Hi bb,
bb
Moreover, I don't think you can't argue monetization and contractor in the same argument.
Of course I can. GMAT Club has something that it believes is valuable to tutors: Tutor Benefits. Let's call it {TuBe}. GMAT Club will give {TuBe} to tutors in exchange (a) for
money ($200-300 per month) and no work (0 posts) or (b) for
work (40 posts per month) and no money.
bb
The idea of giving benefits to experts has been brewing for maybe a year now, and started out as a way to simplify/clarify/standardize/explain the expert status on GMAT Club.
I may be wrong about this, but isn't GMAT Club
mostly just taking away features that used to be free and now providing them as "benefits" to some users?
bb
Just to address something that rubbed me the wrong way, these benefits are not about a scheme for monetization. It is unfortunate that's the perception. I appreciate you speaking up and pointing it out rather than ignoring something that bugs you.
But it doesn't bug me. When I say I support GMAT Club's right to monetise the forum in any and all ways, I mean it. I don't know anything about GMAT Club's cost structures or the expectations of GC's investors/owners (including you).
bb
(The way I saw it, we are only adding benefits and with many experts already making over 40 posts a month, it seemed like it would not take meaningfully more effort). You made 37 in the last 30 days.
As I said in my post, I don't think 40 posts is a hard target for any active expert to reach. As you pointed out, I'll be able to hit it easily. But the Tutor Benefits policy is effectively a commercial arrangement with an explicit exchange of value between tutors and GMAT Club. This is going to make it harder for experts to be truly independent.
bb
Reason for 40 posts was to encourage participation and encourage engagement and to reward those who are active and engaged on a regular basis. If you have an experts status it means you are an active expert and not a dead account from 10 years ago.
But why is that so important? There are so many valuable posts on GC by experts who aren't active on GC anymore. More directly, if GC implements this policy, will it also revoke
daagh's expert badge?
I won't attempt to address your point about Delta Airlines. I've never flown Delta

, but it's a little worrying that you'd equate passengers sitting on a seat for a relatively short period of time to experts sharing their knowledge and opinions with others in posts that increase the value of the forum significantly.
bb
I know you get to be much more concise... I do appreciate your posts and voice. I also appreciate that you have a modest signature and good quality comments.
I appreciate your work on GC as well. I don't think most members of the community will visit this subforum, but it's good to see at least some dialogue here. And because I had to address a lot of other points in this post, here's a quick summary of my position (other experts have voiced other concerns, which I respect):
1. Personally, I don't care about an expert badge or a signature.
2. However, many forum members aren't aware that many (perhaps most) expert badges are given in exchange for, feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, advertising on GC by GMAT Club partners, without any real due diligence.
Further, although I wasn't part of the team that negotiated Jamboree's contract with GMAT Club, it may be true that:
3. GMAT Club and its partners sign a legally binding contract that includes a mutual non-disparagement clause.
4. GMAT Club has revenue-sharing agreements in place for sales made through or as a result of activity on GMAT Club.
5. Independent experts haven't entered into any special arrangements with either GMAT Club or its partners.
6. This independence is valuable to the GMAT Club community, as at least some experts have no incentive to promote GMAT Club partners.