Originally Posted by GRUNTERSDAD
Well for one the Kodak site is going to charge now for storing photos where previously it was free. I think if you do your research you will find many sites that are changing their policy. The economy is effecting everyone. And I don't think that MSNBC would put a propaganda piece in their website to promote Kodak.
But I think everyone is missing the main premise of the question. It's not how much can you afford to donate but if you could how much would you? "...how much would you be willing to pay to be a member of this site..." was the question.
A recent e-mail from Eastman Kodak Co. didn't lead to a Kodak moment for Vanessa Daniele. It got her angry.
On May 16, the company's Kodak Gallery online photo service will delete her picture albums unless she spends at least $4.99 by then and every year thereafter on prints and other products.
That's the new rule for people whose photos take up less than 2 gigabytes of space on Kodak's servers — enough for around 2,000 1-megabyte photos. People over that limit must spend at least $19.99 a year. And customers who signed up under the old rules won't be given a pass.
805 you can start reading the propaganda here.
Oh, okay, it didn't say MSNBC. But while we're on the subject of that, if you saw Jon Stewart's piece on Mad Money's Cramer...
To answer the question though, if Drummerworld did, hypothetically, become a subscription-service website, I simply wouldn't pay. I value this website very much, but not in the sense that I would pay for it. In fact, not only would I not pay for it, but honestly, and this goes for ANY website: Much less people would use it, and there would be many replacement sites open up, to which former users would flock.