Disabling free accounts - Not the way to go IMO
Posted: Wed Aug 11, 2010 3:06 am
The title pretty much says it all.
Running a website costs money. I understand that. When you don't have enough money, bad things happen, and good things have to go away. I understand that too. But, when I saw this, I had a "Sad Panda Moment". This is taking away all the good things to stop one bad thing. There must be some other way to do this!
Here's a thought: You [Aaron] said that registrations were taking up most of the server's overhead. Why not limit or disable them? For example, only allow 0 or 1 registration per account. Any more must be bought at a predetermined price. You [Aaron] could perhaps post on the SS blog that anyone using Sipgate or Gizmo can use a service like IPKall instead, which contacts the SS servers (instead of the SS servers registering with them), cutting down on overhead. This could alleviate the problem of limited server resources (for now) until enough donations can be scraped together to upgrade the server.
Running a website costs money. I understand that. When you don't have enough money, bad things happen, and good things have to go away. I understand that too. But, when I saw this, I had a "Sad Panda Moment". This is taking away all the good things to stop one bad thing. There must be some other way to do this!
Here's a thought: You [Aaron] said that registrations were taking up most of the server's overhead. Why not limit or disable them? For example, only allow 0 or 1 registration per account. Any more must be bought at a predetermined price. You [Aaron] could perhaps post on the SS blog that anyone using Sipgate or Gizmo can use a service like IPKall instead, which contacts the SS servers (instead of the SS servers registering with them), cutting down on overhead. This could alleviate the problem of limited server resources (for now) until enough donations can be scraped together to upgrade the server.