Hacker News Reader

Comment by dangero | Hacker News Reader

I usually just do believable screenshots and a call to action like, "Request a trial" or "Buy now" it depends on what it's for.

I never take any money I just log the actions people took on the site. If it's a buy button, then you can just say, "Thanks for your interest. We are launching soon."

View on HN

But it can also have the opposite effect: people get put off as they think the product is vaporware (rightfully).

Let's say you get 20 people to signup, all of whom think it is (rightfully) vaporware. Well, at least now you can be sure there's a real market (>>20) to justify development. Even if you drop those 20 on the floor... the validation is more than worthwhile.

My experience in doing this has been that a surprising number of people who click the buy button still put their email address down afterwards, and none of the people I've talked to who did were remotely miffed about the deception.

It probably depends on the audience, but people are more understanding than you'd think about the need to look before you leap, especially when they know you're just a solo entrepreneur.

If I clicked on that button and received that response, everything I could find connected with you and your domain would go on my blacklists. Misleading people is a poor way to build trust.

Yes you're right on your count, but you have to consider this scenario (which involves thinking beyond yourself) - - it's only you, and 20 others - - who would be mildly mislead (considering you actually didn't pay anything)

Now the dev can go build a working version putting in 200-500 hours into the MVP and find the next set of 20 people who are ready to use that software, with validation at hand.

However, I agree that better messaging can be used instead of straight up misleading people. Since if it does become widely practiced, people will generally become mistrustful (again, the odds of that happening is low).

~ 2 cents

> but you have to consider this scenario (which involves thinking beyond yourself)

I'm not denying that poor behaviour can net more customers -- on the contrary, it's by far the easiest way of doing so. My response was in the domain of ethical, not commercial, calculus.

Exactly. Don't think of people landing on the site as an infinite stream of people. There are influencers who land first and you don't want to be in their bad books.

Not necessarily, you can buy adds and get random visitors for testing purposes that way. Also you can write a better explanation, so that people don't feel tricked.

Really? You maintain a 'blacklist' somewhere on Dropbox or so, and every time you make a purchase you look through who is somehow connected to it, and cross check your 'blacklist'? I think it's much more likely you're showing some internet outrage here, but when you actually run into it, you won't even remember a week later.

Yes I do maintain a blacklist. The main vehicle is: when I see something I find unconscionable from a company with I'll add an Adguard rule to block their domain name. It's hardly water-tight, but what is?

Your "I think it's much more likely" is a bit odd considering what you know about me (ie. almost nothing). "Outrage" is also pretty exaggerated. There are millions of commercial outfits out there in the world, the vast majority of which I'll never have anything to do with. There's a low bar for me to exclude just one more from consideration.

Respectfully, there is plenty fish in the sea.

I would have validated the viability at the cost of losing one customer. I think most would be willing to take that loss.

Only if you take a point of view that ethics can be shelved in the interests of business. It's a common point of view, in fact pretty clearly it prevails. It doesn't happen to be mine.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com