Supporter-Only Contests?
- Thread starter sw1211
- Start date
roadking06
Member
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2008
- Messages
- 37
Festool corporate pays all the forum expenses now. What is to contribute to? Are taxes being paid and additional income being reported as income buy whomever is cashing the "contributor" checks?
The last contest/give away that was canceled made more sense and nothing was hidden. Henrik was getting nothing for his generosity. With this contest Taunton is getting advertising. And who knows where the cash is going if Festool funds the FOG.
I asked the question two days ago. The slow response came in the form of a non answer, just a link to go read the FOG Support page. When pressed, only 22 of 6000 members qualify.
Where does the FOG support money go?
My 6th sense says something smells fishy...
I asked the question two days ago. The slow response came in the form of a non answer, just a link to go read the FOG Support page. When pressed, only 22 of 6000 members qualify.
Where does the FOG support money go?
My 6th sense says something smells fishy...
- Joined
- Jul 8, 2007
- Messages
- 13,126
If I understand it, Festool pays for the basic expenses of the forum - the hosting and intenet expenses. Enhancements to the the software, etc. are still taken care of out of the administrators pocket. I wouldn't be surprised if the addtional out of pocket expenses added up to more than the cost of a couples of Festools a year.
What is the value of time spent running this forum? I don't see anything wrong with in a giveaway associated with trying to increase funding to the forum. Don't you think that other companies in the world give things away in the hopes that people will visit their websites more often and hopefully spend more money there. It is a normal way of business.
Taxes, and how the administrator handles any income - support fees received in excess of expenses - is none of our concern - and I would venture a guess that isn't a problem anyway - the expenses create a loss.
If you don't like the idea - don't participate.
Peter
What is the value of time spent running this forum? I don't see anything wrong with in a giveaway associated with trying to increase funding to the forum. Don't you think that other companies in the world give things away in the hopes that people will visit their websites more often and hopefully spend more money there. It is a normal way of business.
Taxes, and how the administrator handles any income - support fees received in excess of expenses - is none of our concern - and I would venture a guess that isn't a problem anyway - the expenses create a loss.
If you don't like the idea - don't participate.
Peter
Matthew Schenker
Member
- Joined
- Jan 15, 2007
- Messages
- 2,619
Good Morning,
In order to separate the actual contest from the general subject of supporter-only contests, I have created a new discussion using the posts above.
I'm disappointed to see some of these comments.
My intent was to have a way to thank members who take the extra step of supporting this forum. There has been a history in the FOG of me trying to find ways to give a little more to those people who donate. In the FOG Support area, you'll see several discussions about this (for example, I installed a "drafts" feature a while back for supporters.)
But I have always believed that it is better to discuss finances openly, so below I give as complete a response as possible...
Making a donation has always been voluntary here, and it is hardly ever brought up. Also, this is just one contest out of several that I plan to start here, and I am hoping to have contests run simultaneously -- some for supporters and some for everyone. Taking part in the contests is voluntary, and in no way affects your general activities as a member.
So this is not "extortion."
The concept of supporter-only contests is not new. Several respected forums do this. In fact, Sawmill Creek has been running supporter-only contests for some time (CLICK HERE). In fact, it just so happens that Taunton is also supporting Sawmill Creek's latest contest (CLICK HERE).
This forum has always been totally transparent regarding funding. In fact, I'll bet that this is one of the most transparent forums you'll ever encounter. As I mentioned, I created an entire section just for discussions about support and freely answer questions people have about support. Detailed posts explain every aspect of this forum's support structure. Anyone, any time, can view the member list to see who is designated as an "FOG Supporter" (except for the one anonymous supporter).
So nothing is "hidden," and my response to a request for information about support was not a "non answer" but rather an open answer. I did not need to be "pressed" for information on the number of supporters, as it always has been freely available to every member.
And there's nothing "fishy" about it.
This subject doesn't come up very often, because I hesitate to discuss finances. The reason for that is because this forum operates at a constant financial loss to me, and I've never liked making an issue out of it because the forum has meaning to me beyond finances. Just to clarify: Festool pays hosting costs. Beyond that, I cover a number of other costs. All donations helps pay some of those costs.
Bottom line: supporter-only contests are a way of thanking those who support the forum, while helping the forum get closer to the break-even point financially.
I hope this answers any concerns on the matter.
Thanks,
Matthew
In order to separate the actual contest from the general subject of supporter-only contests, I have created a new discussion using the posts above.
I'm disappointed to see some of these comments.
My intent was to have a way to thank members who take the extra step of supporting this forum. There has been a history in the FOG of me trying to find ways to give a little more to those people who donate. In the FOG Support area, you'll see several discussions about this (for example, I installed a "drafts" feature a while back for supporters.)
But I have always believed that it is better to discuss finances openly, so below I give as complete a response as possible...
Steve-CO said:
Making a donation has always been voluntary here, and it is hardly ever brought up. Also, this is just one contest out of several that I plan to start here, and I am hoping to have contests run simultaneously -- some for supporters and some for everyone. Taking part in the contests is voluntary, and in no way affects your general activities as a member.
So this is not "extortion."
wnagle said:
The concept of supporter-only contests is not new. Several respected forums do this. In fact, Sawmill Creek has been running supporter-only contests for some time (CLICK HERE). In fact, it just so happens that Taunton is also supporting Sawmill Creek's latest contest (CLICK HERE).
This forum has always been totally transparent regarding funding. In fact, I'll bet that this is one of the most transparent forums you'll ever encounter. As I mentioned, I created an entire section just for discussions about support and freely answer questions people have about support. Detailed posts explain every aspect of this forum's support structure. Anyone, any time, can view the member list to see who is designated as an "FOG Supporter" (except for the one anonymous supporter).
So nothing is "hidden," and my response to a request for information about support was not a "non answer" but rather an open answer. I did not need to be "pressed" for information on the number of supporters, as it always has been freely available to every member.
And there's nothing "fishy" about it.
roadking06 said:
wnagle said:
This subject doesn't come up very often, because I hesitate to discuss finances. The reason for that is because this forum operates at a constant financial loss to me, and I've never liked making an issue out of it because the forum has meaning to me beyond finances. Just to clarify: Festool pays hosting costs. Beyond that, I cover a number of other costs. All donations helps pay some of those costs.
Bottom line: supporter-only contests are a way of thanking those who support the forum, while helping the forum get closer to the break-even point financially.
I hope this answers any concerns on the matter.
Thanks,
Matthew
When any othe company has a give away to increase sales, they usually say no purchase necessary. No offense meant Matthew but the way you stated the give away, although accurate, was a bit coy and not fully and openly disclosing some glaring obvious concerns.
In the first place the give away should be to all registered members not just financial contributors. With a subnote encouraging onlookers to register and become contributing FOG members.
Or at the least if your trying to encourage Monetary support for the FOG, just say it that way. I would have stated the contest as such:
In an effort to encourage more FOG monetary supporting members, we are having a give away gift donated by Taunton Press. Currently there are only 22 members (out of 6000) that have made donations who are eligible for this contest. If you would like to become eligible, you must register on the FOG and make a monetary donation for its support. State a minimum donation and how to donate. This way everyone knows where they stand and whose eligible and the purpose of the give away gift.
In the first place the give away should be to all registered members not just financial contributors. With a subnote encouraging onlookers to register and become contributing FOG members.
Or at the least if your trying to encourage Monetary support for the FOG, just say it that way. I would have stated the contest as such:
In an effort to encourage more FOG monetary supporting members, we are having a give away gift donated by Taunton Press. Currently there are only 22 members (out of 6000) that have made donations who are eligible for this contest. If you would like to become eligible, you must register on the FOG and make a monetary donation for its support. State a minimum donation and how to donate. This way everyone knows where they stand and whose eligible and the purpose of the give away gift.
Matthew Schenker
Member
- Joined
- Jan 15, 2007
- Messages
- 2,619
Good Morning,
You are making some assumptions, and misunderstanding what I'm trying to do here.
The reason I did not state that the contest is "an effort to encourage more FOG monetary supporting members" is because this is not an effort to encourage more FOG monetary support from members. As I mentioned in my post above, the intent was completely different.
I would not state it that way, because it presents a completely different picture of the situation. You are misreading the "purpose of the give away gift."
Members all know "where they stand." Information about support is open and freely available.
The reason I did not state a "minimum donation" is because I have never wanted to have a "minimum donation." I trust members to decide on their own how much support to offer, and I appreciate all support. Any 2009 supporters are eligible, so except saying "FOG Supporter" there is not much else to explain.
I've answered that completely in my previous post. I'm not sure what eles you think needs to be "openly" disclosed?
Again, this was a way to thank those who offer support, not a way to push for more donations.
Thanks,
Matthew
You are making some assumptions, and misunderstanding what I'm trying to do here.
The reason I did not state that the contest is "an effort to encourage more FOG monetary supporting members" is because this is not an effort to encourage more FOG monetary support from members. As I mentioned in my post above, the intent was completely different.
wnagle said:
I would not state it that way, because it presents a completely different picture of the situation. You are misreading the "purpose of the give away gift."
Members all know "where they stand." Information about support is open and freely available.
The reason I did not state a "minimum donation" is because I have never wanted to have a "minimum donation." I trust members to decide on their own how much support to offer, and I appreciate all support. Any 2009 supporters are eligible, so except saying "FOG Supporter" there is not much else to explain.
wnagle said:
I've answered that completely in my previous post. I'm not sure what eles you think needs to be "openly" disclosed?
Again, this was a way to thank those who offer support, not a way to push for more donations.
Thanks,
Matthew
Whatever your your purpose is it wasn't stated you were trying to.. thank the monetary supporters. No purpose was mentioned so if what I inferred was wrong it's because your intention was nonexistent and left for interpretation. Not stating the purpose.... That's being coy and less than open.
You posted the giveaway for all 6000 members and all onlookers to read knowing that only 22 people were eligible.... that's being coy and less than open.
When you state you have to be a FOG supporter and don't tell anyone what that is or how to become one.... that's being coy and less than open.
If you want to thank the 22 supporters WHY mention the contest to the 6000 people that aren't eligible and not tell them that your are really trying to show appreciation to 22 monetary supporters? Unless your intention is to increase paying support. If you don't state the intention of the giveaway then it's easy for people to come to there own conclusions. And it's easy for you to state your intentions after the fact or change your intention since it was never mentioned in the first place.
There's nothing wrong with showing appreciation to the 22 members that have contributed money. List their names, state that they are the eligible recipients. We'll applaud them. We'll thank them openly. And tell us the winner when its done, we'll cheer them on. But don't post a giveaway to everyone that "appears" to be for everyone when your intentions is to show appreciation to 22 people. That's coy and less than open.
Nothing wrong with asking for monetary support either IF you wanted to increase monetary supporters. Just be open and honest about it and many will respond.
Bottom line is this:
When you post this to 6000 members and many more lurkers and don't state that only 22 people are eligible, your are being less than open and honest.
When you post this to everyone and don't state your purpose until after a concern is brought up, you are being less than open and honest.
When you post this and don't explain that only monetary supporters are eligible, you are being less than open and honest.
Now you can quote me and respond to each sentence as you usually do but if you were open and honest in the first place, no one would be asking these questions and this conversation wouldn't be taking place. Instead of quoting me and trying to defend each statement on the defensive, why don't you try this approach. Instead of you and I debating, Learn something from this conversation. Here is how to win the debate if it is one. Prove me wrong if you will.
Restate the giveaway openly and completely and honestly with your intentions and full disclosure to everyone so that everyone understands.
If you want to show appreciation to someone...Say so and why. We'll support you
If you want to increase monetary support....say so and why. We'll support you
If you want to increase registered members... say so and why. We'll support you
Incidentally, When I say Honestly, I'm not suggesting you are dishonest. Rather honesty is more than stating a true short fact. IE "Fog supporter". There is honesty and then there is FULL honesty. True honesty is being more complete knowing that more explanation and information is needed. Accuracy with omission is not being truly honest. IE Explain what a FOG supporter is and how to become one and how many there are. Full honesty is stating your intentions in the first place.
Matthew, I believe you'll do the right thing
You posted the giveaway for all 6000 members and all onlookers to read knowing that only 22 people were eligible.... that's being coy and less than open.
When you state you have to be a FOG supporter and don't tell anyone what that is or how to become one.... that's being coy and less than open.
If you want to thank the 22 supporters WHY mention the contest to the 6000 people that aren't eligible and not tell them that your are really trying to show appreciation to 22 monetary supporters? Unless your intention is to increase paying support. If you don't state the intention of the giveaway then it's easy for people to come to there own conclusions. And it's easy for you to state your intentions after the fact or change your intention since it was never mentioned in the first place.
There's nothing wrong with showing appreciation to the 22 members that have contributed money. List their names, state that they are the eligible recipients. We'll applaud them. We'll thank them openly. And tell us the winner when its done, we'll cheer them on. But don't post a giveaway to everyone that "appears" to be for everyone when your intentions is to show appreciation to 22 people. That's coy and less than open.
Nothing wrong with asking for monetary support either IF you wanted to increase monetary supporters. Just be open and honest about it and many will respond.
Bottom line is this:
When you post this to 6000 members and many more lurkers and don't state that only 22 people are eligible, your are being less than open and honest.
When you post this to everyone and don't state your purpose until after a concern is brought up, you are being less than open and honest.
When you post this and don't explain that only monetary supporters are eligible, you are being less than open and honest.
Now you can quote me and respond to each sentence as you usually do but if you were open and honest in the first place, no one would be asking these questions and this conversation wouldn't be taking place. Instead of quoting me and trying to defend each statement on the defensive, why don't you try this approach. Instead of you and I debating, Learn something from this conversation. Here is how to win the debate if it is one. Prove me wrong if you will.
Restate the giveaway openly and completely and honestly with your intentions and full disclosure to everyone so that everyone understands.
If you want to show appreciation to someone...Say so and why. We'll support you
If you want to increase monetary support....say so and why. We'll support you
If you want to increase registered members... say so and why. We'll support you
Incidentally, When I say Honestly, I'm not suggesting you are dishonest. Rather honesty is more than stating a true short fact. IE "Fog supporter". There is honesty and then there is FULL honesty. True honesty is being more complete knowing that more explanation and information is needed. Accuracy with omission is not being truly honest. IE Explain what a FOG supporter is and how to become one and how many there are. Full honesty is stating your intentions in the first place.
Matthew, I believe you'll do the right thing
Matthew Schenker
Member
- Joined
- Jan 15, 2007
- Messages
- 2,619
Wnagle,
It's difficult for me to see how you arrive at most of your interpretations, which run completely counter to everything I've said here and all that has come before in this forum regarding donations.
Sometimes, the "purpose" of someone's post does not need to be stated out loud. For example, what is the "purpose" of your extended criticism?
I'm not sure how one could be more "open" with information than I have been about support. The support system has been open and clear for over a year. There is a "DONATE" button in the main menu, an entire area of the forum dedicated to discussions and detailed explanations of forum support, and all supporting members (except one) are clearly identified as "FOG Supporters" in their posts and in the member list.
There is nothing else to show. What else would you like to see?
It's odd that you twist tactful silence about donations into a reason for criticism. You don't see more talk about donations because I've never been comfortable being pushy about them. Are you saying I would be more open if I spent more time pushing people to donate? Strange interpretation indeed...
I'll trust that the majority of FOG members see what's happening here, and understand both my intentions and yours.
Thanks,
Matthew
It's difficult for me to see how you arrive at most of your interpretations, which run completely counter to everything I've said here and all that has come before in this forum regarding donations.
wnagle said:
Sometimes, the "purpose" of someone's post does not need to be stated out loud. For example, what is the "purpose" of your extended criticism?
wnagle said:
I'm not sure how one could be more "open" with information than I have been about support. The support system has been open and clear for over a year. There is a "DONATE" button in the main menu, an entire area of the forum dedicated to discussions and detailed explanations of forum support, and all supporting members (except one) are clearly identified as "FOG Supporters" in their posts and in the member list.
There is nothing else to show. What else would you like to see?
It's odd that you twist tactful silence about donations into a reason for criticism. You don't see more talk about donations because I've never been comfortable being pushy about them. Are you saying I would be more open if I spent more time pushing people to donate? Strange interpretation indeed...
I'll trust that the majority of FOG members see what's happening here, and understand both my intentions and yours.
Thanks,
Matthew
roadking06
Member
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2008
- Messages
- 37
So if I understand this correctly. I have to voluntarily pay for a chance to win this contest?
Kind of like the Walko workbench contest that was cancelled.
I mean not for nothing, but at least with the Walko bench, there was every intention to account for every penny with none of the money going to profit.
You say you operate at a loss. How much of one? How do we know its a loss? How much have you taken in from the 2009 supporters over and above what Corporate Festool pays? Do you report it to the IRS?
Has the same "offline" source that advised you against the Walko workbench contest, advise you for this one? I dont see the difference and would be surprised this contest is ok but the walko one is not, for the exact same reasons.
Kind of like the Walko workbench contest that was cancelled.
I mean not for nothing, but at least with the Walko bench, there was every intention to account for every penny with none of the money going to profit.
You say you operate at a loss. How much of one? How do we know its a loss? How much have you taken in from the 2009 supporters over and above what Corporate Festool pays? Do you report it to the IRS?
Has the same "offline" source that advised you against the Walko workbench contest, advise you for this one? I dont see the difference and would be surprised this contest is ok but the walko one is not, for the exact same reasons.
Steve-CO, there was no extortion here. No one was asked for anything. No one was forced to do anything. Nothing was taken from anyone against their will. Extortion is pretty harsh, and should be retracted.
Wayne, I do not understand the persistence on this. The rules for the give-away were clearly stated up front by Matthew and he provided clarification when asked. Just because he did not structure the give away to include you (or me) or state the rules the way you would have, does not mean it was wrong. If Matthew wants to limit eligibility to FOG supporters with a K in their surname who live west of the Mississippi he has a right to do that. And whether or not he was subtly trying to encourage donations is not even relevant. He can if he wants to; there is nothing unethical or dishonest in doing so. Would it be wrong if Matthew made a profit? I hope he does. Being a forum administrator is time consuming and often thankless, case in point.
And who cares if Taunton is getting advertising from this? They are providing the prize, are they not? That is also not a reason the contest has to be open to everyone.
Wayne, I do not understand the persistence on this. The rules for the give-away were clearly stated up front by Matthew and he provided clarification when asked. Just because he did not structure the give away to include you (or me) or state the rules the way you would have, does not mean it was wrong. If Matthew wants to limit eligibility to FOG supporters with a K in their surname who live west of the Mississippi he has a right to do that. And whether or not he was subtly trying to encourage donations is not even relevant. He can if he wants to; there is nothing unethical or dishonest in doing so. Would it be wrong if Matthew made a profit? I hope he does. Being a forum administrator is time consuming and often thankless, case in point.
And who cares if Taunton is getting advertising from this? They are providing the prize, are they not? That is also not a reason the contest has to be open to everyone.
jonny round boy
Member
- Joined
- Jul 21, 2007
- Messages
- 3,227
I wholeheartedly agree with Bruce.
What Matthew has done is fine with me. I haven't donated any money, so I'm not eligible. Fine. I live in the UK, so even if I was a financial contributor, I probably wouldn't be eligible either. That's fine too.
Matthew didn't state anything about geographical restrictions (at least, I don't think he did) but I'm not starting a thread complaining about that, am I?
I believe he has already.
What Matthew has done is fine with me. I haven't donated any money, so I'm not eligible. Fine. I live in the UK, so even if I was a financial contributor, I probably wouldn't be eligible either. That's fine too.
Matthew didn't state anything about geographical restrictions (at least, I don't think he did) but I'm not starting a thread complaining about that, am I?
wnagle said:
I believe he has already.
Bruce,
At the risk of being persistent, I'll answer your comment to me.
I think I was clear that we should ask for donations. Nothing wrong with that at all. Just ask openly if thats the purpose. Matthew said that was not his intention or purpose in this CONTEST.
I personally am not looking to be included, I never said I was or made that complaint. If I wanted to be included I'd make a donation. However, as I stated once (or more than once) Listing this as a CONTEST and QUIETLY not mentioning the fact that its NOT a contest rather a gift to one of 22 people who gave money to the FOG, from a group of 6000, AND NOT OPENLY EXPLAINING THIS, and not stating the true purpose, is in my opinion an unethical omission. As I stated the information given was accurate, just incomplete. Your welcome to disagree.
If the information would have been completely explained, I and others would not have asked the question. The Contest posting remains incomplete... now thats being persistent.
If there is nothing suspect with this posting of the CONTEST, this conversation about THIS contest posting would not have been moved to another category under Fun, Games, Diversions Friendly competitions with a focus on tools! . Leave the questions and answers about THIS contest under THIS contest heading where all can read and comment.
The mention about Taunton Press receiving advertising is ok too. The point was made as comparison to Henriks raffling off a tool with no remuneration, and and any additional profit going to the FOG and that raffle being canceled. It was presented clearly and completely. $10.00 for a chance, nd the profits go to the FOG. If Taunton press is receiving advertising benefits from all members, all members should be included in the contest.
If Henriks raffling off a tool was questionable... This CONTEST was represented in a questionable way. My Opinion.
My intention was that maybe Matthew would put all of the information, clearly and completely in the original Contest post so that all who read, new members and old and lurkers would have complete understanding of intention and who and how to be included without having to read all the FOG history or this ridiculous debate.
What could be wrong with stating everything clearly, COMPLETELY, and honestly. I'm sure there is nothing to hide.
Also Bruce, I have made my point many times very clearly. And I have heard your comment about persistence and I promise not to make any more posts on this subject.
At the risk of being persistent, I'll answer your comment to me.
I think I was clear that we should ask for donations. Nothing wrong with that at all. Just ask openly if thats the purpose. Matthew said that was not his intention or purpose in this CONTEST.
I personally am not looking to be included, I never said I was or made that complaint. If I wanted to be included I'd make a donation. However, as I stated once (or more than once) Listing this as a CONTEST and QUIETLY not mentioning the fact that its NOT a contest rather a gift to one of 22 people who gave money to the FOG, from a group of 6000, AND NOT OPENLY EXPLAINING THIS, and not stating the true purpose, is in my opinion an unethical omission. As I stated the information given was accurate, just incomplete. Your welcome to disagree.
If the information would have been completely explained, I and others would not have asked the question. The Contest posting remains incomplete... now thats being persistent.
If there is nothing suspect with this posting of the CONTEST, this conversation about THIS contest posting would not have been moved to another category under Fun, Games, Diversions Friendly competitions with a focus on tools! . Leave the questions and answers about THIS contest under THIS contest heading where all can read and comment.
The mention about Taunton Press receiving advertising is ok too. The point was made as comparison to Henriks raffling off a tool with no remuneration, and and any additional profit going to the FOG and that raffle being canceled. It was presented clearly and completely. $10.00 for a chance, nd the profits go to the FOG. If Taunton press is receiving advertising benefits from all members, all members should be included in the contest.
If Henriks raffling off a tool was questionable... This CONTEST was represented in a questionable way. My Opinion.
My intention was that maybe Matthew would put all of the information, clearly and completely in the original Contest post so that all who read, new members and old and lurkers would have complete understanding of intention and who and how to be included without having to read all the FOG history or this ridiculous debate.
What could be wrong with stating everything clearly, COMPLETELY, and honestly. I'm sure there is nothing to hide.
Also Bruce, I have made my point many times very clearly. And I have heard your comment about persistence and I promise not to make any more posts on this subject.
Daviddubya
Member
- Joined
- Jan 22, 2007
- Messages
- 704
Bruce said:
Great - I qualify! ;D
This thread seems to be a whole lot of discussion over a very small issue. Personally, I think having a drawing (it is not a contest) for a free prize for people that have donated to the FOG is great. I would think that even if I were not a Supporter. This forum needs more financial support than it gets, and having drawing for Supporters is a good idea.
This kind of reminds me of posts by people who don't own any Festool tools and think they are way overpriced for the value.
My little website has all of 300 members. Costs not related to hosting and bandwidth are about $950/yr. Plus about 200 hours of my time. Matthew is managing a forum of over 6,000 people.
If all 22 contributors kicked in $50 (which is doubtful), it would still be a labor of love.
Even though sawmillcreek only asks for $6/yr, there's an occasional post from the 'conspiracy theorists' who are convinced the internet is free and the moderators are bathing in $100 bills.
Having a small contest that rewards supporters (especially when the enterprise supported is clearly not what could be considered profitable by anyone who owns a computer and has an interent connection) is 180 degrees removed from a lotto, where the contribution is specific to a contest.
Jim
My little website has all of 300 members. Costs not related to hosting and bandwidth are about $950/yr. Plus about 200 hours of my time. Matthew is managing a forum of over 6,000 people.
If all 22 contributors kicked in $50 (which is doubtful), it would still be a labor of love.
Even though sawmillcreek only asks for $6/yr, there's an occasional post from the 'conspiracy theorists' who are convinced the internet is free and the moderators are bathing in $100 bills.
Having a small contest that rewards supporters (especially when the enterprise supported is clearly not what could be considered profitable by anyone who owns a computer and has an interent connection) is 180 degrees removed from a lotto, where the contribution is specific to a contest.
Jim
Wayne, for clarification, I do agree with you that Matthews purpose could have been better served by not using the word contest. But I read the same post that you read and had no trouble understanding right away that it was a give away to FOG supporters, even though Matthew used the word contest. The title of the thread said GIVE AWAY and it was clear to me from his description that it was a give away to FOG supporters. However, while contest was not technically incorrect in the broadest sense of the word, I agree with you that contest was not the best choice of words. That is not what I disagree with you about.
Matthew Schenker
Member
- Joined
- Jan 15, 2007
- Messages
- 2,619
Good afternoon,
Bruce, you make a good point, although I wish something meant to be fun had not led to splitting hairs this way (actually we're splitting cells at this point).
I have changed the original post so it no longer refers to this as a "contest" in any form. It is now a "giveaway" throughout the post. I thought that by calling it a "giveaway" in the title, I was being pretty clear. The descripton of the contest also makes it pretty clear. The use of the word "contest" inside the post was meant in the more generic sense as an event in which someone in the end walks away with something he or she did not have before the event began. Strictly speaking, a "giveaway" is a type of "contest." Oh, and by "walks away" I do not necessarily mean walk, as in "use your legs." Someone may be "sitting" at his or her computer, or moving in some other type of "conveyance," upon receiving the prize.
Of course, these are the sorts of things that most people just intuitively know.
Thanks to Bruce, David, and Jonny for helping to clarify this for those who need additional explanation.
NOTE: Jonny, this "giveaway" is international.
Thanks,
Matthew
Bruce said:
Bruce, you make a good point, although I wish something meant to be fun had not led to splitting hairs this way (actually we're splitting cells at this point).
I have changed the original post so it no longer refers to this as a "contest" in any form. It is now a "giveaway" throughout the post. I thought that by calling it a "giveaway" in the title, I was being pretty clear. The descripton of the contest also makes it pretty clear. The use of the word "contest" inside the post was meant in the more generic sense as an event in which someone in the end walks away with something he or she did not have before the event began. Strictly speaking, a "giveaway" is a type of "contest." Oh, and by "walks away" I do not necessarily mean walk, as in "use your legs." Someone may be "sitting" at his or her computer, or moving in some other type of "conveyance," upon receiving the prize.
Of course, these are the sorts of things that most people just intuitively know.
Thanks to Bruce, David, and Jonny for helping to clarify this for those who need additional explanation.
NOTE: Jonny, this "giveaway" is international.
Thanks,
Matthew
