Donations

[ABEditor22]

Here's how much we've raised this month:


Want to donate? Use the form below

WARNING:

Our **Recommended** Payment Processor is DonorBox (using the above form). Please note that you should always exercise Due Diligence when making any payment online and The AnswerBank is no different. We will continually monitor this page and the Donations coming in, but we would ask Members to not make any payment to any other payment method that is not shown on this Question, regardless of how convincing it may seem. Please be safe online.

Alternative Payment Methods
PayPal Donations

Bank Transfer
Please exercise caution when sending any money via Bank transfer. If you would like to verify the bank details on this page please email The Editor using the email address below.
Bank: Natwest Bank
Name: ANSWERBANK LTD
Sort-Code: 54-21-22
Account Number: 24150533

Cheques
Please email for details: theeditor AT theanswerbank DOT co DOT uk
--------


Historic Monthly Donation Sums:
August 2022: £127
September 2022: £91.45
October 2022: £29.23
November 2022: £8
December 2022: £10
January 2023: £33
February 2023: £31
March 2023: £482.58
April 2023: £50.60
May 2023: £303.38
June 2023: £192.01
July 2023: £88
August 2023: £192.96
September 2023: £110.36
October 2023: £103.58
November 2023: £70.26
December 2023: £54.12
January 2024: £56.14
February 2024: £81.98
March 2024: £81.98

----

Dear AnswerBank Community,

I wanted to write to you all to explain a new feature that we have rolled out across The AnswerBank, and, most importantly, to why we have chosen to do so. I am of course talking about the new Donations feature, which you may have noticed recently.

As you know, The AnswerBank is free, and always has been, for our users to access. We have never charged any fees, and, historically, maintenance and upkeep of the website has always been funded by advertising alone. Sadly, over the years, our advertising revenue has declined, in part due to a gradual decrease in traffic volumes, but also due to the rise in the use of Ad Blockers and similar technology.

Whilst we do understand that there are users of The AnswerBank that would prefer to see less advertising on the website, it has always seemed the fairest way to continue to raise funds to cover our costs whilst keeping it free and accessible for all users. However, unfortunately, it is no longer sufficient to continually develop and maintain the platform based on advertising revenue alone.

That’s why we need your help; to raise funds, via voluntary donations. Through your donations, we would like to not only continue to support, maintain and provide the service that The AnswerBank offers; we would like to make it even better. We want to implement new features, as requested by the community, and as part of this, we would like to engage you with our plans to invest the funds raised into the platform.

The new Donations feature is of course entirely optional, but we are hopeful that the community can support this as a way of not only sustaining the platform, but to help it flourish and improve into the future. You can give as much or as little as you would like (although there is a £2 minimum enforced by our donations partner to cover card processing fee’s). You can donate as a one-off, or you can opt to donate regularly on a weekly or monthly basis; whatever suits you best.

We plan to be transparent as we move forwards with regards to the funds we are raising and the impact this is having on the continued success and development of The AnswerBank, so it is out intention to provide updates regularly.

All the best.
M.

[Canary42]

During my years as a member of this site I seem to recall we've had at least two "polls" asking what improvements we would like to see. To my knowledge none have been implemented, so were they just empty PR exercises?

There are several subscriber-funded(voluntarily) other sites to which I belong, all of which have better facilities than Ab, so I would expect real improvement if I were to start subscribing here.

[Barmaid]

I see a difference between the regulars who use it as a chat site and the users who come here for answers to questions. I do think that it could be very intimidating for new users. There is clearly a dual purpose. There is no reason why those two purposes cannot co-exist. I am a member of other sites where the informative part of the site is one thing, but there is also a section where the regulars can chat known as "the Common Room" or similar.

However, recently I have noticed that there is an element of unpleasantness which reminds me of the bad old days when there were various splinter sites and factions.

[MissTerious]

At least I let people know who I am Tony. No secrets ;0))

[tonyav]

I know, Lottie.

[Toorak]

@00.27

Totally agree. Nasty individuals who should be banned

[MissTerious]

Indeed Barmaid. Some people seem to enjoy keeping the nastiness going :0(

[Canary42]

/// There is no reason why those two purposes cannot co-exist.///

I agree absolutely - Chatterbank is a very lively and entertaining "chat room" from time to time, and by its rubric*** it differentiates itself from the more serious information-seeking topics.

***Welcome to ChatterBank the home of natter and nonsense on The AnswerBank. You could ask serious questions here, but don't expect serious answers

[Maydup]

Encouraging donations will only be affective if the experience of visit the site is so good it makes the users want to support it.

I would suggest you update the site first tech wise, moderate the bullies, do some marketing to bring in new users and THEN add a donation button; otherwise you’re likely to raise enough money to buy two cups of coffee next month.

[emmie]

zacs
without the moderators this site would fold over with constant spam, is that what you want.

[1ozzy]

Apparently there is one ED and two spare Eds Maydup.
They may need to do a tad more fund raising to keep this geriatric site working for those that believe it wouldn't work without them..

[davebro]

I use another forum - run by volunteers - that seeks donations to fund itself. They have a annual push on donations & tell us when they have raised enough to cover costs (but you can donate more if you wish).
Donors are acknowledged by having the heart symbol next to their forum name. Donations seem to lie in the range 5 to 20 Euros. (p.a.)

[davebro]

& no advertising or evident spam.

[emmie]

apologies but i won't be donating, its simply that i have limited funds and they are being squeezed to the max by the various outlets i pay money to by direct debit, like rent, energy company etc

[naomi24]

//Who is M?//

M is the new owner. His name is freely available to anyone who wants to look.

I've thought about this suggestion and I see no proposal for practical change that might affect the user in a positive way. For example, biased mods who work not on what's posted but on who's posting are allowed to continue and more to the point, when faced with justified criticism, are defended. Posts are often removed for no apparent reason and all that is offered by way of explanation is someone bleating on about 'the rules' - rules which, in reality, haven’t featured in the removal. One user finds himself suspended on a regular basis, most of the time for far less than other people get away with daily. Why would anyone pay for any of that?

Additionally when people have a gripe they're told to contact the Ed - but unless that gripe is connected to a technical issue a response is rarely forthcoming. To my certain knowledge at least two people have offered to help keep the site clear of spam and other rubbish but no response has been received - not even the courtesy of a 'Don't call us, we'll call you' - and that, quite frankly, demonstrates a disdain for the membership that shouldn't exist.

You say you plan to be transparent with regard to funds but as much as we all like AB, unless this site adopts transparency in other areas and changes its ever protective attitude towards mods who are clearly unsuited to the role, and are in actual fact, detrimental to the site, nothing will change for the user and in those circumstances I really don’t think your new plan will be successful.

[Ken4155]

^
As a well-known user often says, "BA right there."

[vulcan42]

I believe that this site will not change irrespective of how much is donated. There are a few people on here who, by any definition in any dictionary, are internet trolls. According to the rules which are often quoted ,especially by certain moderators, trolling isn't allowed but it continues daily. I suspect it's allowed because it increases traffic and therefore revenue, so why should we finance a site just to be trolled and bullied, also in the rules, by a certain few? If these double standards are not removed I can see The Answerbank disappearing, the important newcomers will not stay to be bullied and disbelieved and also expected to donate for the "privilege".

[Ken4155]

That ought to read "a well known ABer".

[1ozzy]

Dead horse and pointless flogging come to mind.
Refurbishing, that's a totally different path to follow.

[Zacs-Master]

‘zacs
without the moderators this site would fold over with constant spam, is that what you want’

No and I never said remove moderators, I asked for the incompetent ones to be removed. The completely unnecessary and potentially dangerous closing down of Geordiescotland’s thread a couple of nights ago was probably the lowest point I’ve ever seen moderation sink to in my many years on here.

Naomi - well written.

[FatticusInch]

Hell has just frozen over, Lord Lucan has been found(astride Shergar no less) and some Knights have just stumbled across an odd-looking but nondescript drinking vessel in the Middle East……

Oh, and I concur with what Naomi wrote.