Sythe Premium / VIP

You aren't opposing the idea of the rank, only the proposed perks by Sythe.

 

From what I understand higher donators don't get all of the cool features that "vip" would get? If that is the case kind of makes donators feel underappreciated. Assuming higher donators don't get some of the vip perks (correct me if i'm wrong), it is kind of silly for some of the $1000 donators to have to now purchase vip just to get the perks when they already donated so much and should be treated as royalty as is. If I was a $1000 donator I would now feel like i'm just getting milked for money. Personally I would prefer a revamped donation platform instead of adding in a completely different vip platform to go along with the already existing donation platform. I'm sure if these features were added into the donation perks more people would donate.

 

Yes, I'm opposing the rank because the rank because even without all the perks it would just be a copy of a "donor" title but just stated as "Very Important Person" because it's earned by paying on a monthly basis instead of a 1-time donation..... Without perks it just seems pointless and redundant ...

 

Big companies already have a massive advantage over everyone else. Go look at how often Bogla's thread gets bumped from people buying and selling gold.

I support this as a $300 Donator option. Just as we saw with The red monster advertising a website here that is just set to scam but due to the fact it's a website people think they can trust.

Could run into a lot of legal issues with this one.

 

@Kiro your use of the term "selfish" was probably not the best choice of words. It kind of comes off mean and distatsteful to normal users here. As you can plainly see, a lot of people here disapprove of the whole idea and you seem to be the only one defending it.

The point that we are trying to make here is that Sythe, at its core, has ALWAYS been a free platform to sell your virtual goods and it should STAY that way. People donate to give back to the community as a way of saying thank you. I believe that implementing a system such as VIP would hurt the community in the long run. How? Well like one person said above me, donors who have donated hundreds of dollars would feel milked at that point. Also, you would definitely have a separation between regular users and "VIP" users. Third, it just wouldn't be worth it. Fourth, the listed perks are really not all that useful

Lastly @Kiro, and I don't know WHY you keep combating this, the VIP rank would MOST DEFINITELY be looked at as a sign of respect no matter which way you slice it. Every long term user here thats been here over a year would agree that new members would see "VIP" and think it would be safer to trade with them versus the alternative.

 

The purpose of it is to support the site, just as is donating. Perks are given to add incentive for acquisition. The perks last as long as the subscription. I don't see how it disparages or comes off as more important than regularly donating. When you donate, the perks are permanent. Perhaps "sponsor" is a better term than VIP.

Who are normal users? Non staff? Non Donors?

A lot of people on this thread do disapprove of the rank. Here is the list of reasons I picked up:

- It's a carbon copy of the donor rank with an asterisk to it.

Sponsoring and donating are synonymous, yes. It's not a copy in the sense that it's not a one time payment and perks are not permanent.

- It disparages current donors.

In what way? Perks aren't permanent.

- It's not fair to current donors.

There has to be perks to incentive subscribing otherwise the probability of users buying into it drops significantly.

- Adding "another" fun rank is a bad idea.

It's not a fun rank, nor was SVU.

- Only big businesses could afford it.

Not true.

- It gives an edge in the market.

As it stands, the only proposal given that would give an edge is a decrease in waiting between bumps. With the current proposal, you'd still only be able to bump 3 times per day.

~~~

Me calling users selfish is not mean or distasteful. I see users looking at how it would benefit them, then basing their opinions from there. If your argument is that I'm wrong because I'm the only person defending the rank, then doesn't that make me selfless? I'm thinking of how it would support the site while still maintaining a favorable balance.

 

In some countries you need a license for hosting a gambling website.