Main Area and Open Discussion > General Software Discussion

"Donationware 2.0" or something like that - opinions wanted

<< < (2/7) > >>

mouser:
i think nudone captured the spirit of what i meant by mandatory donation or an "opt-out", and in relation to josh's point:
"Option 2, I dont like this idea. Requiring a user state "I do not want to donate" is like forcing them to say "I am too cheap to donate". While this may not be the case in all instances, alot of users never have any intent on donating and requiring them to post to this effect can alienate them because they might not want to post and appear "cheap".
--- End quote ---

i would be against making anyone post publicly that they wouldn't donate.

but the consistent idea is: you want to ask the user to do some affirmitive action, whether donating or stating that they can't/won't donate, to overcome the motivational issue i discussed in the article.

so i kind of tend towards nudone's summary:

users must either:
1) make a donation (of any amount)
2) submit some email or private form saying why they can't or won't, as an exception to this rule.

the idea is simple:
keep the software free for those who can't donate or refuse to donate, but try to make it as easy to donate as to not donate, and let them choose the amount if they choose to donate.


as for making the person come back to get another license - i'm leaning towards eliminating that from our site.. it may be pushing the envelope of being annoying, in addition to being confusing.  the only real benefit it has is in getting people to visit the site at least once more after 6 months of using the program in hopes they will decide to donate, and in serving as a small incentive to donate to avoid this.

mouser:
jgpaiva's idea of a survey might be reasonable..
if you choose not to donate then we ask you to complete a small survey instead, which would ask why they chose not to donate, what might make them choose to donate, and ask them if they would consider donating in the future.  it might be a reasonable way to "connect" with those who choose not to donate and have a minute to "talk to them"
it's kind of a neat idea.

Josh:
users must either:
1) make a donation (of any amount)
2) submit some email or private form saying why they can't or won't, as an exception to this rule.
-mouser (July 27, 2006, 02:28 PM)
--- End quote ---

If option 2 is selected, I do think it should be an ANONYMOUS form where the user isnt required to submit contact info. Requiring an email is only, in my understanding, giving the author a way to respond with more reasons as to why they should donate. This could lean towards being annoying as the user might not have any intent on donating, and providing an email address for the author to reply to would constitute as an annoyance (Nag). So in essence, the form should be anonymous, and linked to a page that generates a license key so that contact info is not required.

I do agree with a survey feature thou, to get a key. As long as it doesnt REQUIRE contact info to obtain a key (allowing the author to attempt to get a donation out of the user again).

nudone:
(i've just had to edit my post because of the quick replies.)

so, to me, jgpaiva's survey sounds like a good idea and also, i think Josh's anonymous message is important for the reasons he stated.

jgpaiva:
I'm not much for anonymousity.
I do understand the reasons josh mentioned, but this gets us in a dead end. If someone doesn't provide a contact info, it'll be a non-personal form. This means that people will just click through it and write non-sense stuff.
The only solution for this would be to make the form have to be aprooved. To have a form like that, i think it'd be better to have the e-mail system as it's much more personal, and i think rewarding for the author. Also, the person would have much more ease in stating their situation in an e-mail than in a form.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page