[Foundation] A More Transparent Approach to Membership

The issue with current model of membership it isn’t transparent and maybe even unfair. Let me illustrate what I mean.

There is company A. They have a Gold Membership. They have 2 real contributors ( by which I mean forum, git or anything considered as a contribution by the foundation)

There is company B. They might be in a part of the world where 5000$ is a lot of money (Bangladesh, Nigeria, Ghana, Vietnam - you get the idea - these countries have tech savy people too) its is not an apple to apple comparison here in terms of value. But they have a team of 5 who are active in the community and are real contributors. They individually can get 5 individual membership 5* 200 = 1000$

We might not have people from these countries yet, but with the current way of membership we sure might be throwing an obstacle in front of techies in those region and their ability to monetize, grow and maybe even choosing another project to solve their customers problem.

So let me not just not point out what i feel is being unfair. Since this is an Open Source Community and we are doing everything to keep up with the Spirit of Open source

There is only one type of membership or “SEAT”.

Each Seat is say 200$.

Now listing priority is given to companies under whom there are fixed number of seats. Each seat occupied by a real contributor - contribution being anything what the foundation considers a contribution

Labels / Listing Priority / given based on number of seats under a company.

Gold Member = 25 seats ie 5000$
Silver Member = 7 seats ie 1400$

This is just the idea and can be rearranged as seen fit.

Now companies whose got money to support the foundation can buy 25 seats, but if they dont really have 25 members , the number of empty seats will be displayed in the Listing.

Now a group of techies in GHana group together to form a company and be 25 in number, they too will be granted Gold Label.

This is much more transparent and gives a better picture to people looking for service. This scenario doesn’t allow capital to foreshadow skill, but those genuinely interested to support the foundation with capital will be rewarded. And so do individuals whose got talent. They are placed on a fairer ground. i hope my idea is clear my articulation skills aren’t the best

What do you guys think?

1 Like

@vivek would love to have you as a member and initiate these discussions :slight_smile:

1 Like

I would like to add one point

Service Provider listing should show completed job, client feedback and ratings.

We can build platform alternative to upwork


@kolate_sambhaji rating if any should be based on contribution and not what customer thinks. Comment boxes can be allowed perhaps.Customers can fill in their issue working with them/company. Like people looking for service providers can be perhaps warned of the talented but hard to work with contributor. eg linus of linux who is known to be very rude and hard to work with.

1 Like

Well …I think all solution can be arguable …as first thing the company that are not able to pay for gold or silver fee …would go for personal membership and pay …let’s say 600$ for 3 personal membership .is better than nothing …

1 Like

@vivek good suggestion, for rating we can add formula like
rating = (contribution + client feedback + active forum member + active gut hub member)*4/100

or simply show information as Customer Rating, Features Developed, Active Forum Member list

This information will be very useful for client to decide active service provider and it will also helpful for service provider to get job.

Alternatively it will build healthy ecosystem.