On 11/29/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The sucking part is that it is unnecessary. I am not convinced there is > any significant reward. I'm am not convinced "green" hosting is going to > play a significant contributing factor to why someone chooses to host with > us. We already have a pledge system in place so we can pay for members > that don't exist. Why should we add to this? Aside from this, its the > principle of the matter.
My "principle of the matter" would be to do less harm to the environment. I realize that not everyone agrees. Ideally, there would be some sort of way to raise special funds towards this sort of "extra" expense, although obviously such a system would add a great deal of overhead itself. As for "green" marketing, all I can say is that if I was not already a member, that would certainly be a plus for me. There are people with environmental concerns, and such people would probably be more likely to join a co-op than the rest of the population (based on my experience with an IRL co-op here in Brooklyn). Notwithstanding that this is, in my opinion, the right thing to do regardless of whether it gains us new members or not. > > Thats fine. Lets call it what it is. Project: Fictitious Energy > Marketing Plan. Call me a horrible person, but I have no sense of moral > obligation to purchase feel good energy. Well, I do. This is not just a "feel good" policy, and to be honest, considering that no one except ntk is paying for this, its a bit unjustified to get upset or self-righteous about it. -Other rob -- Rob Linwood -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://rob.linwood.us/ _______________________________________________ HCoop-Discuss mailing list [email protected] http://hcoop.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hcoop-discuss
