rhizome.org/info/29.php
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Get faster connections
Programers at Rhizome. How long would it take to debug the site?
Who can aid in making that happen.
Somebody call Media Lab…
on 10/25/02 3:44 AM, Eryk Salvaggio at [email protected] wrote:
>
>
> I'm glad someone else is bringing up the bugs on the rhizome web site.
> I've been mentioning this and was told no one else was having the same
> sort of problems. I agree this has to be done- if Rhizome is going to be
> a pay service there will be a higher expectation.
>
> Concerning charging for raw, I think charging for raw is a reasonable
> idea, and for the sake of reaching out and being idealistic, what if we
> waived fees for Raw for those who donate intellectual capital? For
> example, if you make a piece and it is donated to the artbase, or if you
> print something that the superusers deem as publishable, etc, etc, it
> could earn you credits towards using services at rhizome. Or if you are
> a super user. It has to be a small portion of the overall subscriber
> base. Not to mention that at this point, if those people didn't donate
> money then there is something bad happening.
>
> This would accomplish two things: 1. make rhizome raw worth paying money
> for, (for the lurkers) 2. reward people for doing more than issuing
> inane personal assaults at one another, (a problem which seems to be
> diminishing) and 3. something about idealism. Isn't there a central
> government organization dedicated to giving money away to idealists?
> There must be some place with nea funding that's doing something like
> that. [It seems to me that the more serious and realist rhizome has
> become, the less money it's had? Maybe idealism is not so bad a thing
> after all.]
>
> I'm with TWhid on keeping NAN free for all who want it, as an
> advertisement of sorts.
>
> Cheers,
> -e.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> t.whid wrote:
>
>> Mark,
>>
>> You MUST fix the bugs on the web site before the fee is instituted.
>> It's extremely buggy on anything other than IE/Win. I volunteer to
>> rewrite the front-end in clean, contemporary xhtml/css.
>>
>> I don't see a problem with the fee, but I contribute more than the
>> proposed fee every year voluntarily.
>>
>> I would be interested in what people who would be totally against the
>> fee have to say. esp those who take advantage of raw. but i don't see
>> why you would keep RAW free, it's a service like any other.
>>
>> what about all the people who are happily syndicating Net Art News? do
>> they keep it for free (as it functions sorta like an ad for rhiz)?
>>
>>
>> On Thursday, October 24, 2002, at 05:34 PM, Mark Tribe wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Rhizomers:
>>>
>>> I am hoping to start a discussion here on Raw about Rhizome's
>>> financial situation and a possible solution. This email is rather
>>> long, but I'd appreciate it if you'd take the time to read it
>>> through, give it some thought, and let me know what you think.
>>>
>>> <snip>
>>
>>
>> + new media rugby
>> -> post: [email protected]
>> -> questions: [email protected]
>> -> subscribe/unsubscribe: http://rhizome.org/preferences/subscribe.rhiz
>> -> give: http://rhizome.org/support
>> +
>> Subscribers to Rhizome are subject to the terms set out in the
>> Membership Agreement available online at http://rhizome.org/info/29.php
>>
>
>
>
> + new media rugby
> -> post: [email protected]
> -> questions: [email protected]
> -> subscribe/unsubscribe: http://rhizome.org/preferences/subscribe.rhiz
> -> give: http://rhizome.org/support
> +
> Subscribers to Rhizome are subject to the terms set out in the
> Membership Agreement available online at http://rhizome.org/info/29.php
Ok lets get it organized.
Max, you curate the CD show.
Lee, you promote the show
I will get the first 100 CDs mastered and printed.
We sell it for $50 bucks a peice.
I cover my costs and Rhizome should net around $4500
Ready 2 go?
joseph
Quoting Lee Wells <[email protected]>:
> I donate art to Rhizome, music, images, etc. The CD Idea is preaty good and
> has worked for other nonprofit org like, Lumpen Magazine in Chicago.
> http://www.lumpen.com/
>
> on 10/25/02 2:12 AM, Max Herman at [email protected] wrote:
>
> >
> >
> >
> > Yeah, I was thinking a big fatty music CD, all proceeds to Rhizome, I'd
> > donate a song'r two.
> >
> >
> >
> >> From: [email protected]
> >> Reply-To: [email protected]
> >> To: Mark Tribe <[email protected]>
> >> CC: [email protected]
> >> Subject: Re: RHIZOME_RAW: Membership fee?
> >> Date: Fri, 25 Oct 2002 05:45:52 +0000
> >>
> >> Its time to talk about industry mergers. Forget the membership fees, very
> >> few
> >> will pay. If you are about to fold, either fold, or start a capital
> >> campaign
> >> to raise 7 figures. Fold or Bold.
> >>
> >> joseph
> >>
> >>
> >> Quoting Mark Tribe <[email protected]>:
> >>
> >>> Hi Rhizomers:
> >>>
> >>> I am hoping to start a discussion here on Raw about Rhizome's financial
> >>> situation and a possible solution. This email is rather long, but I'd
> >>> appreciate it if you'd take the time to read it through, give it some
> >>> thought, and let me know what you think.
> >>>
> >>> First, some background information. It will cost about $400,000 to
> >> operate
> >>> Rhizome.org this year. Here's how we spend it: $6,000 on administrative
> >>> fees (mostly processing credit card gifts); $122,000 on operating
> >> expenses
> >>> (phone, rent, web hosting, office supplies, etc.); $177,000 on payroll
> >>> costs (salaries, health insurance, payroll taxes, etc.); $93,000 on
> >>> professional fees (writers, commissions, consultants, etc.). These
> >> numbers
> >>> may seem high to some of you, but we actually run a very lean, efficient
> >>> operation. It simply costs a lot of money to run a nonprofit
> >> organization
> >>> that offers as many programs to as many people as we do.
> >>>
> >>> In the past, most of our revenue has come from foundations, but
> >> foundation
> >>> support is shrinking. We had hoped to make up the difference through
> >> earned
> >>> income from web hosting and online education, but those services are
> >>> getting off to a slow start. We have also, as you surely know, tried
> >> asking
> >>> for voluntary contributions. But so far this year only about 1% of our
> >>> 19,000 members have made gifts.
> >>>
> >>> The Rhizome Board of Directors met for its quarterly meeting last
> >> Friday.
> >>> The main topic was how to solve our financial problems. I proposed
> >> putting
> >>> the organization into hibernation mode. This would entail shutting down
> >> the
> >>> office, laying off the staff and discontinuing most of our programs. We
> >>> would keep the web site up, ask the SuperUsers to continue to publish
> >>> texts, and keep Raw online. But everything else would stop: no more
> >> Digest
> >>> or Net Art News, no more commissions, no more events. We'd stop adding
> >> new
> >>> projects to the ArtBase, stop improving the web site (we have a long
> >> list
> >>> of bugs to fix and features to add) and stop planning new programs.
> >>>
> >>> The Board felt that hibernation would be a big mistake. Once we went
> >> into
> >>> hibernation, they argued, it would be very hard to re-emerge and rebuild
> >>> momentum. Foundations would lose confidence in us (not to mention the
> >> fact
> >>> that we wouldn't have anyone to write the grants). Most important, our
> >>> ability to fulfill our mission would be compromised.
> >>>
> >>> Then someone suggested charging a membership fee. This idea has been
> >>> proposed before, and I have always opposed it. Rhizome is for everyone,
> >> I
> >>> argued, not just for those who can afford it. I argued that we'd lose
> >>> thousands of members and that our community would become less diverse.
> >>>
> >>> Then we looked at the numbers. The gap between our expenses and what we
> >> can
> >>> raise from foundations, the government, earned income and other sources
> >> is
> >>> about $100,000. That's about $5 per member. If every member gave $5,
> >>> Rhizome would be financially stable. We could continue to grow and serve
> >>> the community.
> >>>
> >>> The board argued that we pay to subscribe to magazines, to enter museums
> >>> and to see performances. We pay to attend festivals and conferences. Why
> >>> shouldn't we pay for Rhizome? Because it's online?
> >>>
> >>> Consider this hypothetical scenario. Let's say we introduced a
> >>> sliding-scale membership fee starting at $11 per year with "thank you
> >>> gifts" (T-shirts, etc.) at higher levels. By paying $11 a year (or more
> >> if
> >>> you could afford it), you get access to everything: Raw, Rare, Digest,
> >> Net
> >>> Art News, the Calendar, Opportunity Listings, ArtBase, Commissions, etc.
> >>> Maybe we'd keep Raw free. Maybe we'd give new memebers a free trial
> >> period
> >>> so they could check out the goods before they have to pay.
> >>>
> >>> Would you pay the fee?
> >>>
> >>> What do you think about the idea of a sliding-scale membership fee for
> >>> Rhizome.org? Good idea? Bad idea?
> >>>
> >>> Do you think it would be better to go into hibernation?
> >>>
> >>> I am eagerly awaiting your responses.
> >>>
> >>> Sincerely,
> >>>
> >>> Mark
> >>>
> >>> + new media rugby
> >>> -> post: [email protected]
> >>> -> questions: [email protected]
> >>> -> subscribe/unsubscribe: http://rhizome.org/preferences/subscribe.rhiz
> >>> -> give: http://rhizome.org/support
> >>> +
> >>> Subscribers to Rhizome are subject to the terms set out in the
> >>> Membership Agreement available online at http://rhizome.org/info/29.php
> >> + new media rugby
> >> -> post: [email protected]
> >> -> questions: [email protected]
> >> -> subscribe/unsubscribe: http://rhizome.org/preferences/subscribe.rhiz
> >> -> give: http://rhizome.org/support
> >> +
> >> Subscribers to Rhizome are subject to the terms set out in the
> >> Membership Agreement available online at http://rhizome.org/info/29.php
> >
> >
> > _________________________________________________________________
> > Get faster connections
Ok. I'm down.
Mark, what do you think?
If Rhizome wants my assistance I'll help.
Cheers
Lee
on 10/25/02 10:52 PM, [email protected] at [email protected]
wrote:
> Ok lets get it organized.
>
> Max, you curate the CD show.
> Lee, you promote the show
> I will get the first 100 CDs mastered and printed.
>
> We sell it for $50 bucks a peice.
>
> I cover my costs and Rhizome should net around $4500
>
> Ready 2 go?
>
> joseph
>
>
> Quoting Lee Wells <[email protected]>:
>
>> I donate art to Rhizome, music, images, etc. The CD Idea is preaty good and
>> has worked for other nonprofit org like, Lumpen Magazine in Chicago.
>> http://www.lumpen.com/
>>
>> on 10/25/02 2:12 AM, Max Herman at [email protected] wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Yeah, I was thinking a big fatty music CD, all proceeds to Rhizome, I'd
>>> donate a song'r two.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> From: [email protected]
>>>> Reply-To: [email protected]
>>>> To: Mark Tribe <[email protected]>
>>>> CC: [email protected]
>>>> Subject: Re: RHIZOME_RAW: Membership fee?
>>>> Date: Fri, 25 Oct 2002 05:45:52 +0000
>>>>
>>>> Its time to talk about industry mergers. Forget the membership fees, very
>>>> few
>>>> will pay. If you are about to fold, either fold, or start a capital
>>>> campaign
>>>> to raise 7 figures. Fold or Bold.
>>>>
>>>> joseph
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Quoting Mark Tribe <[email protected]>:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi Rhizomers:
>>>>>
>>>>> I am hoping to start a discussion here on Raw about Rhizome's financial
>>>>> situation and a possible solution. This email is rather long, but I'd
>>>>> appreciate it if you'd take the time to read it through, give it some
>>>>> thought, and let me know what you think.
>>>>>
>>>>> First, some background information. It will cost about $400,000 to
>>>> operate
>>>>> Rhizome.org this year. Here's how we spend it: $6,000 on administrative
>>>>> fees (mostly processing credit card gifts); $122,000 on operating
>>>> expenses
>>>>> (phone, rent, web hosting, office supplies, etc.); $177,000 on payroll
>>>>> costs (salaries, health insurance, payroll taxes, etc.); $93,000 on
>>>>> professional fees (writers, commissions, consultants, etc.). These
>>>> numbers
>>>>> may seem high to some of you, but we actually run a very lean, efficient
>>>>> operation. It simply costs a lot of money to run a nonprofit
>>>> organization
>>>>> that offers as many programs to as many people as we do.
>>>>>
>>>>> In the past, most of our revenue has come from foundations, but
>>>> foundation
>>>>> support is shrinking. We had hoped to make up the difference through
>>>> earned
>>>>> income from web hosting and online education, but those services are
>>>>> getting off to a slow start. We have also, as you surely know, tried
>>>> asking
>>>>> for voluntary contributions. But so far this year only about 1% of our
>>>>> 19,000 members have made gifts.
>>>>>
>>>>> The Rhizome Board of Directors met for its quarterly meeting last
>>>> Friday.
>>>>> The main topic was how to solve our financial problems. I proposed
>>>> putting
>>>>> the organization into hibernation mode. This would entail shutting down
>>>> the
>>>>> office, laying off the staff and discontinuing most of our programs.. We
>>>>> would keep the web site up, ask the SuperUsers to continue to publish
>>>>> texts, and keep Raw online. But everything else would stop: no more
>>>> Digest
>>>>> or Net Art News, no more commissions, no more events. We'd stop adding
>>>> new
>>>>> projects to the ArtBase, stop improving the web site (we have a long
>>>> list
>>>>> of bugs to fix and features to add) and stop planning new programs.
>>>>>
>>>>> The Board felt that hibernation would be a big mistake. Once we went
>>>> into
>>>>> hibernation, they argued, it would be very hard to re-emerge and rebuild
>>>>> momentum. Foundations would lose confidence in us (not to mention the
>>>> fact
>>>>> that we wouldn't have anyone to write the grants). Most important, our
>>>>> ability to fulfill our mission would be compromised.
>>>>>
>>>>> Then someone suggested charging a membership fee. This idea has been
>>>>> proposed before, and I have always opposed it. Rhizome is for everyone,
>>>> I
>>>>> argued, not just for those who can afford it. I argued that we'd lose
>>>>> thousands of members and that our community would become less diverse.
>>>>>
>>>>> Then we looked at the numbers. The gap between our expenses and what we
>>>> can
>>>>> raise from foundations, the government, earned income and other sources
>>>> is
>>>>> about $100,000. That's about $5 per member. If every member gave $5,
>>>>> Rhizome would be financially stable. We could continue to grow and serve
>>>>> the community.
>>>>>
>>>>> The board argued that we pay to subscribe to magazines, to enter museums
>>>>> and to see performances. We pay to attend festivals and conferences.. Why
>>>>> shouldn't we pay for Rhizome? Because it's online?
>>>>>
>>>>> Consider this hypothetical scenario. Let's say we introduced a
>>>>> sliding-scale membership fee starting at $11 per year with "thank you
>>>>> gifts" (T-shirts, etc.) at higher levels. By paying $11 a year (or more
>>>> if
>>>>> you could afford it), you get access to everything: Raw, Rare, Digest,
>>>> Net
>>>>> Art News, the Calendar, Opportunity Listings, ArtBase, Commissions, etc.
>>>>> Maybe we'd keep Raw free. Maybe we'd give new memebers a free trial
>>>> period
>>>>> so they could check out the goods before they have to pay.
>>>>>
>>>>> Would you pay the fee?
>>>>>
>>>>> What do you think about the idea of a sliding-scale membership fee for
>>>>> Rhizome.org? Good idea? Bad idea?
>>>>>
>>>>> Do you think it would be better to go into hibernation?
>>>>>
>>>>> I am eagerly awaiting your responses.
>>>>>
>>>>> Sincerely,
>>>>>
>>>>> Mark
>>>>>
>>>>> + new media rugby
>>>>> -> post: [email protected]
>>>>> -> questions: [email protected]
>>>>> -> subscribe/unsubscribe: http://rhizome.org/preferences/subscribe.rhiz
>>>>> -> give: http://rhizome.org/support
>>>>> +
>>>>> Subscribers to Rhizome are subject to the terms set out in the
>>>>> Membership Agreement available online at http://rhizome.org/info/29..php
>>>> + new media rugby
>>>> -> post: [email protected]
>>>> -> questions: [email protected]
>>>> -> subscribe/unsubscribe: http://rhizome.org/preferences/subscribe.rhiz
>>>> -> give: http://rhizome.org/support
>>>> +
>>>> Subscribers to Rhizome are subject to the terms set out in the
>>>> Membership Agreement available online at http://rhizome.org/info/29.php
>>>
>>>
>>> _________________________________________________________________
>>> Get faster connections
I generally lurk on this list, but this issue hits a bit close to home. I
am a partner in running a non-profit gallery in NYC called Open Ground
(http://www.open-ground.org), and am sensitive to the financial needs of
Rhizome.
The proposed $11 / year is an absurdly low amount of money. Let me put it
another way: Rhizome is asking for each of us to contribute the equivalent
of 1 to 2 six packs of beer (1), one affordable CD, one movie ticket, or 2
cups of coffee from Starbucks. If people have a problem with that, either:
* they hail from an economy with a very different cost of living.
* they don't care about rhizome's financial health.
I think users from the first category should be accommodated. I have a
real problem with anyone from the United States complaining about paying
such a trivially low fee. The word "freeloader" comes to mind.
One should recognize that changing the *economy* of art is more
ground-breaking than any particular aesthetic. By and large, art is
supported by catering to a very small audience of extremely wealthy patrons.
Here on-line, we have an opportunity to fund our art collectively. In
return for small individual contributions spread across the community,
Rhizome can cater to our needs and our desires. Such funding base allows
Rhizome to do programming (2) for us, not for Grant A, Foundation B,
Corporation C, or Rich Dude D.
I hope the community is as revolutionary as RAW can sometimes
appear. After consideration of the Second Law of Thermodynamics, we should
conclude that cheap membership is the best way to support the organization
for the community.
~ Patrick May
1.) depending on your taste in beers
2.) programming in both technical and curatorial dimensions
On Friday, October 25, 2002, at 11:10 PM, Patrick May wrote:
> I generally lurk on this list, but this issue hits a bit close to
> home. I am a partner in running a non-profit gallery in NYC called
> Open Ground (http://www.open-ground.org), and am sensitive to the
> financial needs of Rhizome.
hiya,
good to hear from you. please post more.
>
> The proposed $11 / year is an absurdly low amount of money. Let me
> put it another way: Rhizome is asking for each of us to contribute
> the equivalent of 1 to 2 six packs of beer (1), one affordable CD,
> one movie ticket, or 2 cups of coffee from Starbucks. If people have
> a problem with that, either:
>
> * they hail from an economy with a very different cost of living.
> * they don't care about rhizome's financial health.
>
> I think users from the first category should be accommodated. I have
> a real problem with anyone from the United States complaining about
> paying such a trivially low fee. The word "freeloader" comes to mind.
i agree with this as well. beyond country codes at the end of domain
names, is there an automatic way to trace the general location (would
an app that does an traceroute be able to do it..?) of a web surfer
signing up to rhiz? i'm sure mark t would be happy with simply taking
one's word for their location but jerks will abuse that i'm sure.
>
> One should recognize that changing the *economy* of art is more
> ground-breaking than any particular aesthetic. By and large, art is
> supported by catering to a very small audience of extremely wealthy
> patrons.
>
> Here on-line, we have an opportunity to fund our art collectively. In
> return for small individual contributions spread across the community,
> Rhizome can cater to our needs and our desires. Such funding base
> allows Rhizome to do programming (2) for us, not for Grant A,
> Foundation B, Corporation C, or Rich Dude D.
DAMN good point.
>
> I hope the community is as revolutionary as RAW can sometimes appear.
> After consideration of the Second Law of Thermodynamics, we should
> conclude that cheap membership is the best way to support the
> organization for the community.
>
> ~ Patrick May
On Friday, October 25, 2002, at 10:20 PM, Lee Wells wrote:
> Programers at Rhizome. How long would it take to debug the site?
> Who can aid in making that happen.
> Somebody call Media Lab…
>
>
rhizome has only one programmer to work on the DB (the slowness being
the main bug) who seems to be working his ass off.
search queries don't return things that i know are there, the other
major bug.
the 3rd (or maybe the first) major bug is that in Mac IE you don't get
the latest version of the homepage. I suggested using a simple
cache-control meta tag might fix it. don't know if anyone tried it.
there are other minor interface bugs. many times the layout of text
pushes the interface around making the site look extremely sloppy. and
the drop-downs only work on MSIE it seems.
<Honor system? I don't think this makes sense. >
why?
=====
http://www.somedancersandmusicians.com/
__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Y! Web Hosting - Let the expert host your web site
http://webhosting.yahoo.com/
>
i would pay the fee…i mean, if rhizome needs it, i would do it…i know it's not exactly the most popular stance in the world, but there comes a time when you have to REALLY stand up and support what you believe in…
of course, i would demand a full accounting of where the monies were going (which i believe you guys do anyway, right? legal requirement…)
but, yes, especially if the fee were as low as this…
bliss
l
At 04:16 PM 10/27/2002 -0500, Lewis LaCook wrote:
> >
>i would pay the fee…i mean, if rhizome needs it, i would do it…i know
>it's not exactly the most popular stance in the world, but there comes a
>time when you have to REALLY stand up and support what you believe in…
>of course, i would demand a full accounting of where the monies were going
>(which i believe you guys do anyway, right? legal requirement…)
several people have brought this up, so i thought i'd clarify. my
understanding of US law is that nonprofits are required to provide
financial statements upon request, but not to post financial statements.
we nonetheless had a pdf our tax return on the web site until we redesigned
the site. unfortunately, the link to the pdf somehow didn't make it into
the new design.
you can still find it at http://rhizome.org/info/Rhizome_2000_990.pdf
as we get our new audited financial statement from our accountant, it will
go up on the site (should be within a few weeks). it will cover the fiscal
years that ended june 30 2002 and june 30 2001.
best,
mark
This is going to have to wait for me till Jan 03. I'll be off neternet
stuff till then.
>From: [email protected]
>To: Lee Wells <[email protected]>
>CC: Max Herman <[email protected]>, [email protected],[email protected]
>Subject: Re: RHIZOME_RAW: Membership fee?
>Date: Sat, 26 Oct 2002 02:52:32 +0000
>
>Ok lets get it organized.
>
>Max, you curate the CD show.
>Lee, you promote the show
>I will get the first 100 CDs mastered and printed.
>
>We sell it for $50 bucks a peice.
>
>I cover my costs and Rhizome should net around $4500
>
>Ready 2 go?
>
>joseph
>
>
>Quoting Lee Wells <[email protected]>:
>
> > I donate art to Rhizome, music, images, etc. The CD Idea is preaty good
>and
> > has worked for other nonprofit org like, Lumpen Magazine in Chicago.
> > http://www.lumpen.com/
> >
> > on 10/25/02 2:12 AM, Max Herman at [email protected] wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Yeah, I was thinking a big fatty music CD, all proceeds to Rhizome,
>I'd
> > > donate a song'r two.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >> From: [email protected]
> > >> Reply-To: [email protected]
> > >> To: Mark Tribe <[email protected]>
> > >> CC: [email protected]
> > >> Subject: Re: RHIZOME_RAW: Membership fee?
> > >> Date: Fri, 25 Oct 2002 05:45:52 +0000
> > >>
> > >> Its time to talk about industry mergers. Forget the membership fees,
>very
> > >> few
> > >> will pay. If you are about to fold, either fold, or start a capital
> > >> campaign
> > >> to raise 7 figures. Fold or Bold.
> > >>
> > >> joseph
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> Quoting Mark Tribe <[email protected]>:
> > >>
> > >>> Hi Rhizomers:
> > >>>
> > >>> I am hoping to start a discussion here on Raw about Rhizome's
>financial
> > >>> situation and a possible solution. This email is rather long, but
>I'd
> > >>> appreciate it if you'd take the time to read it through, give it
>some
> > >>> thought, and let me know what you think.
> > >>>
> > >>> First, some background information. It will cost about $400,000 to
> > >> operate
> > >>> Rhizome.org this year. Here's how we spend it: $6,000 on
>administrative
> > >>> fees (mostly processing credit card gifts); $122,000 on operating
> > >> expenses
> > >>> (phone, rent, web hosting, office supplies, etc.); $177,000 on
>payroll
> > >>> costs (salaries, health insurance, payroll taxes, etc.); $93,000 on
> > >>> professional fees (writers, commissions, consultants, etc.). These
> > >> numbers
> > >>> may seem high to some of you, but we actually run a very lean,
>efficient
> > >>> operation. It simply costs a lot of money to run a nonprofit
> > >> organization
> > >>> that offers as many programs to as many people as we do.
> > >>>
> > >>> In the past, most of our revenue has come from foundations, but
> > >> foundation
> > >>> support is shrinking. We had hoped to make up the difference through
> > >> earned
> > >>> income from web hosting and online education, but those services are
> > >>> getting off to a slow start. We have also, as you surely know, tried
> > >> asking
> > >>> for voluntary contributions. But so far this year only about 1% of
>our
> > >>> 19,000 members have made gifts.
> > >>>
> > >>> The Rhizome Board of Directors met for its quarterly meeting last
> > >> Friday.
> > >>> The main topic was how to solve our financial problems. I proposed
> > >> putting
> > >>> the organization into hibernation mode. This would entail shutting
>down
> > >> the
> > >>> office, laying off the staff and discontinuing most of our programs.
>We
> > >>> would keep the web site up, ask the SuperUsers to continue to
>publish
> > >>> texts, and keep Raw online. But everything else would stop: no more
> > >> Digest
> > >>> or Net Art News, no more commissions, no more events. We'd stop
>adding
> > >> new
> > >>> projects to the ArtBase, stop improving the web site (we have a long
> > >> list
> > >>> of bugs to fix and features to add) and stop planning new programs.
> > >>>
> > >>> The Board felt that hibernation would be a big mistake. Once we went
> > >> into
> > >>> hibernation, they argued, it would be very hard to re-emerge and
>rebuild
> > >>> momentum. Foundations would lose confidence in us (not to mention
>the
> > >> fact
> > >>> that we wouldn't have anyone to write the grants). Most important,
>our
> > >>> ability to fulfill our mission would be compromised.
> > >>>
> > >>> Then someone suggested charging a membership fee. This idea has been
> > >>> proposed before, and I have always opposed it. Rhizome is for
>everyone,
> > >> I
> > >>> argued, not just for those who can afford it. I argued that we'd
>lose
> > >>> thousands of members and that our community would become less
>diverse.
> > >>>
> > >>> Then we looked at the numbers. The gap between our expenses and what
>we
> > >> can
> > >>> raise from foundations, the government, earned income and other
>sources
> > >> is
> > >>> about $100,000. That's about $5 per member. If every member gave $5,
> > >>> Rhizome would be financially stable. We could continue to grow and
>serve
> > >>> the community.
> > >>>
> > >>> The board argued that we pay to subscribe to magazines, to enter
>museums
> > >>> and to see performances. We pay to attend festivals and conferences.
>Why
> > >>> shouldn't we pay for Rhizome? Because it's online?
> > >>>
> > >>> Consider this hypothetical scenario. Let's say we introduced a
> > >>> sliding-scale membership fee starting at $11 per year with "thank
>you
> > >>> gifts" (T-shirts, etc.) at higher levels. By paying $11 a year (or
>more
> > >> if
> > >>> you could afford it), you get access to everything: Raw, Rare,
>Digest,
> > >> Net
> > >>> Art News, the Calendar, Opportunity Listings, ArtBase, Commissions,
>etc.
> > >>> Maybe we'd keep Raw free. Maybe we'd give new memebers a free trial
> > >> period
> > >>> so they could check out the goods before they have to pay.
> > >>>
> > >>> Would you pay the fee?
> > >>>
> > >>> What do you think about the idea of a sliding-scale membership fee
>for
> > >>> Rhizome.org? Good idea? Bad idea?
> > >>>
> > >>> Do you think it would be better to go into hibernation?
> > >>>
> > >>> I am eagerly awaiting your responses.
> > >>>
> > >>> Sincerely,
> > >>>
> > >>> Mark
> > >>>
> > >>> + new media rugby
> > >>> -> post: [email protected]
> > >>> -> questions: [email protected]
> > >>> -> subscribe/unsubscribe:
>http://rhizome.org/preferences/subscribe.rhiz
> > >>> -> give: http://rhizome.org/support
> > >>> +
> > >>> Subscribers to Rhizome are subject to the terms set out in the
> > >>> Membership Agreement available online at
>http://rhizome.org/info/29.php
> > >> + new media rugby
> > >> -> post: [email protected]
> > >> -> questions: [email protected]
> > >> -> subscribe/unsubscribe:
>http://rhizome.org/preferences/subscribe.rhiz
> > >> -> give: http://rhizome.org/support
> > >> +
> > >> Subscribers to Rhizome are subject to the terms set out in the
> > >> Membership Agreement available online at
>http://rhizome.org/info/29.php
> > >
> > >
> > > _________________________________________________________________
> > > Get faster connections