h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Healthy discussions have alway been noted by the Towers - Lets hope they vote and add their views here with yours.
all the best
veggie

The one hope I had when H2G2 moved under the umbrella of the BBC was that it's financial worries were over. We could be sure of a thriving community without the commercial pressures of having to subscribe to it.

The other problem is that people visiting for the first time to H2G2 are often overwhelmed or it takes them a little time to get into the swing of things. With a subscription fee people wouldn't get the opporunity to see how things work before having to fork out some cash which, I would think, would vastly reduce the number of subscribers and probably the quality of future Guide entries.

The Researchers who are subscribed would eventually run out of things that they know a lot about and therefore the number of new entries would be reduced. I think that this can only be a bad thing in the long run.

Anyway, ramble over,

Rama

My opinion is this...
I considered my licence fee a total rip off. Then the beeb took over h2g2, and I have never been so pleased to pay it. I smile and wave as the cash goes out of my bank account once a month.
But yes, I would still pay to stay here. Although if it turns out that no one else would, there would be no one to talk to, so I would eventually give up.

Dont forget to click on the voting button Mina or your vote will not be counted

Have Fun
veggie

I have to say "nay".

Basically I wouldn't mind a small fee but actually PAYING the fee would be quite difficult. I don't have a credit card and I can't even have one for a few years. Very few online services accept other kinds of payment methods.

Hypothetically, what if BBC Online accepted cheques? Cheques are very rare in Finland. If I were to pay with one, my bank would charge me for an additional service fee of about £12, just for the one cheque. I'd say the total would be a bit too much for me.

*goes and votes*

My opinion is this...

I'd maybe be willing to pay but at the moment I can't afford it... ...I'd find myself in a very strange position if I was paying - I'd be paying them to be allowed to write and edit for them and while I would be gaining experience and benefitting from the community it would be strange...

The BBC has always made a selection of its content free for those living overseas. It's called world service, and it's funded directly from the government and not from the license fee.

Also please note that world service also broadcasts drama, entertainent (including specially edited versions of "Hitch Hikers Guide To The Galaxy"), and sport. The idea that only news should be free runs counter to this philosophy.

One way of part-funding BBC online would be for some of the BBC Online budget to come from that revenue stream.

Also, since BBC Online in effect promotes the English language and celebrates British culture, it seems reasonable to expect a contribution from the British Council (because promoting English and celebrating British culture abroad is their job).

Unless you could pay electronically...

I'm thinking of the new coke machines (like the one at Helsinki Vaanta Airport) where you can pay using your mobile phone.

Now that would be very Finnish

That would be a suitable solution.

In that case there would have to be some sort of system for registering that you have a TV license (in the UK) so that you do not incur extra costs.

Then we have the problem of a TV license covering a household, what if 5 people in the house all use H2G2?

Rama

I have voted 'Nay' because it's rather the other way round! The BBC should pay *me* because I'm hard working for them to *construct* what they are broadcasting around the world

Bossel

My opinion is this... In principle, no, but in practice I'm not too sure.

Actually Bossel - that's a darn good point!

Maybe us volunteers should be exempt

*runs away from *

No, *all* of us should be exempted. Scouting is work, but so is writing entries, and so is serving beer in virtual pubs, or writing Haiku poems. Everybody around here is building the BBC's place

Of course - actually my opinion is in fact exactly the same as Granny Wetherwax's

My opinion is this...
I doubt you would get the same community of volunteers assembled writing, assessing and sub-editing guide entries if it was felt that they were supporting a fee charging site.
Giving up your time for a free site for nothing is one thing, doing it and having someone else make a profit as a result is something else entirely.

$11.25 (£8) a month would be a bit too steep for me, but I would pay $5 a month for h2g2.

My opinion is this...

There must surely be some value to
the articles that we researchers write
--articles that we are giving to H2G2
and the BBC for free. There are a host
of researchers who do various other
tasks for the site--also for free.
Demanding money from researchers
might have the effect of driving them
away. Certainly, it would seem pointless
to keep writing free articles.....