[HCoop-Discuss] EnvironmentalPolicy

[Rob Linwood]

On 11/29/06, rob at hcoop.net <rob at hcoop.net> wrote:

> The sucking part is that it is unnecessary.  I am not convinced there is
> any significant reward.  I'm am not convinced "green" hosting is going to
> play a significant contributing factor to why someone chooses to host with
> us. We already have a pledge system in place so we can pay for members
> that don't exist.  Why should we add to this?  Aside from this, its the
> principle of the matter.

My "principle of the matter" would be to do less harm to the
environment.  I realize that not everyone agrees.  Ideally, there
would be some sort of way to raise special funds towards this sort of
"extra" expense, although obviously such a system would add a great
deal of overhead itself.

As for "green" marketing, all I can say is that if I was not already a
member, that would certainly be a plus for me.  There are people with
environmental concerns, and such people would probably be more likely
to join a co-op than the rest of the population (based on my
experience with an IRL co-op here in Brooklyn).  Notwithstanding that
this is, in my opinion, the right thing to do regardless of whether it
gains us new members or not.

>
> Thats fine.  Lets call it what it is.  Project: Fictitious Energy
> Marketing Plan.  Call me a horrible person, but I have no sense of moral
> obligation to purchase feel good energy.

Well, I do.  This is not just a "feel good" policy, and to be honest,
considering that no one except ntk is paying for this, its a bit
unjustified to get upset or self-righteous about it.

-Other rob
-- 
Rob Linwood -- rob at linwood.us -- rcl at hcoop.net
http://rob.linwood.us/