Yes, precisely. And having been so radically misinterpreted, and then viciously (and repeatedly) attacked based on the misinterpretation, I think the best thing I can do is bow out of the conversation.
Katherine
Keith said:
and
Then Katherine confirmed these observations:
What I actually said was exactly the 180 degree opposite.
There is a difference between ‘buying’ and ‘bonus’.
I also said:
I originally said:
*Clearly when I said, "but which is only available to the ‘privileged landed gentry’ who have a special password. I meant a password given by purchasing the application.
It was the special and privileged on-line site full of writers goodies that was to be the ‘privilege’ - the bonus for buying the application; NOT the application as the bonus for buying access to the special web site.
Step 1 - Purchase Scrivener for Money.
Step 2 - Use your Scrivener licence to get access to a special writers’ craft web site.
The key to getting access to the web site is the application licence that Keith would verify and the verification code he then issued to the licence holder would allow access to the special site. Clearly this access would be denied to those who did not have a proper licence or pass scrutiny by Keith. It is called an incentive to purchase the application.
It would be a brilliant opportunity for Keith and Phil to get together over a quiet coffee or lager and cook up a business deal.
I said the same thing three different ways. People should pay for it. The idea of a special web site for writers who own a paid for licence was as a bonus - a marketing tool to SELL the application at the proper price. I just don’t get it that this could be so completely misunderstood and turned completely upside down. The follow up that insists on the misinterpretation is beyond me. Couldn’t you just go back to what I said in the first post I put up here and read it. Actually read it.
It was an idea for a marketing teaser for Scrivener and an explanation, using Pareto’s Law, of why the activation code idea is not a great idea in terms of the tiny numbers of potential users who would steal the application. As I said, those who will steal the application anyway, no matter how complex the activation key, will probably not use it as a writing tool. Those who will use it as a writing tool will pay for it - according to Pareto’s Law. Obviously using Pareto’s law to explain the idea of the diminishing number of Scrivener thieves is far too complex.
Hey, it was a contribution to the debate. No need to turn it on its head.
I won’t even attempt to explain Group Think as I see it here. Suffice it to say that the comment was even more misunderstood.
Can we get back to the original question posed by Keith about the ‘activation key’ idea. This is ridiculous.
You have to be a bush lawyer here just to defend the contributions you make?
Phew!
LL, no one said you were suggesting that people shouldn’t buy Scrivener, no one at all!
I quite agree!
What you are saying - as confirmed in your previous e-mail - is that there could be a bonus section of the site that would only be available to people who purchased Scrivener, yes? And that this bonus might make potential users become paid-up users?
But you are also suggesting this as an alternative to activation, yes? (Hence it is in this thread.)
All of this was perfectly understood. What I am saying is that - whilst this is a nice idea - it isn’t really feasible as a viable alternative to online activation because:
- It would require a subsection of the L&L site to be so well development and rich in content that rumours of it, or a description of it, would be a sufficient draw to potential users as to make them want to buy. This would be a mammoth task in itself and would require as much time to maintain as Scrivener itself, I wouldn’t doubt. (But don’t get me wrong - I would love such a subsection of the site; it would be great.)
- The implication of your suggestion is that this would be instead of online activation. But what I am saying - and please re-read [b]my[/i] post above, as this is what I was saying there - is that I do not believe that a subsection of the site available only to registered users would be a bigger incentive to potential users than online activation. In fact, I believe the opposite is true.
But the main point is that online activation is a more cost-efficient way of achieving this sort of thing and it works, and I already answered your concern about it being tied to a particular machine - it’s not.
I don’t really want to get into an argument about this. It’s Christmas, I’m enjoying the holidays, and I wish everyone the best. I think a bonus section of the website that only registered users could access, which gave access to special writer information and content, is a wonderful idea, and I’ve certainly toyed with it myself. But I don’t see it as an alternative to online activation, but rather as a potential extra, and it is also something that would be a lot of work - which is something I haven’t got time for with 2.0 on the go at the moment. It would also involve me drawing in a number of writers who would be interested in contributing for very little return, of course…
I do hope we can continue in a more festive spirit, especially given the warm welcome you have received back here, Mr Lightning. 
Happy holidays,
Keith
As I said above:
You have the app, he has the web site.
Katherine, LL nKB, your festive spirits 
No! I’m suggesting that it MAY not be needed if the incentive to buy captures the naughty people who might rip it off in one way or another. If I were a naughty person inclined to steal your app, I would think twice if I could get access to a privileged web site that spoke to my needs - ONLY if I had a legitimate licence and got a special code from you to get that access. I would know that I could not get access unless I paid for the app.
Seriously Keith, Scrivener is the best app of its type on the planet Earth. It is about as fairly priced as it is possible to get. When I put up a marketing spiel on every writer’s web site on this little planet as you were starting out on development you doubted its sheer class - I didn’t. I still have your emails - they were from a chronically tired school teacher who had written a version of a writing tool mostly for his own use. There was a guy with a tool he had developed to write his own novel. I didn’t doubt it - you did. Now you don’ t have to teach and Scrivener pays for your ‘frothy tops’.
So, what I am suggesting is a much more sophisticated ‘lateral thinking’ approach to marketing version 2 that adds a bonus that will act as an incentive to buy that may not need the heavy protection you are suggesting - repeat MAY not. It was a contribution to the thread meant in the same way that I had done way back when. You need to take these ideas on board and reflect on them more deeply than anyone else does. I can’t see the point of killing the idea as it enters the chrysalis phase. Let it live. It may turn into a beatiful creature that stuns you as it takes flight.
Oh, I’m definitely not killing the idea - not at all. All I was saying was that I didn’t see it as an alternative to registration or online activation, which is what I thought you meant to begin with. As a bonus it’s certainly a fantastic idea, and the problem only (well, only is a bit of an understatement, obviously) lies in the implementation. As I said, I had been thinking along similar lines for the future - though probably not with 2.0 but later on. In fact, don’t Mariner do something like this? I’m sure they have some special writing section to their website that you have to be a member to get access to. (One thing I am doing is putting together case studies with authors, but those will be free for all to access.) A special part of the site for registered users would take a lot of thought and time, and probably a better web designer than myself to put it together (there are the issues of security, and of issuing passwords or some way of getting in only to registered users etc). An immediate thought is that 2.0 project templates could be placed there, ones that could be shared by users… And some users were talking of having a private area for critiquing each other’s work. The main problem would lie in gathering content rich enough to make it worthwhile. And I’m all for brainstorming that, if you (or someone else) would like to start a separate thread for such a discussion in the Wish List or Feedback forums, for future consideration.
Many thanks, as always, for your kind words about Scrivener and your ongoing support of it.
Thanks and all the best, and a happy Christmas to you,
Keith
(Now a tired programmer rather than a tired schoolteacher 
)
KB,
what LL is saying is that it needn’t be your content. Work out a deal with some other, preexisting premere site to provide the content. You work on code, they do content. Kind of like sports and broadcasters.
Make sense?
Hi Jaysen, yes, I understand that, and I know who he’s thinking of and I’ll happily speak to that person. But as soon as you make a deal with someone else, you’re giving up a chunk of your revenue, and we already do everything dirt-cheap as it is - the price would have to go up.
Best,
Keith
Not knowing anyone but you, I can’t comment to the over all cost, but it might be that add revenue could offset the cost for the other site. Maybe.
But then we all know that headless folks don’t think all that clearly. Something about missing their head.
That is spot on.
As you have guessed Keith - and I dropped the hint in the first email, you could both be on to a little goldmine!
All it takes is one little phone call.
I thought I got that stain off my tie!
LL, What about those of us who write for fun? Meaning that a pro shop with submission tips and the like might not be much of a draw. Does the “one who is secret” provide enough to causal information to incentivize those of us in the +3 class?
I didn’t have a issue with the product activation, so I can’t complain at all. I have no quarrel with it as long as it doesn’t cause any problems. Like not being able to use the app if I’m not connected to the internet. I know I downloaded and bought it off the web, but I often use it when not connected, like when I’m on the road trying to get some writing done (don’t worry, not when I’m driving).
So if it helps keeping people from stealing it, and causes no or very few unnoticeable problems, I’m all for it. I think people should get paid for their work after all.
I know that probably doesn’t help much. I’m basically saying good job and keep up the good work. Scrivener is the best tool I have used for writing in a long time. I don’t think I could ever go back working without it.
Thanks for all the hard work and care you put in to not upset your customers.
Just a thought. I have no complaints about the product activation, but would it be at all possible to make the product activation check less frequent? (or is there the possibility to do this check by phone? If there already is, and I haven’t seen in the prior posts, my excuse comes later*). As my computer is not attached to the net I now have to dismiss two boxes every time I open Scrivener. I know it’s not exactly a hardship but I’m a*
*lazy beggar
Hi Eldritch,
Actually eSellerate do provide a way of manually activating without an internet connection, but I need to look into it - I’ll definitely include that in 2.0 as you are right, this is something that needs adding to make it even less of a hassle. There’s no way to do it at the moment, though, sorry!
Thanks and all the best,
Keith
P.S. Actually, now that I come to think about it, if you’re not connected to the internet at all, you shouldn’t even see the activation warning panel - what message are you seeing? Curious.
No needs for apologies, like I say, It’s no real hardship and I can certainly wait till 2.0. (And unlike some others I’m in no rush for that.) 
The first box says Product Activation. The serial number for Scrivener on this machine has not yet been activated. etc.
The second says, Failed to connect to server with errors -3001.
Thinking about it to. This is a new mac. I don’t recall having seen these messages on my old mac before it bit the bullet.
Curious - it should only get that far if the Mac tells Scrivener that it has a connection. Try playing with your network settings and telling your Mac that it shouldn’t even try to connect, maybe.
Cheers Keith. Will look into that. I do remember my wifi trying to start a connection to my neighbors network when I first had it but thought I’d turned it off.
That could well be the cause. Let me know how you get on.
Cheers Keith. Just had a look now. An emulator I’d been using had set up some kind of emulated Network (Not sure what to 
) I’ve deleted it, restarted Scrivener and there’s now no Activation reminder. So problem solved.
Thanks very much. 