Adam Chlipala wrote: >No, our capacity choices for the new scheme are based on projections of >likely membership size in the next few years. We will be underutilizing >what we set up, so the actual usage of any particular member will be >trivial compared to all of the resources available. I think the amount >of unused resources will be several times larger than the amount of used >resources, meaning that any costs assigned based on real usage will be >insignificant compared to the remaining cost of unused stuff. Now what >to do with the rest? Ideally (and with the laws of physics tweaked), we >would charge them to future users now, but, since we can't do that, >splitting mostly evenly among current members seems reasonable, >_especially_ given the _tiny_ cost of an even share of the $750/mo. with >our current membership size. > >
Practically and philosophically, I also think that splitting costs, more or less evenly among members, is the best way to go. Justin _______________________________________________ HCoop-Discuss mailing list [email protected] http://hcoop.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hcoop-discuss
