> free riders will come eat the server resources
that's not the way to address a user whether paid or "free rider" as you call them.
that's not the way to address a user whether paid or "free rider" as you call them.
"In the social sciences, the free-rider problem is a type of market failure that occurs when those who benefit from resources, public goods, or services of a communal nature do not pay for them.[1] Free riders are a problem because while not paying for the good, they may continue to access it. Thus, the good may be under-produced, overused or degraded"[0]
He needs to create a sustainable app/service, and does not have a lot of external VC resources to burn while doing so. Thus, it must be sustainable in real time.
Server loads are apparently one of his biggest expenses, so he must optimize to minimize those resources.
OTOH, allowing people to take substantial 'free rides' to test the product in their situation is an excellent way to get new paying users, and often an essential gateway to conversion. I'll hardly sign up for anything without a real test drive.
So, letting potential customers get some 'free riding' is good, but too much will sink the ship.
It looks like he has a limited time 60-day demo and also a no server unlimited time demo. Both seem like good ways to limit the resources given away for free, while providing enough 'free rides' to entice them to pay for the journey.
I'm already heading over check it out after just browsing the main page & comments.
Now, if you are trying to say that mentioning the "free rider" term in public is somehow insulting to the potential users. I don't think so. He's not calling them "freeloaders" which has a more derogatory connotation. the "free rider" term carries a connotation a little bit like I've won a free ride, but it isn't a permanet free pass. I wouldn't find "hey, you get a free ride for two months" at all insulting.
Overall I agree, if all you are saying is that the "free rider who eats resources" phrasing isn't the most customer friendly possible usage, all other things being equal
How will he treat paying customers ? I smell double standards. That's all I am saying.
1. You don't have anything better as a term
2. It's a valid and well understood term on the board you're on
3. It's a legitimate problem for those with finite resources
That leads to the conclusion that you probably don't pay for things often which is why you got your feelings hurt. There is literally no way that term should be offensive to you unless you abusively take advantage of services and then some then when it comes time to pay.
Which is, I probably don't pay for things and felt hurt when I saw "yet another paid note taking app" amongst dozen others on the internet.