4 ms·

I'm not entitled to an ad-free version, but equally they're not entitled to my attention, or my email address. In an ideal world we give each other a bit of val

I'm not entitled to an ad-free version, but equally they're not entitled to my attention, or my email address. In an ideal world we give each other a bit of value and everyone comes out ahead, but if one side takes the piss it's entirely reasonable for the other side to call them out on it, refuse to participate, and highlight their behaviour for others.

edoceo 9y ago
Um, you give them your attention when you click their link. They aren't entitled, you gave it away.
- anigbrowl 9y ago
  In exchange for the promise of an interesting article, which they have failed to deliver on.
  - edoceo 9y ago
    That's called buyers remorse. When a product or service fails to meet your expectations sometime it's just crap, not toxic. It's amazing how much anger/vitriol a small little modal can generate. Don't you have a back button? Otherwise if you want the thing someone is offering in a simple quid-pro-quo take the deal or don't. Otherwise all you a really shouting about is that you think the price is too high.
    - anigbrowl 9y ago
      No it isn't. Buyer's remorse is where you read the whole article and then conclude that you wasted your time. Oh well, too bad. It's amazing how much anger/vitriol a small little modal can generate. No it isn't, because if you spend a lot of time in the web you encounter them tens or potentially hundreds of times a day depending on what you're doing. It's an economic externality, just like the one person saying 'but my little bit of pollution won't impact the environment.' Yes, I have a back button, but if you've wasted my time then I'm going to remember that fact. Semantic/social web technologies are going to make this sort of marketing obsolete.
    - racer-v 9y ago
      It's amazing how much anger/vitriol a small little modal can generate. It may amaze the designer, but it doesn't amaze me as a user. The fundamental principle of a "modal" is that it suddenly and unexpectedly robs the user of control over his experience. If that's not a cardinal sin of interface design, I don't know what is. We're often reminded that good design creates "delight"; that also means bad design can create delight's opposite - pain and frustration.
- rjbwork 9y ago
  The link did not say "we're going to waste a couple minutes of your time to trick you into becoming invested and not beable to finish the story unless you give us your email." At least be honest about the situation up front. There was no hint that we would have some portion of the content locked without signing up until i got to the blurred out part. This is somewhat toxic. At least it's not ad driven, too.
  - yathern 9y ago
    You don't have to give them your email. You can just click 'no', and read the rest. But I agree with your sentiment of not liking that style.

edoceo 9y ago

Um, you give them your attention when you click their link. They aren't entitled, you gave it away.

anigbrowl 9y ago
In exchange for the promise of an interesting article, which they have failed to deliver on.
- edoceo 9y ago
  That's called buyers remorse. When a product or service fails to meet your expectations sometime it's just crap, not toxic. It's amazing how much anger/vitriol a small little modal can generate. Don't you have a back button? Otherwise if you want the thing someone is offering in a simple quid-pro-quo take the deal or don't. Otherwise all you a really shouting about is that you think the price is too high.
  - anigbrowl 9y ago
    No it isn't. Buyer's remorse is where you read the whole article and then conclude that you wasted your time. Oh well, too bad. It's amazing how much anger/vitriol a small little modal can generate. No it isn't, because if you spend a lot of time in the web you encounter them tens or potentially hundreds of times a day depending on what you're doing. It's an economic externality, just like the one person saying 'but my little bit of pollution won't impact the environment.' Yes, I have a back button, but if you've wasted my time then I'm going to remember that fact. Semantic/social web technologies are going to make this sort of marketing obsolete.
  - racer-v 9y ago
    It's amazing how much anger/vitriol a small little modal can generate. It may amaze the designer, but it doesn't amaze me as a user. The fundamental principle of a "modal" is that it suddenly and unexpectedly robs the user of control over his experience. If that's not a cardinal sin of interface design, I don't know what is. We're often reminded that good design creates "delight"; that also means bad design can create delight's opposite - pain and frustration.
rjbwork 9y ago
The link did not say "we're going to waste a couple minutes of your time to trick you into becoming invested and not beable to finish the story unless you give us your email." At least be honest about the situation up front. There was no hint that we would have some portion of the content locked without signing up until i got to the blurred out part. This is somewhat toxic. At least it's not ad driven, too.
- yathern 9y ago
  You don't have to give them your email. You can just click 'no', and read the rest. But I agree with your sentiment of not liking that style.