Quote:
Originally Posted by Hellmark
But what if you were in the other lanes to begin with? If you were someone who had javascript turned off by default, for security purposes, you'd never knew there was a paywall. Are they dishonest? Many people access news sites while at work, and I know of many companies that have javascript disabled, to cut down on security risks. It isn't an uncommon thing, and their dev team should have taken it into account.
|
Yes, more hypotheticals, I get it, I get it. Do you really think the NYTimes gives a shit about people who have javascript turned off and thus "miss" the warning? We can make up stories about this all night to defend certain behaviors-let's not. I get it.
As I noted before, it is obvious to *me*..in *my* opinion, that the NY Times coders in fact did understand the limitations and workarounds, and proceeded with what they thought was the best balance they could find, given the realities of the web. And some people will drive around the barriers, intentionally or not. And some will actually pay the toll, not knowing how to go around the barriers. And some people will pay, because they understand the whole subscription idea, and find value in it. Even if they don't see the barriers at all.
(FWIW, I think the cost barrier is too high, at least for an iPad user who doesn't currently subscribe to the paper edition. But I'm not turning off Javascript. )