Forum Financial Data & Donations

[godless dave]

The Atheist, I run servers for a living too. And I can tell you that refering site information is not always logged.

As I see it, you are asking for two things:

How much the JREF forum costs to run

How much of the money donated to JREF comes from people visiting the forum.

The first item would be easy for the JREF to find out, and share if they wanted to. The second one is something they could start keeping track of if they wanted to.

 

[The Atheist]

The Atheist, I run servers for a living too. And I can tell you that refering site information is not always logged.

Ok, I'll accept that the server may be so outdated that they don't have the details, or maybe NZ is just light years ahead of USA's software?

I can tell where every single one of my visitors across multiple sites has been referred from, but maybe I have better IT support than JREF.

No official answer has yet been forthcoming, but if that's the explanation, I'll accept it. With surprise that an organisation funded partly by forum donations doesn't know where they're coming from, but I'll accept it nonetheless.

 

[hcmom]

Typical... and even that's wrong....

I know full damn well I'm quoting out of context, and probably derailing, but I couldn't help myself....

 

[TsarBomba]

The Atheist, I run servers for a living too. And I can tell you that refering site information is not always logged.

As I see it, you are asking for two things:

How much the JREF forum costs to run

How much of the money donated to JREF comes from people visiting the forum.

The first item would be easy for the JREF to find out, and share if they wanted to. The second one is something they could start keeping track of if they wanted to.

I don't think that it is really "easy" for the JREF to come up with how much the forum costs to run, depending on how you want to calculate costs. Cost Accounting can be very tricky. Do you assign a percentage of building maintenance/depreciation because the server is located in the building? What about employee time monitoring the Forum? Do you include Phil's, Jeff's, and so forth's time when they check out what is on the forum? Do you include a percentage of their fringe benefits (assuming they get any)? Do you allocate a percentage of the IT budget in general? Utilities? I have no doubt that a lot this could be taken into consideration, but it would be time consuming and ultimately useless, except to satisfy TA's curiosity. You could give a simple hardware acquisition/maintenance cost, but I have a feeling that TA would want you to add in more and more things each time you announced the "cost" of the forum. It is not worth spending the time on just to satisfy TA's curiosity.

Also, just how would you calculate the percentage of JREF revenue attributable to the Forum? Raw donations from the "Donate" banner? What about people that go to TAM because they got involved in the forum? What about Forumites who buy something from the JREF store? What about a forumite that also reads the main page and donates there? Forumites that become official JREF members? There is no right and easy answer to this question.

It would be a waste of resources for the JREF to spend any time looking into TA's requests for information.

 

[Little 10 Toes]

The Atheist, I run servers for a living too. And I can tell you that refering site information is not always logged.

As I see it, you are asking for two things:

How much the JREF forum costs to run

How much of the money donated to JREF comes from people visiting the forum.

The first item would be easy for the JREF to find out, and share if they wanted to. The second one is something they could start keeping track of if they wanted to.

Not to pile on you The Atheist, but do you keep track of the brand name of the shoes people wear when they enter into your home? Why not? I know I'm picking on a very minute piece of info, but until someone tracks it, it isn't known. The system may be providing that infomation, but no one might be "listening" to it.

And no, I don't keep track of shoe infomation either.

 

[The Atheist]

It would be a waste of resources for the JREF to spend any time looking into TA's requests for information.

That would even be a reasonable answer. It would still have JREF a few points shy of the christian forum, but I haven't ever doubted that it's JREF's choice whether the information is posted.

I say just that in the OP:

Is there any chance we could have the financial information of the forum made available?

A "no" would have answered the question.

Not to pile on you The Atheist, but do you keep track of the brand name of the shoes people wear when they enter into your home? Why not?

Because I don't keep track of bad analogies.

 

[Cleon]

Ok, I'll accept that the server may be so outdated that they don't have the details, or maybe NZ is just light years ahead of USA's software?

I can tell where every single one of my visitors across multiple sites has been referred from, but maybe I have better IT support than JREF.

No official answer has yet been forthcoming, but if that's the explanation, I'll accept it. With surprise that an organisation funded partly by forum donations doesn't know where they're coming from, but I'll accept it nonetheless.

It's not a matter of looking up HTTP_REFERRER, though, even if they have it turned on (which is likely, as it's a default setting in Apache). That won't get you any financial information. That will just tell you how many people visited the Donation page as a result of clicking on the forum's Donate button. It won't tell you who actually contributed or how much.

 

[Klimax]

It's not a matter of looking up HTTP_REFERRER, though, even if they have it turned on (which is likely, as it's a default setting in Apache). That won't get you any financial information. That will just tell you how many people visited the Donation page as a result of clicking on the forum's Donate button. It won't tell you who actually contributed or how much.

Not counting ways to block it.And as it is set up,even such info cannot be connected with paypal info.

And cookies are not reliable and have same problem as referrer.
For TA:fail

If you would use energy you focus on this forum to actually investigate it,you would find that no web mechanism without further cooperation with paypal cannot give you data you ask.

 

[The Atheist]

For TA:fail

As I said to someone else, I accept that JREF might have weak accounting and tracking systems, but if so, it would have been enormously simple for them to have replied in that exact vein. "The information isn't available."

All so very easy, isn't it.

Here was Jeff's comment:

I don't know what Phil will do, but I didn't say anything in that e-mail that you don't already know.

Not: "Our information system doesn't have that information."

You're hysterically funny, though. Horribly naive about what constitutes a fail, but funny.

 

[KoihimeNakamura]

No, it's more paypal doesn't track for where it goes, and I imagine that there is no simple way to do it short of creating it's own payment system. Which, you'll note, the JREF doesn't have.

 

[MattC]

I'm going to principally address this post to recursive_prophet, and it seems TA's claim is somewhat parallel so it will (hopefully) be addressed herein, I beg either of you to alert me if you have further questions in this matter.

Most non-profit foundations post their budget and expenses once a year. Is there anywhere potential contributors can see those numbers? It was mentioned so I assume there is, and I'd appreciate a link. Does it really make no statement wrt the costs of maintaining this site? Any ideas as to why these wouldn't be listed along with other cash outlays? Isn't the best way to see where things are going to 'follow the money?'

Yes and no.

First, getting something out of the way, you can find the JREF's most recent 990 form (from 2008) here: http://www2.guidestar.org/ReportNonProfit.aspx?ein=65-0649443&Mode=GxLite&lid=523196&dl=True

You'll need to register before being able to download it as a PDF file.

Perhaps the most specific breakdown can be found on page five of the federal taxes section, titled "Other Functional Expenses." This page is generally designed to give both the federal government and any other potential viewer of the document an analysis of the organization's operating (e.g. 'related to the functioning of the organization') expenses. However this page does this in a very general format (as it should), I'll repost the section in question here for anyone that doesn't have a GuideStar account:

(my apologies in advance for the terrible formatting, I'm not sure of a way to fix it in this forum)
[Name Total Expenses // Program Service // Management & General // Fund-Raising]

Expenses:
Communications 21,585 // 18,777 // 1,300 // 1,508
Awards 13,709 // 13,709
Insurance 14,553 // 8,819 // 5,210 // 524
Cleaning and Maintenance 13,160 // 7,975 // 4,711 // 474
Advertising and Marketing 16,090
Consulting Fees 12,611 // 12,611
Credit Card Fees 19,981 // 9,990 // 9,991
Office 9,336 // 5,304 // 3,153 // 879
Utilities 6,957 // 4,216 // 2,491 // 250
Miscellaneous 249

Totals: 128,231 // 81,401 // 27,105 // 19,725

A safe bet is that website costs in general are couched in the "Communications" expense section, but trying to separate out the specific cost of the forum from the many other costs involved in communications (website costs in general being but one example) is impossible with the information contained in the 990 form.

Please let me know if I can be of further help in this matter.

~ Matt

 

[hcmom]

I don't know what Phil will do, but I didn't say anything in that e-mail that you don't already know.

Not: "Our information system doesn't have that information."

You're hysterically funny, though. Horribly naive about what constitutes a fail, but funny.

So when Jeff says it's not up to him to provide you with that info, you decided that he was trying to avoid the issue, not to say that it isn't up to him to provide that info?

 

[recursive prophet]

MattC: Thanks a lot for taking the time to post your answer to my question. I must admit to being a bit stunned by how small the numbers are. I certainly didn't envision JREF as any behemoth, but I didn't think it was that small. Puts things in a different perspective. I really appreciate your reply. Kudos Matt!

 

[The Atheist]

So when Jeff says it's not up to him to provide you with that info, you decided that he was trying to avoid the issue, not to say that it isn't up to him to provide that info?

No, and if you followed the thread, you'd be aware of that. I sent two e mails to JREF before Jeff Wagg joined the thread or copied me an e mail incorrectly.

Jeff didn't say it wasn't up to him to provide the information, and since you copied his post, I'd expect that to be self-evident. At no stage has anyone from JREF made any comment on whether the information exists.

Given the ease with which "The information doesn't exist" could have been posted or e mailed, I think it's likely it does exists, but nobody's very keen to answer.

 

[rjh01]

So it costs a subset of $18,777 to run this forum for a year. That is not much. But then you can run a basic forum with advertising for almost nothing.

This forum also helps JREF achieve its objectives. I just wonder what the world would have been like if James Randi had vetoed the idea of a forum so many years ago?

 

[KoihimeNakamura]

... Er, TA.

Or, maybe, they just don't care to respond to silly questions?

 

[The Atheist]

... Er, TA.

Or, maybe, they just don't care to respond to silly questions?

But since they did respond, even "We don't answer silly questions" would make more sense.

Please do keep trying to defend the indefensible - I've already shown just how simple and fast an answer could have been made.

 

[MattC]

So it costs a subset of $18,777 to run this forum for a year. That is not much. But then you can run a basic forum with advertising for almost nothing.

This forum also helps JREF achieve its objectives. I just wonder what the world would have been like if James Randi had vetoed the idea of a forum so many years ago?

The $18,777 figure you mention is listed on the 990 form as being the "Program Services" fee under the communications section. This fee is not limited simply to the running of the forum as your post implies, it includes additional elements as well (software licenses, hardware costs, off-site storage {if used}, bandwidth fees, and a lot of things not directly related to the internet - it is a general expense column after all {airline tickets may count for one}).

Bear in mind that the 990 form is for the JREF as a whole, and the question here relates to something very specific (this web forum, which is really little more than a combination of a memory bank, a server, and Terry shamelessly working to keep it together). Determining the specific local cost for this forum from the information contained within the 990 form is impossible due to the generality of the information the 990 possesses (it is designed to communicate overall data rather than specific incidents {they don't say, for example, how much the TAM for the 2007-2008 fiscal year made them but they do say how much they earned from all events during the year}).

Please let me know if there are any more questions in this area.

~ Matt

 

[MattC]

It occurs to me as well that the major issue here may be much simpler than I've been thinking up until now (these moments of revelation keep me up at nights).

Donations given through the link are sent to the JREF as a testament of the donator's faith in the organization's stated goals and methods of reaching those goals. The JREF has many different ways of advancing these goals, of which this forum is only one (TAM, TAA, lectures, and so on). Running a web forum is certainly one of the JREF's many activities, but it is not the only one. Donating money to the JREF in general as opposed to specific assets thereof allows the foundation to determine what areas need money the most and to allocate needed funds there, giving them a much greater flexibility (and greater ability to advance its goals).

The great majority of other web forums do not operate like this - their goal is simply to run a web forum. Admittedly I do not know anything about this Christian forum you choose to visit, but it seems to me that a lack of organizational diversity could explain the differences. A web forum seeking only to maintain itself will naturally be able to furnish better information upon how money is spent on the web forum because they have no other obligations to maintain.

~ Matt

 

[The Atheist]

And still no communication at all from JREF itself.

Can't say that I'm surprised...

 

[Phlebas]

And still no communication at all from JREF itself.

Can't say that I'm surprised...

I'm surprised that they didn't drop everything and dedicate the entire staff's time to researching your relevant and poignant question. Especially when you have been such a pleasure to work with and have proven to be a friend to the JREF.

Perhaps some of them (erroneously, obviously) have gotten the nutty idea that you aren't planning on doing anything useful with this information and are simply whining for those numbers in an attempt to waste everyone's time and generally garner more attention?

I, of course, would take a bullet for you if it meant you could find out how much time and money is lost when Linda stops on her way in to the office for a Starbucks. But those Great Information Hoarders might just be waiting for a reason to jump through these hoops? Just guessing.

 

[The Atheist]

...blether removed...

How hard would it have been?

Is there any chance we could have the financial information of the forum made available?

No

 

[Phlebas]

How hard would it have been?

Again, not speaking for them. I am a footsoldier in your Great War Of Terribly Important Information Sharing.

But just maybe Jeff didn't know the answer, so he forwarded it on to Linda with an oblique hint that she need not kill herself for the answer. Then you got wind of it, the thread went up in smoke, and IN THEIR EYES you'd been behaving like a petulant child and they are content to let you sit and spin instead of reinforcing your behavior by taking the time to answer.

It appears to me, a lowly footsoldier, that the information is not coming. Either it's not obtainable at all or not easily enough for them to justify the effort just because someone demands it -- surely you forgive them for not seeing the inherent worthiness of your request?

Some of those obstinate JREFers have oblique senses of humor -- maybe they are enjoying you dangling here in vain, awaiting information so you can finish whatever stunning and worthy project you have started.

Again, don't ask me. I'm just cannon fodder.

 

[The Atheist]

Some of those obstinate JREFers have oblique senses of humor -- maybe they are enjoying you dangling here in vain, awaiting information so you can finish whatever stunning and worthy project you have started.

Wasting their time. My expectation of getting the data is nil - I just like to confirm that it hasn't been released, or any reasons given for its non-release, in case anyone reads the thread and wonders.

Again, don't ask me. I'm just cannon fodder.

Funny you have so much to say on the subject then.

 

[Phlebas]

Wasting their time. My expectation of getting the data is nil - I just like to confirm that it hasn't been released, or any reasons given for its non-release, in case anyone reads the thread and wonders.

So you are performing a valuable public service! I knew it was something like that. You are speaking up for the downtrodden masses who need such pertinent information but are unable to ask for it themselves. Perhaps we should call you The Altruist?

Still... it could be that the JREF employees don't see The Big Picture, and only see the part where you are trying to waste their time by demanding a breakdown of information that could not possibly of any direct use to you?

Maybe in the future, Jeff Wagg and Phil Plait will have broadened their minds enough to see that it's worth their time to stop everything because The Atheist has yet another desire for an obscure piece of information. For now, forgive them, for they know not what they're doing.

 

[The Atheist]

Still... it could be that the JREF employees don't see The Big Picture, and only see the part where you are trying to waste their time by demanding a breakdown of information that could not possibly of any direct use to you?

Nope - still a stupid argument, as it would have taken but a few seconds to note that the information isn't going to be forthcoming.

Unfortunately, that sweeps all of your attempted sarcasm into the dustbin it belongs in.

Maybe in the future, Jeff Wagg and Phil Plait will have broadened their minds enough to see that it's worth their time to stop everything because The Atheist has yet another desire for an obscure piece of information. For now, forgive them, for they know not what they're doing.

Lovely exercise in logical fallacies and failed sarcasm, but to what end?

If you're trying to point something out, you've failed miserably, because the points have all been made, except for why it's such a big deal.

Nice of you to display the lengths some people will go to attempt to make a case out of nothing at all. (Actually, less than nothing, because it hasn't yet been explained by JREF as to whether the information even exists, or the difficulty in obtaining it.)

Pray continue - it's probably a good show for lurkers to try to figure why some bloke is trying to defend the indefensible.

 

[Morrigan]

Sorry, I'd expected that moderating a large site like JREF forum one of you might have been aware of how the internet and computers work. As this is clearly not the case, I'll gladly explain it in layman's terms for you:

Inane condescension aside, you are completely wrong. As was pointed out, the HTTP_REFERER would only track the clicks to the donation page, and even that information isn't reliable. After that, the visitor may be taken to a Paypal payment page if s/he chooses to, and that referer information will then be lost since it's not passed along (not automatically, anyway).

Meanwhile, if you have any further problems with understanding how your own system works, do let me know.

This would be really obnoxious and arrogant, if it weren't so cutely ironic...

Incorrect again. Are you sure you know as much as you claim you do?

I am a web software developer, and I'm at least the third person to tell you you don't know what you're talking about. Maybe that should start sinking in.

Sorry, but that's still wrong. The information is recorded. Remember how those linky things work? The reporting system may not be set up to provide that information, but it could easily be retrieved. It' just sitting there in the memory of the server, waiting for someone to ask it.

Assuming randi.org runs on an Apache server, you're going to have to cross-reference the referrers from the Apache logs with... what, exactly? Paypal doesn't provide the IP of the originating transactions unless the merchant previously passed it along in a custom field -- and he'd have to pass along other info to be able to cross-reference with the Apache logs, anyway -- so yes, it would require coding work (at which point, using a cookie or session variable would be much easier anyway), not just parsing existing data "sitting there", as you claim. And the HTTP_REFERER header is known to be unreliable. It's an interesting piece of information to see where some your traffic comes from, but it should never be used for anything else.

You're not right about being no need to record the details either - unless you want to claim JREF is an organisation with very sloppy accounting practice. It's contigent upon business owners to know which channels* provide which income.

As a business owner who makes money with websites, including a site who receives donations, I can't help but laugh at you. I couldn't give a damn if the donaters come from my site's forum or not. It's simply unnecessary information to track in my case, and I suspect it's the same with the JREF. "Very sloppy"? Not even remotely.

You're hysterically funny, though.

Keep throwing those big rocks in your pretty glass house.


All that aside -- why the hell would you care about how much of the donations come from forum members and/or people who clicked the donation button from the forum? What does it matter to you?

 

[The Atheist]

Assuming randi.org runs on an Apache server...

Since I stay away from assumptions, I'll continue to wait for someone who knows rather than is guessing.

As I've said, these assumptions may well be right and that NZ server software is infinitely superior to that in use in USA, but until we have a definitive answer, we'd be assuming - see above.

All that aside -- why the hell would you care about how much of the donations come from forum members and/or people who clicked the donation button from the forum?

See the OP.

 

[Phlebas]

Nope - still a stupid argument, as it would have taken but a few seconds to note that the information isn't going to be forthcoming.

A lesser person would think so, yet you have majestically kept trying for two weeks! Brava!

Unfortunately, that sweeps all of your attempted sarcasm into the dustbin it belongs in.

You WOUND me. What makes you think I'm being sarcastic? I just exuberantly want you to have the information you clearly so desperately need. You have plugged away at it for two weeks of your life, which you will not get back, and so far achieved nothing but the continuing ill will of fellow posters.

This makes me sad. I just want you to get SOMETHING out of all this.

Lovely exercise in logical fallacies and failed sarcasm, but to what end?

I'm a double-agent. I want the others to think I'm being sarcastic, but I'm totally on your side. This information definitely needs to get out. In fact, once you get it, let's rent a billboard!

If you're trying to point something out, you've failed miserably, because the points have all been made, except for why it's such a big deal.

I confess that I don't know why it's a big deal. It baffles me why anyone would have the slightest interesting in such an esoteric thing. But I have faith in YOU. BFFs?

Nice of you to display the lengths some people will go to attempt to make a case out of nothing at all.

You give me too much credit. It ain't no big thang.

(Actually, less than nothing, because it hasn't yet been explained by JREF as to whether the information even exists, or the difficulty in obtaining it.)

Alas, at this point, I think it's a secret you will take to your grave. Few are the people who could hang with this issue for two weeks. You might be unique in that aspect, even.

Pray continue - it's probably a good show for lurkers to try to figure why some bloke is trying to defend the indefensible.

I serve in my own way. I have not your selflessness, since I honestly doubt I can maintain interest in this much longer. Forgive my weakness...

 

[MattC]

How hard would it have been?

Very.

You say:

Is there any chance we could have the financial information of the forum made available?

I'm interested to find another forum doing just that as it asks for donations and it occurred to me that while JREF's finances are public knowledge, I haven't seen any details of this forum's financial performance.

I've attempted to point out several times that it is functionally impossible to determine the financial underpinnings of this forum - the publicly available information (the 990 form) is not that specific. Particularly, I covered the matter in some detail in this post: http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=4553198#post4553198

I'm going to presume you've read that so you know that the 990 is of very little use to you here save as a generalized value of many distinct costs. The publicly available information, therefore, will not be of much use to you in this endeavor - I'm sure someone with your expertise in this field could arrive at a fairly accurate figure by adding up the hardware costs and software fees, which is probably going to take less time than messing around with whatever this HTTP_REFERRER thing is you technical people keep shouting around.

MattC: Thanks a lot for taking the time to post your answer to my question. I must admit to being a bit stunned by how small the numbers are. I certainly didn't envision JREF as any behemoth, but I didn't think it was that small. Puts things in a different perspective. I really appreciate your reply. Kudos Matt!

No problem. The numbers are low yes, but bear in mind that a non-profit organization cannot by law retain a large sum of money without an excellent reason for doing so. I'm afraid that I've forgotten the poster's name, but in another thread dealing with JREF finances someone wisely said "for-profit organizations make money to make money, non-profit organizations make money to spend money." I'm sorry that I've forgotten who said it, as it's an excellent analogy to the current situation.

 

[The Atheist]

Very.

No - answered many times.

"We don't have that information"

Took me about 2 seconds to type it, give it three for pushing POST and waiting.

5 seconds, tops.

 

[lionking]

I'm afraid that I've forgotten the poster's name, but in another thread dealing with JREF finances someone wisely said "for-profit organizations make money to make money, non-profit organizations make money to spend money."

True, but "where does the money go?" is a valid question. I work for a not-for-profit company, our staff are well rewarded and we are proud of it.

 

[MattC]

No - answered many times.

"We don't have that information"

Took me about 2 seconds to type it, give it three for pushing POST and waiting.

5 seconds, tops.

My mistake for presuming that you would be satisfied with such an admission. I intended to demonstrate that the public finances of the JREF would not be able to locate you the data you seek.

True, but "where does the money go?" is a valid question. I work for a not-for-profit company, our staff are well rewarded and we are proud of it.

The information he desires to find (I'm presuming that this is an honest inquiry for relevant data) is not contained within the public domain nor the apparent method of obtaining the data he suggested (this HTTP_REFERRER thing). Judging by the information presented on the donate page, the money goes to the JREF itself and is from there disseminated as befits need.

~ Matt

 

[hcmom]

No - answered many times.

"We don't have that information"

Took me about 2 seconds to type it, give it three for pushing POST and waiting.

5 seconds, tops.

Yes, but you seem to care a lot more than the JREF that you want the information.

 

[UnrepentantSinner]

Does anyone else who has been around a long time get the smell of "I can do it better than they can" in this thread?

Reading over some old threads recently I was struck by all the self-identified experts who thought they could run the forum better than Hal and the mod staff could back in the day. I can't recall anyone here who felt they knew better than Randi and the JREF BOD/staff who could run the foundation better than it currently was though. There's a stench of narcicism in a lot of those old threads - and this one. Oddly enough, people like TamiO, EvilYeti and Xouper are long gone and all their bitching and offers to make things better amounted to nothing.

Wonder if that's because their good ideas were rejected or because they weren't as good as they thought.

 

[The Atheist]

My mistake for presuming that you would be satisfied with such an admission. I intended to demonstrate that the public finances of the JREF would not be able to locate you the data you seek.

yes, but unfortunately, not being privy to the operation of JREF - unless you're an employee - you're just assuming, same as all the others.

Yes, but you seem to care a lot more than the JREF that you want the information.

No, I don't care at all.

I wondered if the JREF would be as free with its financial data as a church group is, and the answer is clearly "no".

Seriously - can you please, please, please get your mom to send you to TAM? Please?

I'm beginning to worry about your state of mind, CS - you keep following me around various threads inviting me to a Tim-Tam. Are you feeding an obsession? If not, and you have something to say, why not try saying it?

I promise not to destroy you as badly as the last..... every time we've debated.

Go on, 'fess up - I'll go easy on you; I understand the pain you're in in your [lack of] love life. I had that problem for an hour once.

 

[MattC]

yes, but unfortunately, not being privy to the operation of JREF - unless you're an employee - you're just assuming, same as all the others.

I do not see what I am assuming in pointing out that the 990 (the only publicly available information the JREF is required to release about their finances) does not have the specific information you require.

I wondered if the JREF would be as free with its financial data as a church group is, and the answer is clearly "no".

They're as free with their financial data as the law requires, asking them for any more than that is essentially asking them for a favor - judging by the responses you've gotten, they don't seem willing to bother. I've also pointed out several reasons why the specific data you desire is probably unattainable even if I were an employee of the JREF.

~ Matt

 

[The Atheist]

I do not see what I am assuming in pointing out that the 990 (the only publicly available information the JREF is required to release about their finances) does not have the specific information you require.

There's no assumption in that part, no, and I'm fully aware of the 990 - there's a 15-page thread on it somewhere.

They're as free with their financial data as the law requires, asking them for any more than that is essentially asking them for a favor - judging by the responses you've gotten, they don't seem willing to bother.

That's one of the assumptions - that the data doesn't exist - because that hasn't been confirmed at any time.

I've also pointed out several reasons why the specific data you desire is probably unattainable even if I were an employee of the JREF.

~ Matt

They were the other assumptions, although speculation's probably a better description in your case.

 

[Morrigan]

Since I stay away from assumptions, I'll continue to wait for someone who knows rather than is guessing.

Hahahaha - You're the one who kept insisting you knew more about that kind of thing than the others initially.

Besides, I don't even need to assume anything: I have the means to verify it (a simple glance at the site's response headers will do the trick), and I just did: randi.org does run on an Apache 2.0 server.

That's one of the assumptions - that the data doesn't exist - because that hasn't been confirmed at any time.

Since randi.org runs on an Apache server, I can reiterate what I've already said about the logs. The referrer information isn't tracked all the way to Paypal, so there's no way to know how much of the donations come from the forum. And the reason it's this way is no doubt because nobody cares.

 

[Cleon]

Hahahaha - You're the one who kept insisting you knew more about that kind of thing than the others initially.

Besides, I don't even need to assume anything: I have the means to verify it (a simple glance at the site's response headers will do the trick), and I just did: randi.org does run on an Apache 2.0 server.

I talk to Terry a fair bit, so I kinda already knew.

But it doesn't matter if it's Apache, IIS, or nginx. The only way it would collect the sort of information TA wants is if it was specifically coded to do so, and the effort/benefit ratio there doesn't seem to make it worthwhile.

Magical kiwi-based technology notwithstanding, of course.

I'm reminded of something someone said...

Hint: when blustering, it's best not to do it to someone who is quite capable of extracting the data in exactly the fashion I'm discussing.

I've decided to coin a new word, in honor of The Atheist. "Bullster." It's what happens when someone tries to bluster and BS at the same time, like TA is doing above.