I don't know about this (and I see this idea expressed in other comments)... Something about that just seems wrong to me. What DistroKid is doing is showing g

I don't know about this (and I see this idea expressed in other comments)... Something about that just seems wrong to me. What DistroKid is doing is showing good will to users who for whatever reason decide to game the system. It's a fair and square proposition: "This service costs money, we see you are trying to game the system and instead of just kicking you out we are willing to assume you're going to be honest and pay if you can really afford. It's the choice we made (to trust our customers), and that's it." Constantly nagging about payments, when they already agreed to let people not pay, would in my opinion and taste be just pathetic. The message that would send (again, in my opinion) is: "Remember when we said we trusted you? Yeah, well, that was just to get our foot in the door. We don't, so now not only will we take your money, we'll insult your intelligence with this passive aggressive message." I assumed you're proposing this message pops out as the second phase of the current scenario. OTOH, if they offered this kind of deal right from the start it would be a different thing, but please -- sans passive aggressive pop-ups on morality. ;) That said, I think what DistroKid is doing now, as it is, is perfect.