next message in archive
next message in thread
previous message in archive
previous message in thread
Index of Subjects
that's all they are. There is a long discussion to be had here, but just one quick point: > IP with Network Package > - $1000 (to be negotiated depending on needs) > - above plus 20 email addresses > - 4 mailing lists > - contracted support (if necessary) > - org takes responsibility for email addresses >are, at most, at a 'future projection' stage. They're not even close to >anything that the CCN could at the moment advertise, invoice for, etc. >What is 'reasonable'? What does 'to be determined and enforced sometime in >the future' mean? What does 'takes responsibility for Email addresses' >actually entail? How does PPP support factor into these categories? What >does 'contracted support' actually involve? David Murdoch has just such an arrangement with the Halifax Regional Development Authority to provide just such a service -- dedicated phone lines, numerous organizational email accounts, shared file space, etc. It is a great example of a partnership and also of our very formidable capabilities. I think the other stuff will just have to fall in to the category of "we agree to disagree". At 12:00 AM 11/01/99 Monday, Christopher Majka wrote: >Greetings Peter! > >On Sun, 3 Jan 1999, Peter Morgan wrote: > >> Happy New Year! > >And to you! BTW, thanks for the fine and Xmas card! Started my wanderlust >juices flowing. ;-> > >> One more time (with gusto), as adopted by the Board as an interim measure >> until a representative IP committee can be established: > >I'm not sure where the notion that there is no IP Committee arose, >however, I simply don't subscribe to it. The IP Committee just met last >month (December 10) with eight members in attendance and regrets received >from six others (minutes at >http://www.chebucto.ns.ca/Chebucto/IP/Minutes/dec-10-98.html). Just >because the chair of a Committee leaves does not, in my view, mean that >the Committee ceases to exist. > >IP Training continues to work as before. The CNN Editors (13 members >strong) continues to work as before. All during the fall we have continued >to work on projects of our own design (Site Map, Featured IP, >administering current IPs, fixing bugs in the IP database, etc.) as well >as liasing with the Technical Committee and the Communications Committee, >etc. on mutual projects (FTP to IP directories, restricted-post mailing >lists, etc.). > >Apart from the Technical Committee the IP Committee seems to me to be the >next most active committee in the CCN. > >Further to this point the IP Committee discussed precisely the issue of >VDNs (as it has in the past) with the following conclusions (taken from >the minutes): > > There was considerable discussion of this topic, particularly the > rate structures that the Board of Directors is proposing to charge > our non-business IPs. The IP Committee was unanimous in its > conviction that a $400 annual fee was: > > Not what its understanding ever had been for this rate > structure. It was rather its belief that this fee should be a > one-time set-up charge; > > That it was excessive and would put this feature out of the range > of the vast majority of our current Information Providers; > > That it was out of keeping with what costs the CCN incurred in > implementing VDN's (i.e. the technical overhead in > implementing this was of a one-time nature: beyond that, > maintaining a VDN was scarcely more difficult than that any other > IP). > > A rate of $400 as a one-time set-up charge followed by a $100 annual > fee was floated as something which represented a much more > realistic fee for non-business IPs and which many felt was much > more apt to be 'sell-able' to our IP constituency. > >> NB: These are all ANNUAL FEES (why do I find myself shouting?) and I see >> their is no distinction for businesses > >Fine. We did, however, go through a whole process last spring (ratified, >it seems to me, at that time by the Board) which did create a separate >business IP category. In my view distinguishing between these two makes a >great deal of sense, given my sense of the economic means of these two >groups and thus of having a membership instrument to distinguish between >them. > >> Basic IP service: (what we currently offer) >> suggested minimum contribution of $50 annually >> limit on web space (to be determined and enforced sometime in the future) >> 2 mailing lists >> volunteer training and support >> other services as you could better iterate than I >> >> (WITHOUT resorting to shouting, I must point out that this means that IP's >> who currently do not pay anything, can continue not to pay anything. They >> will continue to receive all services they presently receive. How this can >> be construed as not affordable to an IP is beyond me.) > >No one that I know is arguing this. ;-> My concerns have pertained to >virtual domains and costs thereof. > >> IP Member >> - $200 >> - above with "reasonable" space >> >> (This is the category we want current IP's, which can afford to pay, to >> contribute at. This represents less than an individual would pay for a >> commercial account with far less benefits) >> >> IP Member with VDN >> - $400 >> - above plus: >> - VDN >> - organizational email address >> >> IP Member with Organization Package >> - $600 >> - above plus 10 email addresses >> - contracted support (if necessary) >> - org takes responsibility for email addresses >> >> IP with Network Package >> - $1000 (to be negotiated depending on needs) >> - above plus 20 email addresses >> - 4 mailing lists >> - contracted support (if necessary) >> - org takes responsibility for email addresses >> >> PPP access is offered to all IP's paying a membership ($200 or more) >> >> We could certainly publish this fee structure, although my sense is we want >> to have a discussion with potential users and an email link serves us well. > >But Peter, (equally without resorting to shouting ;->) these categories >are, at most, at a 'future projection' stage. They're not even close to >anything that the CCN could at the moment advertise, invoice for, etc. >What is 'reasonable'? What does 'to be determined and enforced sometime in >the future' mean? What does 'takes responsibility for Email addresses' >actually entail? How does PPP support factor into these categories? What >does 'contracted support' actually involve? > >Before we start to advertise such categories we need to exactly specify >what all these terms and conditions mean. Why would an IP buy a 'Member' >category f