Thread: OpenCandy
View Single Post
Old 10. Apr 2011, 03:23 PM   #8 (permalink)
Super Simple
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 11

Originally Posted by MidnightCowboy View Post
Collectively we try to provide Gizmo's visitors with what they want to see and judging by the current feedback, items containing Open Candy are not on this list. One of the biggest criticisms we receive is for not pointing out hidden elements such as Ask and OC in our reviews.

Hey, it's your site, and you get to do whatever you want. No argument there.

And as for pointing out hidden things, heck, I'd agree. As a user, I want to know about those things. But there's nothing hidden or secretive about OC. (see below)

Originally Posted by MidnightCowboy View Post
Personally, I object to being "stealthed"with something I would otherwise choose not to have if I knew it was there in the first place.

There's no "stealth" about OC. Yes, there are those out there that do try to slip by. OC isn't one of them.

Originally Posted by MidnightCowboy View Post
To be honest I'm not much interested in how developers need to fund their software because it is not up to the likes of me to judge them. To suggest though that this is all fine and dandy is stretching the inference that the rest of the world must be wrong to its limits.

Not sure how to respond to that. You seem rather hostile towards developers that are trying to produce tools to help people. Dunno... Am I reading you wrong?

Here's a portion of the site privacy policy here:

Collecting information about you

We collect personal information from users who register at our site as well as subscribers to our RSS feeds. The main types of information we collect are contact details, such as email addresses and names. We collect most of this information directly from individuals when they voluntarily register at our web site or subscribe to our RSS feeds.

We also collect statistical information from site visitors through the Google Analytics web statistics service and the Logaholic web service. This information includes details of the browser you use, the operating system you are using and other similar information. Full details can be found on the Google Analytics website and on the Logaholic site. You can disable the collection of this statistical information by turning off JavaScript in your web browser though this may create possible navigation problems for you on this site.

I don't see how that is any different. The moment someone steps on the site, information is collected about them. More information than OC collects. There's no opt-out. No warning. Nothing. Is that not "stealth"?

Now, I'm not trying to say that you're doing anything malcious or anything of the sort. I don't see anything wrong in what you're doing. But applying the same standard, or even a stricter standard, I can't see how OC is doing anything wrong either as it is little different (OC collects less information).

I wouldn't be a "dog with a bone" if the same standard were applied elsewhere as well. But it's not. That's the problem.

In the same line of thought:

Using and disclosing your personal information

Our purpose in collecting information about you is to deliver the site services you requested, newsletters and RSS feeds to which you subscribe, to provide any services that you request and to operate our business efficiently.

This website and RSS feeds to which you subscribe may contain advertisements...

Regarding that, you said:

Originally Posted by MidnightCowboy View Post
Personally, I object to being "stealthed"with something I would otherwise choose not to have if I knew it was there in the first place.
Going in blind, I can't think of anyone that would prior to visiting a site say that they wanted to see ads on it. Some ads are useful. I found out about a few concerts that I went to through ads, and I'm very glad they were there because I wouldn't have known otherwise. (Some concert pics are here.)

But I don't feel ambushed because a site has ads.

I wouldn't call the information collection on a web site "stealth" either. Then again, I do software, and I know about those things. But for someone that isn't tech-savvy, I still don't see that there's any "stealth" going on.

To be honest, I've not seen any ads on the site here, and I find that rather bizarre. I don't know how you fund the site.

Do you have premium content?

No, this is a free site and will remain that way.

How is this site funded?

This is a community based site and our aspiration is to keep the site independent and non-commercial. We are not affiliated with any commercial site or software developer.

Currently we are trying to fund this site by donations from site visitors and selling "Gizmo's Freeware" branded merchandise. Any shortfall is funded with the minimum amount of advertising.
It's quite frankly amazing. You guys have done a spectacular job of things. And I haven't seen a single ad.

Heck, if you can afford to support everything yourself, all the more power to you! Philanthropy is a good thing.

So I think I get the context that you're operating under, and the aversion to ads. I only have 1 site that has ads on it, and I was reluctant to put them there, but I wanted to make the software free, and needed some way to try and cover some costs.

To me, it just seems a tad unfair to apply different standards. Not everyone can afford to work for free.


Super Simple is offline   Reply With Quote