20 Sep '05 00:39>
Why don't they give those without the power to subscribe a least a chance to play a maximum of 8 games? Why 6 max?
Originally posted by zwuits all about bandwith nowadays. we have to pay for it.
Why don't they give those without the power to subscribe a least a chance to play a maximum of 8 games? Why 6 max?
Originally posted by hildanknight6 Concurrent games is more than enough for you to enjoy the experience here and to see the benefits of subscribing.
No chess site should mistreat their free members. Free members may still be very enthusiastic about chess and the site and may be able to make sigificant contributions. For example, they may come up with original ideas to improve the website.
While there are some free members who sincerely cannot afford to pay for the chess here, we must realize that e ...[text shortened]... their Red Hot Pawn experience which may affect my decision on whether to subscribe to the site.
Originally posted by zwuAnd what happens if it was increased to 8 games and the next non subscriber thought it might be better if you got 10 free games and then the next reckons 12 etc?
Why don't they give those without the power to subscribe a least a chance to play a maximum of 8 games? Why 6 max?
Originally posted by XanthosNZNon-subscribers do contribute ad revenue, although not much, it does help. There was once a time when the ad revenue was close to worthless, but this isn't the case anymore, thankfully. But of course we would prefer people to subscribe.
I think non-subscribers should stop whining about a site they pay nothing for.
Originally posted by RussWhy not introduce a budget subscription - full priveleges, but those subscribers still get the inconvenience of adverts?
Non-subscribers do contribute ad revenue, although not much, it does help. There was once a time when the ad revenue was close to worthless, but this isn't the case anymore, thankfully. But of course we would prefer people to subscribe.
-Russ
Originally posted by GatecrasherYou could switch a lot of the advertising off. The only thing I ever remembered seeing prior to deciding to become a paid subscriber was the regular reminder to subscribe. Didn't get any of the other ads. I'd suspect I'd be far from the only one doing that.
Why not introduce a budget subscription - full priveleges, but those subscribers still get the inconvenience of adverts?
Originally posted by redbaron101At age 13 you should be capable of picking up a paper route or something to find extra cash.
mebe there should be a 3month or 6month subscription, or a cheaper sub with less priveleges so perhaps kids could afford to join, I remember when i was a non subscriber I used various ad blockers so i never got the ads, but this site impressed me enough to subscibe to, but i wouldnt be surprised if non subs did the same and used ad blockers etc - there g ...[text shortened]... cheaper sub (for eg one with a higher cap games limit) i might of convinced my mum to fork out.
Originally posted by XanthosNZClass Recs {
I think non-subscribers should stop whining about a site they pay nothing for.