3 ms·

Woops, sorry about that. I'll make sure it's clearer. There's no mention that it's Free anywhere however around 35% of the course is free. It shows which conten

Woops, sorry about that. I'll make sure it's clearer. There's no mention that it's Free anywhere however around 35% of the course is free. It shows which content is free and which one is paid in the sidebar, but it could be that you haven't checked it out

publicfig 8y ago
There is also no point on the front page that it is paid, and I would assume that because there is no mention of pricing that it would be free. I'd definitely put something very early on stating pricing and that it is not a free program. To tell someone 35% through a lesson that they are expected to pay may be fine for conversion, it's a really scummy practice.
- LocalPCGuy 8y ago
  I know this may be a minority opinion among developers, but I'm ok with them trying to make money. And if the optimal way to do that is to ask 35% of the way through, then that's what they should do. I don't view that as a dark practice or bait and switch. I don't think there is an obligation to be super clear that there is a paid version. It's something the owner should test, and see if it puts people off or if it converts better. Maybe it puts off 10% more people, but 30% more convert? Good on them for finding that out and optimizing accordingly. We in the dev world expect way too much for free. Not that I complain when I find something for free, but people deserve to be compensated for their work also.
  - qntty 8y ago
    Sounds like publicfig is saying that it's not optimal for them.
  - publicfig 8y ago
    I never argued the effectiveness of misleading business practices towards generating revenue or conversions. I feel that design can be misleading and user-antagonistic while still being the most effective solution for monetization. It is up to the creator/organization to make that decision, and that decision can be both financially effective and amoral/"scummy" at the same time. I cannot make that decision for the creator/organization, but I also feel no need to default to defending user-antagonistic practices just because "they work".
onewhonknocks 8y ago
Frankly it kinda angers me a bit, because I would not have signed in with my github account if I had known it was just a trial.
LocalPCGuy 8y ago
I'd say to test what makes the most sense and works best financially for you. Test your conversions and optimize for better conversions over what a handful of people online say they like or don't like. Particularly when their opinion could cost you $$.

publicfig 8y ago

There is also no point on the front page that it is paid, and I would assume that because there is no mention of pricing that it would be free. I'd definitely put something very early on stating pricing and that it is not a free program. To tell someone 35% through a lesson that they are expected to pay may be fine for conversion, it's a really scummy practice.

LocalPCGuy 8y ago
I know this may be a minority opinion among developers, but I'm ok with them trying to make money. And if the optimal way to do that is to ask 35% of the way through, then that's what they should do. I don't view that as a dark practice or bait and switch. I don't think there is an obligation to be super clear that there is a paid version. It's something the owner should test, and see if it puts people off or if it converts better. Maybe it puts off 10% more people, but 30% more convert? Good on them for finding that out and optimizing accordingly. We in the dev world expect way too much for free. Not that I complain when I find something for free, but people deserve to be compensated for their work also.
- qntty 8y ago
  Sounds like publicfig is saying that it's not optimal for them.
- publicfig 8y ago
  I never argued the effectiveness of misleading business practices towards generating revenue or conversions. I feel that design can be misleading and user-antagonistic while still being the most effective solution for monetization. It is up to the creator/organization to make that decision, and that decision can be both financially effective and amoral/"scummy" at the same time. I cannot make that decision for the creator/organization, but I also feel no need to default to defending user-antagonistic practices just because "they work".

onewhonknocks 8y ago

Frankly it kinda angers me a bit, because I would not have signed in with my github account if I had known it was just a trial.

LocalPCGuy 8y ago

I'd say to test what makes the most sense and works best financially for you. Test your conversions and optimize for better conversions over what a handful of people online say they like or don't like. Particularly when their opinion could cost you $$.