yallways's dashboard

I second that. I really see this as more of a Principle thing as well. I'm glad you stress that point.

As far as saying that PPW is not simple, I'm not sure I understand why you guys keep seeing this as something complicated. I am a website developer as well (programming in more than 7 languages [not including constructs such as css]) and this appears to me to something that can be easily implemented into an already existing payment structure like Pro. Nonetheless, I guess I may be seeing things from the perspective of a development structure as apposed to maybe a business structure... so I'll stop pressuring this I guess.

But I do agree 100% with your reasoning about dictating to the developers as to what they can put in their widgets keeping in line with TOS. There are many other places to go. which is what I have done long before this issue and only still respond to the issue based on the fact that I do still have some floating widgets here on their service that are also attached to social sites. – yallways, on May 18, 2009 22:59

First, I realize the implications involving a total reconstruction... But this would not eliminate the pro option that is already successful. I am only asking to implement an alternative option.

Secondly, when seeing the last part I added, this would also raise your popularity even more due to the fact that Developers will be fighting to get a piece of this action by developing ungodly amounts of new widget. The more widget that have ads, the more apt you are to receiving payments for ad free widgets. Many widgets do not even have ads, so people do not feel a real pressure to pay for pro right now.

the only possible option I can think of with the current structure is to explain to the visitors (on the widget page) that developers do not obtain that pro cost and leave a method for them to donate something to the developers. That amount will go into our accounts and paid out using our payment methods monthly (when it reaches a certain amount). At least using this option, people can donate to us even if they do not get Pro. Or at least allow developers a space to add their own donation buttons (codes) for accepting payments. The only problem with letting us add the code though is that this poses security risks. the best option is for them to pay you the donation and this goes into our accounts there for later payout. – yallways, on May 18, 2009 17:49

There's no fair way to accomplish this with your current method of charging pro users. The only way to really cut the developers in on the deal is to charge a lower cost option per 'ad free' widget. And then from that cost, provide a percentage to the developer.

For example, use your usual charge for pro users but offer an alternative such as ".50 cents per month per single ad-free widget." Then the developer of that widget gets .25 cents of it per month. Most people will choose this option if they plan on subscribing to less than 8 widgets... while most people are apt to even do this than become pro to begin with. Plus this is a residual income for developers and yourself which means it just ads up over time.

You win because you don't pay us anything at all if they choose to go pro for 29.99 per month while we both win if they choose to pay per widget. Then this would account for the loss in revenue at least.

Users simply have a choice of 1 of two types of accounts. Pro or PPW (pay per widget). Although the developer only wins with the PPW option, it is better than nothing.

Oh,... forgot to mention. Imagine how many more widgets we'll be developing if we consider the fact that the more we make, the more we could be getting paid. It would skyrocket!

I'm just curious... But what ever happened to "an hour or so"? – yallways, on May 18, 2009 14:57

Wow... I'm so going to put a hold on those articles because I love the fact that you no longer sound like a canned employee and a bot more human now. However, I did bookmark this thread already for burying. If your reason for burying it was for the reasons you just stated then perhaps you can explain why your first explanation for doing so was "Angry developer..."? that's the part that really got to me. If our dissatisfaction is the basis of burying our concerns then that would seem to be extremely unethical in anyone's honest opinion. Perhaps you should have simply stated the paypal issue and then replaced the words paypal with ****** or something. we would get the point.

Wow... another excellent point for my articles. Thanks. – yallways, on May 15, 2009 09:18

Oh, I can believe it and I knew it would happen too. This is what people do when they don't want other people to see evidence of their screw-ups. I'm just waiting for them to delete it altogether... because when they do, I'm creating several articles and posting them on more than 230 social bookmark sites. I'm considering working on it now just for burying this post. The posting part is easy considering that I have my own toolbar created that automatically posts my articles to hundreds of my bookmark accounts with one click. And a post got buried because a developer was angry? Well, duh. I suppose if you don't agree with them, you must be wrong. Well, let's see how they like My articles. I'm writing them tomorrow and posting them to social bookmarks and article databases this weekend. Let's see how their tune changes when dealing with an SEO professional that has been doing this for more than 14 years.

Oh don't worry Widgetbox... You can't claim any slander or lawsuits on this either due to the fact that I am also ex-Military Intelligence and Hopkins County Deputy and very much aware of what constitutes an illegal act and what doesn't. This is merely public information based on a developer's own experiences. I live in the USA. Good luck with that!

And no, you do not provide a free service. Nice try. Your site is ad based and you produce revenue from that. therefore you get paid to provide us with these "Free" services. I can develop widgets without your help and have done so for years. Any developer can. All you provide for us is an additional method in which to display them to the public. And there are many online methods in which to do that without you. Nothing is free.

Yes, when that one widget is bringing me in approximately 60 to 90 dollars a month in adsense revenue. How much will we all be losing at your expense over the years? And you methods of allowing us to get paid is unacceptable. I will not use paypal... no one in their right mind will use them either after what they have done to me. Your services are no longer acceptable to me because you can not consider the needs of developers prior to making decisions that directly effect them. $60 a month may seem like pocket change to you but I do not keep my eggs in one basket. I continuously anticipate moves such as this and is why I maintain the ability to adjust accordingly. I am not providing a free service for you to charge them for it.

People put forth a lot of effort to create and maintain widgets as well as spend money to keep their services going. Then you come along and tell us that we cannot place ads on these widgets for your pro users. the fact is, these are YOUR pro users, not OURS. they paid YOU, not US. I stopped actively developing widgets and even removed a lot of mine already because when you people called and interviewed me (as well as other developers) a couple of years back, you said that you would consider my suggestions to pay developers via an affiliate service. I had no idea at that time, you would be using only PayPal and thus discontinued developing there. Anyone using paypal is virtually blind to their scams. I do not even PAY people who require you to do so via PayPal let alone have an account there. So what good is it to me or anyone else in the right mind to be offered a payment solution by you with that in mind?

It's okay with me that you are doing this. You are right. One little widget will not hurt me. But that's what you like about it, huh? That you can simply go around to all these developers and say... "Ah it's one little ad or two" ...and then rake in the revenue from those thousands of developers who lose money over this? Yes, it's just one little ad. But I choose not to partake in your greed. But that shouldn't bother you none that I am not partaking in it though. After all, I am but one unimportant useless little developer to you, huh? I don't matter, right? Just like the rest of them.