At least with current ST the 'tutorials' for this tend to involve hex editors or scripts that can be quietly subverted by the author.
Keep in mind the context of this conversation is a conjecture that Sublime's nag screen led to purchases out of convenience for the users making those payments (who could've easily patched the binaries but didn't). Disagree with that premise if you want, but if so, clarify that you're doing that.
If my last comment wasn't clear, I think the dent in revenue would be considerable for fully open-sourcing Sublime as it would make it too easy for people to patch out the nag.
> Huh, I started that premise and I'm continuing to argue it. You might be thrown off by HN's busted comment nesting.
I'm asking that your argument is internally consistent—that you're not trying to advance some thought, and the backtrack to a position where you advance another one that's at odds with the original. I don't see how this suggests that there's confusion about how to read threaded comments.