quote:
Originally posted by WDZ
quote:
Originally posted by MSGPlusRox
Isn't there some kind of donation system? I'm sure Plus users would be more than happy to donate.
Really? 
http://shoutbox.menthix.net/showthread.php?tid=32...d=313713#pid313713
quote:
Originally posted by Patchou
The donation page was online for more than a year and only about 10 people out of 2 million donated.
The same happened to me. My website has had over 533,000 unique visitors in the past few years. I tried Paypal and other donation streams, as did a friend of mine whose data rescue software was downloaded over 700,000 times before he gave up on paypal and started charging $5 per copy. Better to charge a token amount than to subject users to adware and spyware.
Donations don't work because those who are looking for freeware are, by the very fact that they want it to be free, often not willing to pay anything. So, I continue to work ridiculous hours in full time employment to pay the bills, and try to support the cost of my voluntary, free to all, high end technical support (I have a family and 2 teenage kids to support) by using Google Ads which generates a nice steady stream of income without hijacking my visitor's browser, without forcing pop up ads, and without taking over home pages or search engine settings. Sure, my income from Google Ads doesn't even cover the cost of my internet access account, but I'll be damned if I will put income before what is best for my visitors. Free is free as far as I'm concerned, and free does not include hijacked home pages, search engines and unwanted pop up ads that advertise sometimes disreputable software.
The fact that the donation system doesn't work (welcome to the real world of freeware and shareware), is NO REASON to minimise up-front disclosure in a conscious attempt to maximise installation of the sponsor program (minimising by hiding all information in the EULA, and by hiding lop.com behind the innocuous name of "sponsor program").
Patchou KNOWS that the EULA is not being read. Patchou doesn't do anything about the problem, because (I have no choice but to assume this from his own statements) 'nobody would install it [the sponsor program]' if the installation was more 'frank' about what would happen, thereby affecting his income. To make things worse, at no time during the installation or uninstallation of the "sponsor program" is the sponsor program given a name. Why is that? Is it because lop.com has such a bad name?
One telling statement by Patchou, made in what I admit was a stressful moment, is more honest, more truthful and more telling than all the manouvering and excuses and blameshifting that I see in this forum by his supporters.
Here's a free cluestick from somebody who's been there and done that. Trying to shift blame on to users by pointing to an EULA that you all KNOW, and have known for a long time, is not being read, a situation that y'all allow to continue despite knowledge of the problem, because 'nobody would install it [the sponsor program]' if the required changes were made, is not doing Patchou any favours.
We know that Patchous is trying to preserve his income. Fine, let him do that, many of us have families to support and all of us deserve to earn a crust, but for god's sake wake up and smell the roses. It is not doing your reputation, or the reputation of Patchou any good, by having him admit that there is a problem and that things could be better (on one hand) while at the same time his supporters are saying its all [the user's] fault at the same time. The two statements do not join together.
If y'all REALLY believe that Patchou's decision is justifiable, be honest. Don't try to shift blame when Patchou himself has acknowledged that things could be better.
