Open Letter: Don’t make the Gear Swap for members only

Here is Ryan Jordans comments, from before the changes occured.:

2. If you can afford a membership and you get benefit out of the forums, then please consider subscribing. If you're freeloading and spending your coin on the latest Lady Gaga albums on iTunes, then you're not going to get a lot of sympathy from the "M"s when you try to advance your "the Internet should be free" argument, because everyone here who has an M or MLIFE next to their forum ID is subsidizing your entertainment. This site would not exist the way it does in a Marxist society.

3. If you can't afford a membership and you are getting benefit out of BPL and its forums, no sweat. You're always welcome here.

Kevin, most members want to keep it TOTALLY open too. But apparently that is not going to happen. Ryan was precocious in his acknowledgement that non paying complainers wouldnt recieve much sympathy from members.

Very few people here are so destitute they cannot afford 25/yr. And there are likely plenty of members too for whom $25 is too much to spend on a whim. But we all must choose what we spend our disposeable income on. Those that believe there is something good here to support, do that. Those that dont, dont. Its really that simple.

Regardless, no one wants anyone else to go away (at least as far as Ive been able to tell).

It was fun while it lasted, but honestly, if you use the gear swap forum so much, chances are it is worth the 25 bucks to support it and keep the lights on.

I like the gear swap, but I also like the community here. It's nice to have a place to discuss backpacking and gear in an intelligent and (most of the time) respectful manner. I feel that alone is worth 2 bucks a month (this coming from a poor grad student).

its like putting three fisherman on a PUBLIC RIVER FULL OF FISH and then telling two of them you can t fish here unless your rod cost over $100 its a public river but
you cannot have fishing rights either go buy a $100 rod or don t use this river

bpl is a public online forum right??? therefore in a lot of minds if you suscribe to a PUBLIC FORUM you should be able to accsess and use any thread in that public forum reguardless of which sub forum you decide to hand out in

SAME CONCEPT IF YOU ASK ME BUT ITS ONLY MY NON MEMBER OPINION and apperantly it doesnt mean anything anyway :(

divr6347

On a public river, you dont need a $100 dollar rod to fish.

But you DO need to buy a fishing license.

Ill leave it to you to figure out why.

Hint: the fisheries management is not free and must be paid for by somebody.

you do not have to pay to throw your line in the public river??? RIGHT!!!

I am totally serious about this.

If you are really cash strapped and can't afford a membership,(I've been there) I propose that members that can afford it – gift a 1yr membership. consider that a membership is less than one trip to a fast food joint per month, two starbucks coffees, 4 gas station coffees, 5 doughnuts, 2 netfliks.

If this is trully your reason, then please pm a member or post below.

Dave

I think this while "member vs non-member" thing is being blown out of proportion. For the record, I signed up for a membership to access articles. So whether or not the gear swap required a membership was a moot point for me.

The people who run BPL have decided that if you profit from the gear swap, you should also support it and the rest of the community. There should be no member vs non-member vitriol going on, or elitism. If you don't feel the gear swap is that important, then it's your choice not to pay for it.

Elitism isnt a matter of having an M next to yr name or not

It is the attitude that only the lightest or best gear will do, or only using UL techniques such as no toilet accessories, etc …

The "elitist" attitude affects both members and non members alike … Just witness those old rei or walmart threads … Or those threads where only the lightest, shiniest, UL gear will do

I remember not long ago when anyone mentioning the word fleece or synthetic would get derided by certain members and non members

The true elite are out there, likely sponsored, possibly unsung, definately too busy doing the sickest stuff to worry about bpl or any other forum arguments

Most of us are just pale imitations

There are "elitist" members and non-members on bpl, some on this thread and more concerned about winning an internet argument

Kevin and others propagating the elitist arguement:

I think you hold what is a common misconception. This is NOT a public forum. It is not government subsidized or paid for with your tax dollars. It is owned by a private interest. As a private interest, the owner(s) are able to make the rules as they see fit without your, my, or anyone else's input. This private interest has decided to set levels of access. Whether one elects to pay for more access/privileges is completely up to the individual. That choice makes you no better or worse than any other individual, it only affects your access to the site. The analogy to a public access river is not valid. A better analogy would be access to a privately owned lake where the owner chooses whether to allow you to fish.

Access to BPL was never a "right". It is a priviledge that was granted. It is unfortunate that certain priviledges were ever free in that now that the access level has been changed there has been bad feelings on the part of those who's access has become limited. But again, this is a decision that is well within the rights of the owner(s) of the site. And it is a decision available to all users of whether the access is worth the price. The individual always has the right to go elsewhere or start their own site where they get to make the rules.

Like Tony, I don't think the individuals decision in this regard says anything about the worth of their input in the forum in general. I have learned a lot from many users, members and not. I have, in the past questioned whether I felt I was getting my "money's worth". Bottom line, I like the forums here. I read many of the articles. I have sold items on gear swap a couple times. For me, I think, it is worth the price. But I cannot make that determination for anyone else.

My hope is that this bickering will stop and we can get back to the thing that brings us together in the first place.

"Amen" to that Brian and Tony, let's stop talking and go hiking!

Fishing licenses ensure that our limited freshwater fisheries are not fished to depletion — and that if and when that does happen, there is money in place to re-stock them. I can see the relation to server funds, but under the assumption that BPL is (or at least was) a business, I don't accept it.

Reading Ryan's post (and reading BPL Staff member Roger's dismissive comment) was enlightening. I had no idea that BPL had become a charity masquerading under the guise of a business. I am a fan of clarity, and only wish that "donations" were not sold under the false pretense of being a subscription to a magazine, which no one (including the owner, apparently) seems to believe that subscribers are buying. Just call it a donation and make the whole website members-only because the current "guest account" bull-oney creates an atmosphere that is obnoxious and aggravating to the guests. At the current rate, it's only a matter of time before BPL goes the way of the Practical Backpacking Forums, where every post (beyond the first few dozen words) is censored to non-members, and a heavy-handed moderator locks threads when they stray from the original topic.

I will add in one final appeal to Ryan or whoever calls the shots on this website: please use more advertisements on your website. Ad revenue keeps content free, free content attracts more users, and more users are better than fewer users, both in terms of the quantity and quality of expertise available at any given time for an on-going discussion. I think this would be a desirable thing for BPL. What do you think?

I honestly believe this entire argument could have been avoided had the original poster more carefully chosen his words.

Here is a quick example of how I believe it would have been more effective:

"To the staff and members of BPL –

I respectfully request that you reconsider the decision to restrict "For Sale" postings in the Gear Swap forum to members.

There are several advantages to allowing non-members to sell their lightly used gear in your forums. These include providing members and non-members with a greater amount of used UL goods from which to choose. Further, a robust Gear Swap will likely serve as the impetus for some to visit your website in the first place. While some may choose only to sell their gear a percentage of these visitors will undoubtedly be attracted to the quality content your website has to offer, and will choose to pay for the privileges of membership.

Those that do not become members may still choose to participate on your forums, adding their voices to the growing legion of UL and SUL backpackers. An active community can provide the inertia necessary for growth, help foster interest in the UL/SUL movement and create enough traffic as to make it viable for advertisement-sponsored content, if you choose that route in the future.

If there were a mechanism by which to earmark a portion of the proceeds from the sale of used gear to your website, I would gladly do so. This seems fair as it would help cover your costs associated with your business. As someone who only posts occasionally to Gear Swap and is on restricted budget, I believe this makes much more sense than to invest in a membership I will not use.

Thank you for consideration in this matter.

– The Original Poster"

I am all for having ads on BPL, however the balancing act will be keeping the perception that taking AD money will not bias the reviews.

I don't think that would happen….question might be, would having more ads offend people to the point of not signing up for a membership?

I don't think so….BPL thought long and hard before putting the ads that are on here now. They are tasteful and discrete.

If there was a way for BPL to get a small cut of the gear sold via the gear swap, that would be great too and therefore would open up the gear swap for everyone to use.

However, I am just not sure if AD revenue could bring in enough money to outpace the income from memberships.

In either case, it seems clear to me that priority one would be to change the content here to bring in more memberships and to continue to develop a stable of consistent advertisers to pay for Ads to supplement the income of the website.

Any other suggestions for bringing in revenue?

1. Memberships

2. Ads

3. Possible income from getting a cut of the sales from Gear Swap?

Problem that I see with #3 is that wouldn't this involve investing a lot of money and effort into creating a mini Ebay to capture that percentage????

Keep the ideas rolling in.

-Tony

Tony,
I applaud your efforts to keep things constructive in this thread. You asked for non member feedback with some specific questions, so here goes…
The thread regarding BPL's future and what people would like to see that occurred in the summer was also something informative and I contributed to it, so I won't repeat myself here.
What I find strange is that Ryan only issued a reply to members, which is like talking to the converted. I'm sure people on the fence like me would have liked to know about BPL's plans before we join up.
In general, you ask here and in another thread what would it take for non memebers to join. I can only speak for myself, but can summarize with one word: Content.
If you look at the home page, there is a banner sequence of five links. Three are for subscription or BPL promotional gift ideas, one review about ski bindings, and a mini article from the Tips book. That hasn't changed in over a week. If BPL is a magazine, this is pretty poor, especially if they are trying to lure people in to read and discover the site. No content there.
What has happenned in the last few weeks in just gear alone? Two new packs from GG, two from MLD, the new sleeping systems from ZPacks, new shoulder strap fixings from ZPacks, etc You get the point. Even small artiicles like 'first looks' would entice people to get into the site. Ads from the companies involved would keep the site free and provide continuity. If you are worried about objectivity, hey, there will always be people moaning about that. A good example of a site that functions like this is dpreview.com. Owned by Amazon, impartial reviews, scrupulous standing in the photo community, and FREE and making money for the owners and employees. It can be done, there's enough content out there for several articles a week here, not to mention interviews, trip reports by readers, international sections and comparisons in techiniques… I'm a journalism professor, I could go on.
Next look at the banner at the top of the page. The first link is to subscribe, next to the home page, next to a blog that doesn't exist yet, next to the articles that you need to be a member to read, then the forums, and last to the school offerings of BPL. Where is the content? it is already behind a pay wall. The forums are free, and will be according to Ryan's quote you provided, except they aren't, you have to pay to be a member to buy and sell on one, the gear swap, OK, now you've reduced the market to members with no obvious benefit to either seller or buyer, what was that all about?
BPL is a great place, but there's nothing worse than a good idea done badly (Ansel Adams).
Reading Ryan's response about his other blogs etc seems to me he doesn't know what to do with BPL, has tried other things, spread himself to thin and doens't want to take responsibility. No problem from me about that, I'm not perfect either, but I like to know what I'm buying before I plonk down the readies as a customer.
I'd like to see a mission statement about BPL's future, the content they will provide, and the direction they want to go. Right now it looks like a charity masquerading as a community that sells a school when it could be so much more. Hell, I've even offered to participate/contribute and heard nothing, so where's the motivation in that?
This is meant in a constructive way, and while it may sound critical to some degree, I think it won't get any response, just like my other two posts in this thread, as people don't seem to want to address wider issues collectively. (Except Dave T- thanks). So, I'll just keep browsing the forums for the real news, and infotainment, and let the site (d)evolve into what the owners want, whatever that may be.
cheers, Fred

It is very informative to hear other people’s constructive viewpoints and critiques of this site. For me, it is more than adequate for the required membership, as I enjoy the articles, gear reviews and tips. I am an old dog and my time is valuable. I don't like sifting though ads to find what I am looking for.

For example, my other passion is woodworking. I subscribe to an old school printed magazine (woodsmith) that does not contain ANY ads. It is packed cover to cover with projects, tips and how-to's. I pay $24 a year and I get one issue every other month. For me this is plenty and I have made many air loom pieces as a result of my membership. I have had other subscriptions, but let them go as my tastes/needs changed.

Please don't junk up this site with too many ads. The speed and volume of the articles may be one area of improvement, as I see in Ryan's post above. I would rather have quality articles than a breaking newsfeed type of site.

Thanks for keeping it civil.

Dave

wow, you are really new to the internet aren't you. you don't need to "SIFT" through ads. They sit quietly in the gutter (that is those giant white and grey columns there over on the right and left taking up 50% of the screen) So, i'm not sure exactly what would be going on but you need to see more forums

Also, Ads should create no more bias on reviews than the reviewer getting the gear for free like they already do. so if that is an issue then the integrity of the reviewer.

RC has banner ads from Backcountry.com.

Mountain project has no ads on their forum only on the home page, photo section and route database.

Ditto David re everything he said — civil, constructive comments/criticism of BPL's future is great, and please, no ads cluttering up the site.

Seems to me that a model primarily dependent on funding from membership would be more responsive to members' interests compared to a model based on ad revenue (and good-will) of commercial interests committed to profit.

Not to disparage profit or highly commercialized gear, but keeping BPL ad-free, or at most ad-unobstrusive, provides a welcome oasis for substantive content.

I've followed BPL since BPL's earliest "non-membership" days. The Arc quilt was one of my first purchases for "going light" after I learned about the Arc — as well as benefits/techiques for "lightening up" — from reading early articles at BPL.

BPL is and has been a great resource for me, as have the postings on gear, trips, and techniques by many others once the forums were introduced.

I agree, too, with Fred that "content" is key. I see BPL as going through some growth pains as it adapts to matching (and maintaining) its value as a resource to the increasing demands of diverse interests.

I, too, hope BPL's fundamental value as a great resource isn't overlooked, or lost, because of a lot of rant and rage.

Lighting a candle beats cursing the darkness.

You would rather have giant blank space than profitable pictures in the gutters.. wow. you guys really are from the dark ages. news flash.. you don't even need to click ads for them to create $ they go by page views.

i showed a friend who is in the computer/internet business and laughed at how old this platform is and how easy it would be to upgrade if someone actually wanted to put in a tiny amount of effort.

just make this place members only then watch it fizzle out. Someone with a better idea how to run a business will step up and fill the void.

Tony,
Perhaps with a more civil outlook on things I can venture another opinion on enhancing the site per the OP's wishes and also drawing more members.

Ads? Well, I come here mostly for the articals and forums. Ad's are what drives me away from sites.

Perhaps the biggest factor contributing to the lack of membership is the economy. Everyone, generally speaking, has less disposable income. UL people are kinda out at the fringes of the camping community, soo, one of the first things that can get dropped is costs ascociated with it. People still go camping, after all, it is a low cost activity, generally. As an example only, "I do not need a 8oz Cuben tarp when a 14oz Silnylon tarp is still usable" is the attitude. Of course you get a range of people that can and do still buy new gear, just not as much as they used to. Same for membership. I would not have a membership, except I was undecided to reup, despite the value of the site's stuff. My wife said go for it as a Christmas present. This is a good idea and is well presented on the front page.

There are fewer people interested in hiking. Less population interest means less people at the fringes. Unfortunatly, more people are simply NOT in my woods., though some areas remain about the same or even increased in popularity. NY state parks are a good example of those more heavily used. Trails are less heavily used. As are deep woods canoe trails and longer distance trails. People like to hike for a day, it simply isn't in their interest to hike for a week. Perhaps the articals should diversify in content to fit the newer audience? Hence providing more value to these types of more mainstream hikers?

You mentioned charging to use Gear Swap. This was discussed and found to be an expensive option to implement. It may well be a truely viable alternative. Again, because of the fringe nature of light weight hiking(one of my hiking buddies still thinks I am a bit wonky,) Charging for sales might indeed be an option. But, I suggest a simple aproach to minimize any programming/implementation costs. Perhaps a simple charge per ad (up to 3 items) form rather than the forum like posting that currently exists. Questions to the poster, via PM, all exchanges to the poster. And, an automated removal of the Gear Swap ad after a few days. Cost, is required as is condition and general description, including weight. A sugestion only. Perhaps we can entice more non-members to the site, and, decide if they want to join. Maybe not… 3-4000 is a lot of money in programming and could well go into forum upgrades. Unless somebody wanted to do it for no charge as a test solution.

I suggest that more questions be posed. Often, it is difficult to write about "things." Determining a main subject, organizing a plot line, performing tests, evaluating gear, conclusions, and opinions. There is a HUGE body of knowledge out here. Asking a single very specific question, then publishing the best answers chosen by a group of staff, lifers, members and/or non-members chosen for some demonstrated expertise related to that question. Again, Content->readers and Readers->members. This is a Magazine, after all.

Anyway, my thoughts only . . .
jdm

I too have been driven away from other sites in the past by ads.

When you become dependent on advertisers, you become subservient to them. Any attempt to honestly review gear or services from an advertiser is a conflict of interest, and results in either watered down reviews, or even in some cases, glowing reviews of poor products.

Censorship of forum discussions about products is also frequently a side effect. Often as well as censorship of any post which references any competing websites.

Open, uncensored review and discussion of ultralight gear and its use is the reason why people come here.

It seems to me that over the years Backpacking Light has tried to be several things and maybe some goals are not compatible with others.

1. Is it a non-profit membership controlled organization?
There are membership dues so it fits that criteria.
It's not non-profit but according to voices here the profit seems to be very meager so maybe it straddles the definition there.
What has also been made clear here is that the members do not have membership rights in the form of voting on leadership, financials or direction of the organization.
So it doesn't pass muster on the last point of definition.

2. Is this a subscription based online magazine?
If we call the membership fee a subscription it fits the definition rather nicely.

3. Is it an online community?
Most definitely, and an intelligent, gracious and generous one at that.

These three goals of BPL seemed to co-exist if not perfectly then at least workably for several years. It no longer does because:

1. Changes were introduced that were not vetted with the membership (introduction of ads earlier this year and now restriction of forums.)
The membership reacted: "Hey we are members, doesn't that count for something?"

2. The restriction of the Swap forums feels like only the first step to restricting the forums to paying members only. This would shrink the community from large, active and growing one to something else entirely.

Where does Backpacking Light want to go from here?
1. It could expand the content for the online magazine and try to survive as a truly subscription based service.
2. It could upgrade the forum software, get advertising revenue, and run a professional but free forum website for the Backpacking Light community.
3. It could turn itself into a true membership organization where leadership, financials, and decisions are turned over to the paying members.

So to question goes to Ryan Jordan: Where do you want to take it for here?

Especially as providing some "big-picture" context/contrast for issues in current threads on BPL's past-present-future, conflicting perspectives, and civility, the thread at the link below concerning the "value" of the Backpacker Gear Guide and evolution of its print magazine has many thoughtful, well-spoken comments:

http://tinyurl.com/What-To-Do-Or-Not-Do

I wouldn't characterize the decision to limit advertisement as akin hailing from the "Dark Ages." I have no insight into the decision process, or if a decision regarding advertising was ever made, or if it was just one of those things that evolved over time. I agree with James – the economy and focused appeal of UL backpacking does present its own challenges. Including, I suppose, its appeal to niche segments of the the sporting goods and clothing universe. The question that I think we all have is what are advertisers willing to pay to reach this narrow focus? And what is the spending power of backpackinglight.com readers? And how often do they spend?

There are other considerations to advertising. Management costs, bandwidth usage, and most certainly, editorial control. It is difficult to remain impartial in the wake of advertising. Advertisers often have influence on all but the most powerful and well-funded publishers, if for no other reason than publishers depend on advertisements. (In the interest of full disclosure, I was a newspaper journalist for several years and still have many associates in the field. Editors mostly do resist advertising interference.)

From a purely aesthetic consideration, I recall the advice of graphic designers: "white space is your friend." You don't need every square inch of a web page, newspaper, magazine or packaging covered by competing messages. Rather, judicious use of white space focuses the eyes to what is important. A great example of this is Apple. Their packaging designs are simple, uncluttered and highly effective. To this point, Jake made the case for advertising that were not overly intrusive.

I appreciate the civil discourse. It makes for a more thought-provoking discussion than does recrimination.

Dirk

deleted

I would suggest that instead of advertising (pay per click, trying to sell ad space, etc.) that BPL reach out to companies to seek out sponsorship for the forums. I would imagine that the costs associated with the forums are somewhat fixed and it would seem like that would be a way to offset the forum costs and ensure that the contributing companies adhere to the BPL mission. Plus it could help defray expenses and maybe allow BPL to get back to its mission. I would be happy to help sponsor the continuation of the forums from a business perspective (putting money where mouth is). I would imagine that there are other gear companies that would be willing to do the same.

Secondly, the real problem with BPL and generating continuing income is the fact that the magazine/site is too niche. I am not a member because, well, I am not an ultralight backpacker (heresy, I know). I am most definitely a backpacker, just not an ultralight backpacker. While there is a welcoming attitude by the majority of the folks on this site, there are cases of over the top proselytizing. There isn't anything right or wrong with that, it just makes those of us that aren't UL, SUL, XUL etc, not very likely to sign up for a membership. My suggestion would be to broaden the appeal in some shape or form…although many may not agree with that.

Finally, the value proposition is not apparent. With a print magazine, at least I know that 9 times a year, Backpacker will show up in my mail box. I enjoy reading it, even though I may not agree with everything in it. I am also a member of the WA Trails Association. They have great guides and trail reports on their site, and I receive a magazine from them. Also, I see all of the great work that they do maintaining trails. Access to old BPL articles and a trickle of new material isn't all that compelling compared to the apparent value by other membership driven or subscription based backpacking orgs. Many people point to the value of the forums, however, those are offered for free, and if they weren't there are plenty of other places to go to discuss backpacking, especially for those that aren't part of the ultralight crowd. All of the questions about the relative health of the BPL is also concerning.

All of that having been said…Ryan Jordan, you have my email address. I am willing to help. I would love to hear other gear company owners chime in.