Finding the right balance between paid memberships and open membership is important.<div><br></div><div>I agree with John Bradley's sentiment about the piper and the tune he/she plays, but I'm not quite sure we're making rock music that people want to really listen to yet. That is, people may want or benefit from the efforts of this group, community, and the foundation, but may not be willing to fund or promote its development, because the outcomes of our work seem ephemeral or too far away from their day-to-day experience to know what membership means, or why it might be important.</div>
<div><br></div><div>Furthermore, without more clearly articulating the "value proposition" of the foundation to members, it's hard to quantify how much membership might really be worth to regular members. Being able to vote in the elections is certainly a nice benefit, but the last vote we held had something like a 5% turn out? Even those who are paid up don't seem interested (or aware) that they've paid for a vote.</div>
<div><br></div><div>We've also made little to no progress on improving the OpenID libraries, and how easy it is to implement or support OpenID — and our branding story is all over the place. So while the government effort has been something of a win, it's been at the expense of more near-term and tangible benefits.</div>
<div><br></div><div>Thus, in order to diversify where our income comes from, we must be able to show value that's worth paying for, and then articulate that to the membership. This is something that I believe Inventures is supposed to help us with (i.e. growing the membership), but I've seen little movement in that direction.</div>
<div><br></div><div>Curious what other [current] members see as the value proposition of being an OIDF member?</div><div><br></div><div>Chris</div><div><br></div><div> <br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, Nov 24, 2009 at 12:40 PM, John Bradley <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:ve7jtb@ve7jtb.com">ve7jtb@ve7jtb.com</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">Allan,<br>
<br>
I don't have the numbers but I suspect that individual memberships are a very small part of the overall income.<br>
<br>
The majority of the money comes from the Sustaining Members who get board representation.<br>
<br>
I don't know that it is wise to put more of our eggs in that basket.<br>
<br>
The old saying "He who pays the piper calls the tune" should not be forgotten.<br>
<br>
As far as I recall large companies spend money to make more money, otherwise there shareholders get cranky.<br>
<br>
The large companies need to get something from there membership or it is not a good investment for them.<br>
<br>
So we need to make sure there is a value proposition for them to keep spending $50,000/year.<br>
<br>
We also need to consider what the foundation can be reasonably expected to accomplish other than being a steward of the IPR.<br>
<br>
Diversifying the funding would also be beneficial. A broader base of corporate members at $5K would be more stable.<br>
<br>
I know that ongoing legal costs related to the IPR take a big bite out of the annual budget.<br>
<br>
It may not be a popular idea but perhaps we could offload some of those costs to a partner SDO.<br>
<br>
It is not that I have any doubts about the commitment of our Sustaining members.<br>
Rather that I am concerned that unexpected events affecting only one or two of them would be enough to severely jeopardize the foundation.<br>
<br>
So yes a broader individual base, but also a broader corporate base.<br>
<br>
John B.<br>
<div><div></div><div class="h5"><br>
On 2009-11-24, at 4:15 PM, Allen Tom wrote:<br>
<br>
> On a related note, I think it would be a great idea to lower the membership<br>
> fees to $5 or even $1. As far as I know, the $25 membership fees are an<br>
> insignificant revenue source, and it's really only there to discourage<br>
> automated registrations of accounts. Making membership more inclusive and<br>
> accessible is definitely a good thing.<br>
><br>
> Allen<br>
><br>
> On 11/21/09 11:15 AM, "SitG Admin" <<a href="mailto:sysadmin@shadowsinthegarden.com">sysadmin@shadowsinthegarden.com</a>> wrote:<br>
><br>
>>> Are you a member of OIDF? If not I would like to invite you to join OIDF.<br>
>><br>
>> *facepalm* I hope you meant "will pay for his membership"; the OIDF<br>
>> is *not* a by-invitation-only group!<br>
>><br>
><br>
> _______________________________________________<br>
> general mailing list<br>
> <a href="mailto:general@lists.openid.net">general@lists.openid.net</a><br>
> <a href="http://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-general" target="_blank">http://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-general</a><br>
<br>
</div></div><br>_______________________________________________<br>
general mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:general@lists.openid.net">general@lists.openid.net</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-general" target="_blank">http://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-general</a><br>
<br></blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><br>-- <br>Chris Messina<br>Open Web Advocate<br><br>Personal: <a href="http://factoryjoe.com">http://factoryjoe.com</a><br>Follow me on Twitter: <a href="http://twitter.com/chrismessina">http://twitter.com/chrismessina</a><br>
<br>Citizen Agency: <a href="http://citizenagency.com">http://citizenagency.com</a><br>Diso Project: <a href="http://diso-project.org">http://diso-project.org</a><br>OpenID Foundation: <a href="http://openid.net">http://openid.net</a><br>
<br>This email is: [ ] shareable [X] ask first [ ] private<br>
</div>