Abuse of Siteini and Webgrab

mat8861 wrote:

Authors and team members received several notices of other users trying to make money out of this project. Someone even selling "siteini's" on the network, even siteini's present on webgrab servers or other user's github. Therefore to keep up this project we kindly ask you to avoid these users/sites as they are killing this project. This may force new editions of the executable wg++ into a coded version where all new functons will work only with specific encryption userkeys.

Dear WG++ team,

I fully understand the concerns about some "providers" trying to make a profit off your hard work given freely (and I do not support these providers who I agree are abusing your good will). However while reading this http://www.webgrabplus.com/content/siteini-encryption-beta-217-and-more makes things a bit clearer, I see folks both contributing and folks who have already donated (http://www.webgrabplus.com/content/donators-badge) becoming frustrated about not being able to obtain access to various inis. Please do not take this as a criticism, but for your intended paid WG++ Encryption scheme to work, you need to make the scheme clear, transparent and user friendly, so users can decide if they think it is worth donating for the site(s) they wish to use.

Cheers

Kristian

mat8861 wrote:

I will be glad to know who is frustrated with a donation of 5 euro. I personally agree with the authors to ask a minimum donation, as the epg grabbing become a business for someone. Besides that, as explained already in other posts, until now was all free and fun, but do you consider correct the authors pay licence, dns, servers, forum, work on updates of wg++ all for free ? I don't.
I will also (for me personally) add that some siteini need a lot of time to be made up, shall I make siteini for users that sell the data.....yes... but at least they need to donate a minimum.
Of course who is now selling siteini at 15-20 euro (just an update of siteini taken from this forum or of github from experienced users) is very bad...I would consider an idiot who buy those ini, instead of asking for an update here(considering the 5€), but soon also that will end.
Any suggestion is welcome.

Hi mat8861,

Like I said above, my comment was not a criticism.

With all due respect, you need to read what I wrote carefully (and I have not amended it); I never said anyone was frustrated with a donation of 5 euro. As for myself, I have donated twice and I am happy with what I get for the donation. As above I am appalled by the abuse of your goodwill and free time. However, people have the right to choose to donate, as long as they know what it is they are donating for. This was the subject of my note.

What I said was some people had paid and not got their badge and they were frustrated by that (and I gave the link, here it is again http://www.webgrabplus.com/content/donators-badge). (Here is another one - http://www.webgrabplus.com/content/dont-bother-donating.) Maybe they were too impatient.

What my suggestion was (and remains) for the site is that rather than having the sites changes for paid yearly support in various locations where it is hard to find (I am sure not on purpose) e.g.
(a) In this article (which will disappear into page 9 sometime) http://www.webgrabplus.com/content/siteini-encryption-beta-217-and-more and
(b) In this forum sticky http://www.webgrabplus.com/content/abuse-siteini-and-webgrab (which folks new to the site wil not see first) and
(c) In the "Support Us" link http://webgrabplus.com/node/494 (which finally has an explanation but which is a link that no-one will enter until they know what it is they are supporting - who clicks the donate button first? No-one does.)

, why don't you make the whole site more transparent and visible and state what you state in (c) up front, on the main page, before anyone even gets near to downloading the program or visting a forum or the news.

I hope you appreciate I am trying to help you lay out to site users what it is you want to say but it needs to be VISIBLE and it needs to be CLEAR and at present I don't think you're doing yourself justice by making it so.

Kind Regards

k.