On Tuesday, November 11, 2008, 8:49:44 AM, Micah Anderson wrote: > "Jeff Chan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I think that SURBL is a valuable service, and I understand how it is > difficult to maintain such a service without resources. >> The funding is, by design, very moderate and will provide much needed >> support to sustain this initiative. > However, I believe that for non-profit organizations the funding model > is not moderate at all. Perhaps this is because of the unfortunate > decision to put non-profits into the same category as governments, which > typically are able to bring in much larger amounts of money. Or perhaps > it is a short-sighted view that non-profits all fall into the same > category of large, well-funded non-profits. While there are some that do > have resources available to them, a large majority of non-profits are > deeply struggling with resources and honestly I cannot imagine any being > able to afford the subscription rates that are listed for > non-profits/governments. I'm on the board of directors and am an > executive for three different non-profit organizations, and although > they all would be eager to contribute to SURBL, none of them could > possibly meet the funding bar that has been set. > The SURBL FQS is great, and it is appreciated that you have thought of > small charitable/non-profits with low email volume. However, I think you > are missing that there are small charitable/non-profits that can do this > volume on a extremely tight budget. > Micah Hi Micah, Thanks very much for the feedback. Does anyone know how many non-profits have more than 1,000 users (i.e., users with mailboxes)? The non-profit pricing is below ISPs and half that of regular end users. Cheers, Jeff C. -- Jeff Chan mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.surbl.org/
