||Feb. 6th, 2003 08:02 am|
I don't know why bradfitz (& co) put up with this.|
Anyone know if he's got an amazon wishlist?
Or possibly a fund for the heart bypass he's going to need soon.
$2.09 pcm is bloody cheap. And there's generally someone who'll handle the money for you if you can't yourself. Or in extreme cases buy you an account if you smile nicely at them ;)
Not that it's just the free users complaining, or that I'm trying to get at them. But that just seems (narrowly) the least rational complaint of a long list.
Personally I suspect the limits should be more like 5/20/25, as the objective is to clip abusers rather than impose a limit people are likely to hit, but the chances of getting that point through the firestorm are pretty much zero.
I doubt he has time to read all those...
I think its perfectly reasonable. The number of users has grown bigger than they ever expected, there are limited resources, it makes sense to ration them, and they have held off doing this for a long time.
Admittedly 5 posts for free users would be better, but he says it may increase to that anyway.
This has just given the beginnings of an idea though...
Well, I'll not be upgrading to a paid account, because I spong ff my friends/lovers enough already.
I don't even know whether the thing about 'early adopters' means I'm a 3 post person or a 10 post person. What's an early adopter?
I'm surprised he hasn't said fuck the lot of you and pulled the plug.
I suspect a lot of the people who are being so up in arms really have no idea of what the costs must be for lj. And for what is, really, nothing. I've paid 1) a year's paid account (25 dollars) plus 2) a pernament account (100 dollars) plus a few donations here and there. All told, I've probably given lj less than 200 dollars and I've got to use it for a year and a half and always found it reliable. No way could I have this level of service for 200 dollars a year if I took all my toys away and tried to set something up for myself. And I could have had it for free.
To be fair, unless you were reading it at 2AMish this morning, you missed the bits that were deserving of criticism. I have no objection to the post-limits, although I think they could possibly be a little higher (and I agree that there should be a way to pay for a higher limit, if you really want one).
But that post went up without the clarifications - making it unclear how comments and posts to communities counted - and the post limits were immediately switched on.
While I think the idea's workable, launching it that way is incredibly daft customer relations - especially as the first some people knew about it was when a post they were writing "when the switch was flipped" was rejected. If it's going to be based on a 24 hour rolling window, surely it's sense to provide at least 24 hours warning and a clear description of the changes?