itsme wrote:
Becky wrote: Pinecam is a for profit corporation that doesn't seem to be able to generate revenue over and above what is necessary to keep the site going.
Who said they are trying to? Was that Wayne's goal? Had he failed at it? I don't think so. But perhaps I'm wrong.
I wanted to help the community I chose to raise a family in. I never considered Pinecam something where I would make extra income. Anything I made, I put back in the site or saved for a rainy day when site revenue didn't meet monthly operating costs.
It doesn't really matter what my intention was in incorporating the site, since I haven't been involved in Pinecam decisions for more than five years. During that time, the Board of Directors have been at the helm and have their own intentions. There was a reason I decided to form a Board of Directors and a reason for incorporating. There was also a reason I took my leave from Pinecam management and eventually Pinecam itself. All the reasons are different.
My reason for incorporating was two fold: to avoid any personal legal liability for anyone connected with Pinecam as a volunteer (including myself). But, also to avoid any future personal financial tax liability as Pinecam began to grow. When an ad hoc Pinecam committee held a publicly announced meeting to discuss incorporation (at Sweet Fanny Adams), I went into the meeting thinking we would be a non-profit. However, several people, including the volunteer who drew up the incorporation papers suggested a for profit model was the better way to go -- avoiding a lot of paperwork and also allowing the Pinecam forum to continue. There are strict rules for non profits operating in that area, I was told. By becoming for profit, we were not bound by those rules. Had we become non profit, I suppose I could have written off all the time I put in on Pinecam. We had a designated secretary (Zeroe) who took detailed notes of the incorporation meeting and I believe he posted the notes on Pinecam, to let the members know what was happening and why. I know he sent them to everyone attending. I probably still have them somewhere. I do know the change to a board was discussed on Pinecam in the public forum. Before that meeting, when I considered forming a board of directors, we held a public meeting at the Elk Creek Fire station which was covered by the local newspaper (High Timber Times). At that meeting, I solicited public comment and input and asked for anyone interested in being on the board to contact me. After the board was formed and I passed the torch, the board came up with a different set of bylaws because the original ones were ambiguous in several areas.
To be honest, I was perfectly happy having Pinecam make only enough income to pay operating expenses. Up till then, I paid for everything out of my pocket. If ad revenue fell short, I made a public plea for funds, if there was a need I couldn't pay out of pocket -- like when the camera on my house died several times. As for making more money to help the community more, I concentrated on promoting volunteer opportunities to help the community. Money is nice, but getting personally involved is even better.
I am not a businessman. I'm an idea guy. I was approached by several people over the course of the 11 years I was there who wanted to use Pinecam as a model to start other community websites. The idea was that the Pinecam model would be franchised and I would benefit financially from the arrangement. I was never in it for the money and I had my hands full just with Pinecam as a hobby, so I turned down those business opportunities as they required even more work on my part. This was before I formed a board and after Kurt Boyer left and gave back his half ownership of Pinecam.
As I said in a previous post, I made a number of mistakes while running Pinecam. I also made some very good decisions. The fact that Pinecam continued to grow through it all and after I left tells me the good I did outweighed the bad.
I have learned a lot in how a local web business should be run from JMC. He has a vision that I never had and an approach to handling the customer that I don't believe Pinecam has ever embraced. I came over here because I was invited and asked for my input. Here, I was not a castoff. My years at Pinecam were seen as something of value by the management here. I hope I've helped them in some small way avoid some of the mistakes that were made with Pinecam and point out some of the opportunities that Pinecam missed.
For those who have mentioned that 285Bound seems to be a "copy" of Pinecam, including Xenon, I would point out that Pinecam itself is a copy of other websites in local communities. It's not like I invented the the section layout used by Pinecam's forum. I used ideas from other community websites in putting it together.
I used to joke that Pinecam is responsible for bringing so many people together around here -- and not just on Pinecam itself. It also brought people together on Club285, DSV, 285Freetalk. I've probably forgotten some websites. Even people that didn't like Pinecam got together because they shared a common bond. And Pinecam always had competition. It was never the only local website in town. When I started Pinecam I think there was a local BBS still operating along the corridor: Sharama or Shazam or something like that.
You'll notice I've stayed out this cross-site discussion up till now, but since the discussion started going toward what my motives were with the Pinecam, I figured I am the one who could best answer, since they were my intentions and not always publicly shared. That way, people don't have to guess. Other than answering here, I'm content to stay out of the online spotlight and finally enjoy other things that I neglected while devoting some much of my spare time to Pinecam.
I wish both sites the best in the future because they both serve the local community that I love.
it'sme, I see a future spot at Pinecam for you... perhaps as a moderator. Expect an email soon.