RealJock for $60

  • OutdoorAdvent...

    Posts: 361

    Aug 15, 2009 2:38 AM GMT
    I joined RealJock on September 6, 2007, which I think makes me one of the early members. In those less than two years, RJ has gone from all members being able to view everyone who has viewed their profiles, to viewing only the last two members who have viewed ones profile unless joining (for $60), to not being able to view anyone who has viewed ones profile unless joining. Other features of the site that were also not charged for one now must pay for. My income is modest, and for that and other reasons I try to live modestly. I understand that there are costs of running a site like this, and am happy to contribute, though feel I'm gradually being squeezed out unless I put a $60 charge on my credit card every 12 months, and maybe being a bit manipulated to do so. I think many things distinguish this site from others where gay guys meet. Voluntary financial contributions from members no longer does. What do y'all think about this?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 15, 2009 4:07 AM GMT
    It's annoying. I can't stand sites where everything you click asks you for money. If they go too far, the site will lose popularity so I think it's a balancing act.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 15, 2009 4:07 AM GMT
    OutdoorAdventurist saidI joined RealJock on September 6, 2007, which I think makes me one of the early members. In those less than two years, RJ has gone from all members being able to view everyone who has viewed their profiles, to viewing only the last two members who have viewed ones profile unless joining (for $60), to not being able to view anyone who has viewed ones profile unless joining. My income is modest, and for that and other reasons I try to live modestly. I understand that there are costs of running a site like this, and am happy to contribute, though feel I'm gradually being squeezed out unless I put a $60 charge on my credit card every 12 months, and maybe being a bit manipulated to do so. I think many things distinguish this site from others where gay guys meet. Voluntary financial contributions from members no longer does. What do y'all think about this?

    Yeah, I think what initially attracted me to this site is that it offered a lot of things for free, while other sites charged for it. Stuff like.. private pics, hidden email address, who viewed me, and a few other things.

    Like other websites, RJ needs to make money to keep things going, and advertiser revenue alone just doesn't pay the bills sometimes. I can foresee all the free features gradually disappearing. I think next will be the private pics. That's a very useful and wanted feature, and RJ can/will use that as leverage to get more Supporters.

    But really, $60 a year isn't too bad. And you're not forced to pay it. The essential features of the site are still free. Honestly, I don't care who viewed me. And there are ways to send each other attachments outside of the site. And I have enough t-shirts, so I don't need one from RJ. icon_lol.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 15, 2009 4:12 AM GMT
    xrichx said And I have enough t-shirts, so I don't need one from RJ. icon_lol.gif


    But you'd look so great in one, I think. Anything for that matter.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 15, 2009 4:40 AM GMT
    I'm sorry to hear about your job loss. I thought part of the stimulus package was supposed to extend unemployment benefits. Have you looked into that?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 15, 2009 5:27 AM GMT
    Chaaxwvn said
    xrichx said And I have enough t-shirts, so I don't need one from RJ. icon_lol.gif


    But you'd look so great in one, I think. Anything for that matter.

    icon_biggrin.gificon_biggrin.gificon_biggrin.gif
  • Koaa2

    Posts: 1556

    Aug 15, 2009 5:42 AM GMT
    OutdoorAdventurist saidI joined RealJock on September 6, 2007, which I think makes me one of the early members. In those less than two years, RJ has gone from all members being able to view everyone who has viewed their profiles, to viewing only the last two members who have viewed ones profile unless joining (for $60), to not being able to view anyone who has viewed ones profile unless joining. Other features of the site that were also not charged for one now must pay for. My income is modest, and for that and other reasons I try to live modestly. I understand that there are costs of running a site like this, and am happy to contribute, though feel I'm gradually being squeezed out unless I put a $60 charge on my credit card every 12 months, and maybe being a bit manipulated to do so. I think many things distinguish this site from others where gay guys meet. Voluntary financial contributions from members no longer does. What do y'all think about this?


    I think it is a sign of things to come everywhere on the net. Business realizes that they can make a few bucks, so they are going to start charging where they can.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 15, 2009 6:00 AM GMT
    Christian73 saidI'm sorry to hear about your job loss. I thought part of the stimulus package was supposed to extend unemployment benefits. Have you looked into that?



    I know that is true for North Carolina. I lost my job last September and have been on unemployment since then. Just received notice that mine is being extended another 3 months. Fortunately, I am finally getting some calls and hits about my resume'. I have a couple of interviews next weeks.

    I am a supporter of Real Jock. I decided to become one to support the community and to help essentially to keep the website free, as possible after I was a member for about 6 or 7 months. I appreciate the RJ Gods, but I have never understood how someone can be a supporter yet not be verified. Doesn't make since to me.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 15, 2009 6:09 AM GMT
    I will starve myself for a week to be a supporter
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 15, 2009 6:37 AM GMT
    I am a supporter or I was.. not sure if I still am, I got the longest one, free t and all and then left before my supporter thinger was over hahaha so whiiile I was a supporter then I'm no longer carrying the badge.. probably over now though
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 15, 2009 7:42 AM GMT
    OutdoorAdventurist saidI joined RealJock on September 6, 2007, which I think makes me one of the early members. In those less than two years, RJ has gone from all members being able to view everyone who has viewed their profiles, to viewing only the last two members who have viewed ones profile unless joining (for $60), to not being able to view anyone who has viewed ones profile unless joining. Other features of the site that were also not charged for one now must pay for. My income is modest, and for that and other reasons I try to live modestly. I understand that there are costs of running a site like this, and am happy to contribute, though feel I'm gradually being squeezed out unless I put a $60 charge on my credit card every 12 months, and maybe being a bit manipulated to do so. I think many things distinguish this site from others where gay guys meet. Voluntary financial contributions from members no longer does. What do y'all think about this?


    I wrote to them and said the same thing. Not only didn't they do anything, but never even answered my message. icon_sad.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 15, 2009 7:51 AM GMT
    you all do know that running a site like this isn't cheap.. at all.. in anyway..

    It takes both masses amounts of time and money to keep something like this alive and running.

    Servers (and RJ will either have more then one, OR something incredibly powerful) which I'm willing to bet are owned by the owner/s of RJ

    Colocation costs, which pays for a place in a rack in a server farm that lets it connect to the internet.

    Bandwidth costs, thankfully today, most just charge you by the gig not by speed

    Then there is the people.

    Person or People who maintain the website, develop new features, track down bugs, design things..

    Writers who write the articles you all read, including photographs in the articles

    Then the owner/s would need to be paid, even if they don't do any of the things listen they'd be managing all of that AND dealing with advertisers, legal bullshit, complaints, so on and so on.

    And while this website as advertising I wonder how many of you actually click on them and buy something from them?

    Whist I understand some people can not afford it due to what ever life concerns and they should be allowed to access the forums, profiles and so on without being charged, the simple fact is, this place isn't put out for free, it costs money and the owner/s should be allowed to monitise this place as best they can.

    In fact there are things they could do a lot better that would let them make more money, but they don't and the few things you can't access as a none paying member aren't that important in the whole grand scheme of this website.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 15, 2009 10:31 AM GMT
    I can honestly tell you after running a wrestling website (see profile) for 14 years that A LOT of time and effort and money goes into keeping it running and dealing with members. I was smart when I started mine back in 1996; I started charging from the get-go. Nobody in their right mind would deal with beligerent members for free, no matter how much you enjoy the subject your site is about. Still, mine is only $2 a month.

    The reasons sites start out free and then gradually cut-off features unless you pay is because LAZY CHEAP BASTARDS DON'T SUPPORT THEM, or they are too costly.

    icon_lol.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 15, 2009 1:12 PM GMT
    The "Who Viewed You" feature is vastly overrated. So what if So-and-so visited me.

    Now they tell me how many people have viewed my profile in the past month. Is this a burning statistic that somebody wanted to know?

    And they are telling me how many profiles I have visited.

    What's the point of all this data....without graphs and charts??????. ...I need statistical analysis to be able to make future projections and decisions so I can make educated decisions about how to invest my profile pursuing time in this Man Market.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 15, 2009 1:22 PM GMT
    Caslon12000 saidThe "Who Viewed You" feature is vastly overrated. So what if So-and-so visited me.

    Now they tell me how many people have viewed my profile in the past month. Is this a burning statistic that somebody wanted to know?

    And they are telling me how many profiles I have visited.

    What's the point of all this data....without graphs and charts??????. ...I need statistical analysis to be able to make future projections and decisions so I can make educated decisions about how to invest my profile pursuing time in this Man Market.



    lol creepy
  • OutdoorAdvent...

    Posts: 361

    Aug 15, 2009 4:26 PM GMT
    My impression is that gays are, generally speaking, politically progressive. Yet, setting the cost to fully participate in the RJ community as the same for everyone, regardless of ability to pay, is not, and makes us less of a community. To bring the site more in line with the values of many of its members, I suggest the cost of membership for an individual be based upon his ability to pay:
    No charge for those living below the federally established poverty level, which for an individual with no dependents is presently $10,830;
    $20 for those whose income is between the poverty level and twice the poverty level, say $22,000;
    $40 for those whose income is between two and and three times the poverty level, say $33,000;
    $60 for everyone else.
    People, of course, could contribute more, perhaps to help subsidize the membership of those less well off.
    Obviously, the workability of the above proposal would depend upon the honesty of members, though that's hardly a revolutionary proposal either.
  • silverfox

    Posts: 3178

    Aug 15, 2009 5:58 PM GMT
    I find it interesting that of all there is on RealJock....the articles, the exercise programs, the forums the chats etc......

    This "who viewed me recently" feature is that big of a deal?

    I mean, so someone viewed you. They have the opportunity to speak up (so to speak) and write you if they are interested in you...yes?

    On Myspace and Facebook do they have "who viewed me recently?"

    I think they do have on sites like Manhunt and Big Muscle...but then again...in both cases you would pay for that feature. Adam4Adam is a free site and you do not have that feature.

    I empathize with those out of work (hey I am a Realtor so technically I am with you except I don't get unemployment benefits), but people pay for sites that in my humble opinion offer much less than RJ, and if the "who viewed me recently" feature is that important to you....well maybe you should ask yourself...

    Why?

    PS...I do agree about the tee shirt. IMHO who needs it and if it can cut down on subscription costs I think most would appreciate that.
  • HndsmKansan

    Posts: 16311

    Aug 15, 2009 6:18 PM GMT
    Let me say I'm a proud supporter and paying $30.00 every 6 months is a bargain based on the friendships and information I get here. I have no qualms about it.

    Guys, if you don't use the information or don't find it valuable, don't pay.
    Now, if you pay and RJ officials aren't prompt about your question.... thats a reasonable complaint. In this day and age, you have to be prepared to pay for some things that might have been free initially.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 15, 2009 8:30 PM GMT
    icon_lol.gificon_lol.gificon_lol.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 15, 2009 9:07 PM GMT
    the plural of pic is pics, not picĀ“s.

    icon_rolleyes.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 15, 2009 9:19 PM GMT
    OutdoorAdventurist said I suggest the cost of membership for an individual be based upon his ability to pay:
    No charge for those living below the federally established poverty level, which for an individual with no dependents is presently $10,830;
    $20 for those whose income is between the poverty level and twice the poverty level, say $22,000;
    $40 for those whose income is between two and and three times the poverty level, say $33,000;
    $60 for everyone else.

    And are you suggesting that we all fill out little RJ tax returns? Do we get writeoffs for dependents, amortization and depreciation, and business expenses?
    Somehow I don't see this happening.
  • OutdoorAdvent...

    Posts: 361

    Aug 15, 2009 9:24 PM GMT
    TexDef07 said
    OutdoorAdventurist said I suggest the cost of membership for an individual be based upon his ability to pay:
    No charge for those living below the federally established poverty level, which for an individual with no dependents is presently $10,830;
    $20 for those whose income is between the poverty level and twice the poverty level, say $22,000;
    $40 for those whose income is between two and and three times the poverty level, say $33,000;
    $60 for everyone else.

    And are you suggesting that we all fill out little RJ tax returns? Do we get writeoffs for dependents, amortization and depreciation, and business expenses?
    Somehow I don't see this happening.


    As I suggested above...

    "Obviously, the workability of the above proposal would depend upon the honesty of members, though that's hardly a revolutionary proposal either."
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 15, 2009 9:27 PM GMT



    Good gosh Brandon_ what happened? You were pretty darn nice when you got here......


    ...oh, and mooo to you x 2, as we're older than TheGuyNextDoor.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 15, 2009 11:10 PM GMT
    OutdoorAdventurist saidMy impression is that gays are, generally speaking, politically progressive. Yet, setting the cost to fully participate in the RJ community as the same for everyone, regardless of ability to pay, is not, and makes us less of a community. To bring the site more in line with the values of many of its members, I suggest the cost of membership for an individual be based upon his ability to pay:
    No charge for those living below the federally established poverty level, which for an individual with no dependents is presently $10,830;
    $20 for those whose income is between the poverty level and twice the poverty level, say $22,000;
    $40 for those whose income is between two and and three times the poverty level, say $33,000;
    $60 for everyone else.
    People, of course, could contribute more, perhaps to help subsidize the membership of those less well off.
    Obviously, the workability of the above proposal would depend upon the honesty of members, though that's hardly a revolutionary proposal either.

    you don't see to get it.. YOU don't have to PAY to be a member here, you are free to be a member without paying a cent..

    You can access all the features of this site that make it a great site, forums, articles, profiles, private photos..
  • OutdoorAdvent...

    Posts: 361

    Aug 15, 2009 11:35 PM GMT
    lilTanker said

    you don't see to get it.. YOU don't have to PAY to be a member here, you are free to be a member without paying a cent..
    You can access all the features of this site that make it a great site, forums, articles, profiles, private photos..

    I don't seem to get what? What's important to you?
    I'd guess "Who Viewed Me Recently" is a popular feature, perhaps the most popular, and that's why we now have to pay ($60) for it.
    Let's keep sight of the topic with which this forum began...that charging everyone the same price to use all the features of RJ is not egalitarian. A consequence will no doubt be that some of the less financially well off among us are now unable, and others less able, to take advantage of all the site has to offer.
    My proposal is to set the site up on a sliding scale, based on an individual's income. The system would depend here, as in many other places where it's used, on the honesty of members. Both financially contributing what one is able and honesty are ingredients, I believe, of a real community, in this case a real jock community. I suggest the owner try it. If he takes a financial hit, or more of one than he can afford, then I think it'd be fair to revert to everyone paying the same to (fully) participate.