Somewhere, someone pays for what's on the net, that is seemingly "free."
If you use it, don't think it's just availaable for the taking thereof.
Even if it's "only" time, the moderators, the site caretakers, folks like that give of their time, but time is not free.
What those folks give is time they could use more productively to gain a salary (definition: an exchange of product for money.)
We all have to live.
So, when the plea for remuneration comes, please don't treat it as a big surprise, like you thought you were being supplied those services because you were such a nice person.
Maybe you are, but that and $2.50 will get you a cuppa tea.
Rob Studdert wrote:
On 10 Apr 2004 at 23:47, John Francis wrote:
I am quite strongly opposed to the idea that pug submitters should be coerced in any way to pay for the privilege of submitting images. The suggestion that the PUG is for the benefit of the submitters, rather than for the benefit of the pdml as a whole, irks me.
As has been pointed out, the two are not related by specific ties. They exist separately.
How is the suggestion of possibly being asked to pay for services rendered coercion?
keith whaley
The PUG and the PDML aren't currently intimately linked, my guess is that there are plenty of PUG submitters who aren't and have never been PDML subscribers. Associating the gallery and its URL with pdml.net is a great idea regardless of the host location.
Some one has to pay something unless a free space and BW can be secured, your suggestion seems very gracious, I'm sure no one would mind if it were free (but surely someone has to pay somewhere down the line?)
Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998
