GOING BACK ON THEIR WORD?

Yep, we have been discussing this in this thread

It kinda veered off the original topic as threads have a habit of doing, to the very thing you're talking about

Quote

I must say I do find the news that blue members will not have so many songs to sing as rather disappointing to say the least.
In the current economic situation certain people just cannot afford to pay and many on here can't seem to recognise that, and reply back with "It's only $7 a month!" but that is a big deal for people who are seeing their value of money diminish from what it once was.
Don't get me wrong, IF you can afford it, buy gold, because it really is worth it, but to punish people who simply don't have the means to pay for it, well, as I said, i find it disappointing to see.

Quote

IMHO the problem is this: there are other karaoke websites (no names mentioned here) that have free songs and stereo to boot for free. Added enhancements are a way to retain and foster membership.

~ Chris

Edited on October 9, 2008 at 11:34 AM Quote

k2501961 wrote:IMHO the problem is this: there are other karaoke websites (no names mentioned here) that have free songs and stereo to boot for free. Added enhancements are a way to retain and foster membership.

~ Chris

Yes but those sites have other restrictions, such as the ability to record a limited amount of songs unless you subscribe, or a very limited library. I have been to several but decided to land here. So many nice options here. Also a great community with forums chat etcetra. And it seems you have alot more contact with those running the site and they welcome feedback and actually respond.

Quote

Regarding the original post on this thread:

You have to remember this is a business. Buisnesses need to make money to thrive, or even to survive. As a blue member you can record an unlimited number of tunes, which in itself costs the company server space. There are literally thousands of people recording multiple songs every day. Anyone has access to any of those tunes. Granted sometimes it takes a few seconds to load during busy times, but considering the harddrive space and bandwidth it takes to serve those thousands of people at any given time, it must cost SingSnap alot of money to maintain the servers that allow so many instant enjoyment of all this karaoke music. Not to mention the licensing fees. So while they may have stated at one time that certian music may always be available to free members, it is understandable that as a buisness they have to make some changes to stay in business. I would rather see them survive then fail, or worse provide a poor product (long waits for loads, servers crashing etc). As so many internet businesses have failed in the past.

Just my .02

Quote

Mr_Microphone wrote:
Yes but those sites have other restrictions, such as the ability to record a limited amount of songs unless you subscribe, or a very limited library. I have been to several but decided to land here. So many nice options here. Also a great community with forums chat etcetra. And it seems you have alot more contact with those running the site and they welcome feedback and actually respond.

I have been to some other sites, not all of them I am sure, but I have not been impressed at all. They may have some songs that I want to sing that SS doesn't but there is a whole package here.

The things I missed most were the singing chat, message board and even simple things like sorting your list of songs. (this last one bothered me the most).

Kevin_P

Edited on October 9, 2008 at 1:29 PM Quote

oh and video...I missed that as well

Quote

REALLYMAD wrote:I've been here for two years now (blimey, where did the time go?).

During that time, I have watched with great interest the progress Singsnap has made from its early days as an invite only beta testing site to the full blown top rated world renowned business venture it is today. All the effort seems to have paid off.

It saddens me then to see Trev's latest update which appears, to me at least, to be the first time in the site's history that a major promise has been broken.

From the inception of Gold Memberships it was stated on numerous occasions that the remaining songs would ALWAYS be available free to blue users. In the latest update, it seems that this will no longer be the case, with the 'review' of that decision meaning that many more songs will be taken away from the free list and made exclusive to Gold Members only.

Market forces and decisions required to maintain a thriving business etc. notwithstanding, it grieves me that the need is felt to do this, particularly when we are reminded how successful the Singsnap phomonenon has become.

Stereo has finally been released site-wide. Incentive enough we are told to warrant the very reasonable $7 subscription a month. Why then are extra incentives required? Are subscriptions down on the projected targets? Are we doing well but not well enough?

I am still a staunch supporter of this site, and I remember applauding such a bold statement by Trev when he said categorically that nothing would be taken away from the blues. It seems however it was too bold since this climb down has occurred.

Whilst not earth shattering, and probably won't effect me too much as I rarely sing anyway these days, I am deeply disappointed that my faith and absolute trust in the site philosophy has been dented. Can't help but to think "What next?"

Well said. I don't give a damn about stereo or the other features, let me have the older free songs to record, knowing it may limit me from dueting with friends on songs that are gold, but don't take away the main thing besides the boards that makes this place enjoyable, a library of 10k free songs, unless I'm able and willing to pay. Most of the time I can or could, but I shouldn't have to depend on sponsors and it's not feasible for everyone that will need it to get it once the demand becomes greater, which it will for sponsorships. And what then after the inevitable price raise? Maybe a tiered form of membership where you get the big library before gold and nothing less, but you have a lower fee, silver level someone said. I would buy that as soon as I got a job.

Edited on October 9, 2008 at 2:20 PM Quote

mick you amaze me,,,,ya say youre a staunch supporter of the site.......yet youre still blue.........a stauch supporter wouild subscribe just to support the site, even withouit using all the fancy new stuff availble........

Quote

Well I for one totally agree with Mick....Once again the voice of reason in my opinion. Free speech is a wonderful thing and still thankfully supported by this site.

Quote

donnyxxx wrote:mick you amaze me,,,,ya say youre a staunch supporter of the site.......yet youre still blue.........a stauch supporter wouild subscribe just to support the site, even withouit using all the fancy new stuff availble........

Quote

oh shite,,ive opened my big mouth again....

Quote

Who wrote the definition of staunch supporter here anyways???? What does it mean to YOU? LOL!

I have NEVER paid, and I 'support' the site COMPLETELY. I try to be civil and abide by the tou. I promote it, stand by it, and agree with the way it is set up for it's users AND paying customers. Not ALL support is in the wallet. MUCH of it is in the behavior though.

My definition of a nonsupporter would be someone who ignores the tou, brings negativity, demands special favors, and has typed tantrums.

Quote

Having to look up staunch....brb

Quote

Okay...it means...

steadfast in loyalty or principle

Quote

Added Enhancements don't benefit those of us that have had Identity theft and several instances of CC theft on Paypal, nor does it tell us anything about classic rock and the British Invasion period of Musics (that is NOT returning, but still slowly disappearing on ocassion hence makes it unstable for us to join for a year) return, or whether or not we will need to keep singing the same songs over and over and over again since our genre isn't returning. The site needs first off a MORE flexible means of payment for under a year given current music selection instability in certain genres (that doesn't require opening a separate bank account in case we get robbed on Paypal again, and also doesn't involve making a trip to a bank or post office to buy a cashiers check for two or three months membership mailing it to Canada- it's not practical)

Flexible payment arrangements for under a year-

What is the future of Rock music lost-

What security do those of us that love the British Invasion period of rock have to join for one year given current instability and the fact our music IS NOT returning ?

I don't have complaints about the site in general, it's a great site, but I'm here to sing music I LIKE... Nobody can disagree with that... Locking in for a year with such instability is not logical ! opening an account on a site we've been robbed on also isn't a reasonable expectation (Paypal)!

Fact is, NOTHING that has returned Gold since March has been anything I'd sing anyway... Where are the Rolling Stones ? Beatles ? Better Rock songs lost in ALL categories ? Where's James Taylor ? etc.. R&B has since been disappearing too.. Commodores, EW&F, no Spinners, no Cornelius bros, Little RIver band has one song left, some of us lost MOST of what we joined for. WILL it return ?

Vast amounts of duplicates and obscure songs in different genres don't assure those of us that love pop-40 classic rock genre of anything.. I'm singing the same songs over and over again (which is OK I suppose) but to go Gold for a year isn't reasonable with such instability and unanswered questions.

Edited on October 9, 2008 at 6:23 PM Quote

REALLYMAD wrote:I've been here for two years now (blimey, where did the time go?).

During that time, I have watched with great interest the progress Singsnap has made from its early days as an invite only beta testing site to the full blown top rated world renowned business venture it is today. All the effort seems to have paid off.

It saddens me then to see Trev's latest update which appears, to me at least, to be the first time in the site's history that a major promise has been broken.

From the inception of Gold Memberships it was stated on numerous occasions that the remaining songs would ALWAYS be available free to blue users. In the latest update, it seems that this will no longer be the case, with the 'review' of that decision meaning that many more songs will be taken away from the free list and made exclusive to Gold Members only.

Market forces and decisions required to maintain a thriving business etc. notwithstanding, it grieves me that the need is felt to do this, particularly when we are reminded how successful the Singsnap phomonenon has become.

Stereo has finally been released site-wide. Incentive enough we are told to warrant the very reasonable $7 subscription a month. Why then are extra incentives required? Are subscriptions down on the projected targets? Are we doing well but not well enough?

I am still a staunch supporter of this site, and I remember applauding such a bold statement by Trev when he said categorically that nothing would be taken away from the blues. It seems however it was too bold since this climb down has occurred.

Whilst not earth shattering, and probably won't effect me too much as I rarely sing anyway these days, I am deeply disappointed that my faith and absolute trust in the site philosophy has been dented. Can't help but to think "What next?"

I agree completely. It was stated many times that blues would not LOSE anything that they already had.

I can certainly understand that this IS a business and there is NO other karaoke site that even comes CLOSE to the benifits that we have here. Perhaps if SS needs more revenue, they could offer for NEW golds only, buy 2 months of gold and get the 3rd month free. Or for current Golds, sponsor 2 blues and get a month free for yourself. It's certainly possible that if a blue tries gold, they may never want to go back to blue.

Perhaps the powers that be should come up with a thread or a contest for suggestions to promote Gold. I definitely feel as though we should come up with ideas to ENCOURAGE people to WANT to go Gold, rather than take more away from Blues. It will only bring on more negativity. We need POSITIVE IDEAS!!!

Just my humble opinion! I love Singsnap Gold or Blue!!

Quote

You're absolutely right about your situation Steven and I'm missing all the Bowie and Counting Crows, as well as John Lennon, some of my fav artitists. That's why I never bought a one year membership even when I was making good money but still living simply, because of the uncertainty.

I'm not so worried about using paypal or my credit card later when I'm in better financial shape, but until the track record improves I'll never consider paying a year at a time.

Quote

Tom wrote:You're absolutely right about your situation Steven and I'm missing all the Bowie and Counting Crows

I know someone that did a typo in their karaoke books and left out the 'O' in Counting Crows..made for some interesting comments one day, lol

Quote

HAHAHA

Quote

Mandy wrote:

Tom wrote:You're absolutely right about your situation Steven and I'm missing all the Bowie and Counting Crows

I know someone that did a typo in their karaoke books and left out the 'O' in Counting Crows..made for some interesting comments one day, lol

Mandy, you loveable naughty girl! You always have one-track photographic, or was that pornographic, mind. Doesn't matter, I love it either way and you always give me a giggle when I need it.

Edited on October 9, 2008 at 8:23 PM Quote

:O

Me?? pornographic?? I'm shocked!!

*hides all naughty recordings for the next 24 hours*

Ok, back to the topic in hand!!

Hi Mick!!

lol

Quote

I thought that it was always said..

"The basic features of the site would remain free"

not exactly how much of it one gets..

Edited on October 9, 2008 at 9:02 PM Quote

Well Connie, My thoughts are when a sites Beta it's getting off the ground and in time needs to be funded anyway, an excellent selection like this, and space to store our works of _____ (fill in the blank as appropriate), as well as numerous features provided needs to be supported in time. I don't even think people should cling onto what might've been an initial "wish" or hope indefinately, fact is, in time the site needs help , servers, tech help, paying for licensing, there's a huge library here that needs to be funded, that seems inevitable IMHO. So a wish at the onset during the sites inception (assuming all was to stay free indefinately), who would solely carry the expense ? That's not even logical.. My concern is instability of the genre of music I love, and the fact none has returned.. That is MY only concern.. What the future might be here for Rock music of the 60's and 70's ballad style.. It's about all I try to sing.
Such as the British Invasion period (into the US) R&B and balladeers such as James Taylor returning (or not more classic rock disappearing- which is my fear, and none of this when asked has been addressed- and although I can understand this is an uncertain area, to lock in for a year I would wish to know about the future of older pop-40 music on this site), that, and easier payment terms for under a year via CC.. Even 6 months I'd do Credit Card transacting (direct to a business) but too many people have received generous gifts (courtesy of my money). People that I've never met or even purchased items for :(.. People sure can be generous with stolen CC info.. Nope, Not doing Paypal, and to go buy a cashiers check, mail it to Canada for a couple months ? There must be an easier way to support the site for a couple months.. I'm just afraid to lock in for a year only to find I'm stuck singing Julie Andrews and and closest left to Classic Rock is "Copa Cobana" by Barry Manilow.

I wish the site had more payment options for under a year. I'm not doing Paypal for ANYTHING..LOL

Doesn't Trevor have other businesses ? Perhaps I can do a Credit Card phone transaction to a different business for 6 months via Credit Card ?? I don't know, I prefer to transact directly with businesses via credit card or bank info, none of this "Store it online" stuff anylonger.. These counterfeiters are REALLY good :( If I'm going to bother with a site such as Paypal again, I'd feel about as much security as if I justed posted my CC number, Exp Date in here for all to see. (At least I might know a few of the people who take my money)..

Edited on October 9, 2008 at 10:07 PM Quote

tomac626 wrote: That's why I never bought a one year membership even when I was making good money but still living simply, because of the uncertainty.

I'm all for supporting the site, but that means driving to the post office, standing in line paying for a cashiers check, mailing it to Canada, having it clear, and after all is said and done sometime in 2014 I'll be gold for three or four months ? I WON'T do Paypal ! If I did, I'd have to open a new bank account just for Singsnap transacting because I can't use a Credit Card off Paypal for under a year ? That is the problem I face.. Like many, I've been Gold.. People have been kind enough to say they WANT to sponsor me, but I have the money.. It's not fair to take theirs because Singsnap limits us to Paypal.. That's all that's impeding me from being Gold for at least several month increments at a time..

If some of the Beatles, Stones, JT, Commodores, Bowie, EW&F, R&B lost and still going returned I would be less reticent to join for the year.. I understand the problems the site can face internationally with licensing, but STILL if that's the music I like, just like all else, without my music, all I'll do is say stupid things on the site venues due to a paucity of music to sing, I don't wish to do anymore blabbing about bboard stuff such as "Amish perspectives on whether there exists life after birth"- that's what I'm doing now.. when I'm not singing the same songs over and over again.. Instead I'm chatting within threads like "Beliefs" categories etc.. I joined to sing, not chat in these bboards waiting for easier payment arrangements or music to return (so I don't feel uncomfortable locking in for a year)..:(

Nothing that has appeared Gold Fridays in the 7 or 8 months has been anything I sing anyway.. Song selection is what matters to me.. Bells and whistles are great... But not if I am limited to singing "Feed the Birds" in stereo with echo.

(Although I suppose the key changer might come in handy to transpose up given that scenerio) :/

Edited on October 9, 2008 at 10:26 PM Quote

Steven_Kaplan wrote:Well Connie, My thoughts are when a sites Beta it's getting off the ground and in time needs to be funded anyway, an excellent selection like this, and space to store our works of _____ (fill in the blank as appropriate), as well as numerous features provided needs to be supported in time. I don't even think people should cling onto what might've been an initial "wish" or hope indefinately, fact is, in time the site needs help , servers, tech help, paying for licensing, there's a huge library here that needs to be funded, that seems inevitable IMHO. So a wish at the onset during the sites inception (assuming all was to stay free indefinately), who would solely carry the expense ? That's not even logical.. My concern is instability of the genre of music I love, and the fact none has returned.. That is MY only concern.. What the future might be here for Rock music of the 60's and 70's ballad style.. It's about all I try to sing.
Such as the British Invasion period (into the US) R&B and balladeers such as James Taylor returning (or not more classic rock disappearing- which is my fear, and none of this when asked has been addressed- and although I can understand this is an uncertain area, to lock in for a year I would wish to know about the future of older pop-40 music on this site), that, and easier payment terms for under a year via CC.. Even 6 months I'd do Credit Card transacting (direct to a business) but too many people have received generous gifts (courtesy of my money). People that I've never met or even purchased items for :(.. People sure can be generous with stolen CC info.. Nope, Not doing Paypal, and to go buy a cashiers check, mail it to Canada for a couple months ? There must be an easier way to support the site for a couple months.. I'm just afraid to lock in for a year only to find I'm stuck singing Julie Andrews and and closest left to Classic Rock is "Copa Cobana" by Barry Manilow.

I wish the site had more payment options for under a year. I'm not doing Paypal for ANYTHING..LOL

Doesn't Trevor have other businesses ? Perhaps I can do a Credit Card phone transaction to a different business for 6 months via Credit Card ?? I don't know, I prefer to transact directly with businesses via credit card or bank info, none of this "Store it online" stuff anylonger.. These counterfeiters are REALLY good :( If I'm going to bother with a site such as Paypal again, I'd feel about as much security as if I justed posted my CC number, Exp Date in here for all to see. (At least I might know a few of the people who take my money)..

I find PayPal very secure. Sure there are people that will e-mail you with a link, claiming they are PayPal. But PayPal will NEVER send you an e-mail with a link. That is how hackers get your password!

Quote

I WAS JUST THINKING ABOUT THE ADDS...... IF BLUES LOSE MORE AND MORE SONGS THEN IT WILL BE AN ALL PAY SITE AND IT LOOKS LIKE THAT IS WHAT THEY WANT.... BUT IF NO BLUES ARE HERE THEN NOBODY SEES THE ADDS , SO THE COMPENYS THAT HAS ADDS HERE WILL GO AWAY THEN SS PRICE WILL THEN GO UP FOR THE GOLDS.... YALL THINK ABOUT IT.....WALTER

Quote

^^^^well i dont see that happening at all^^^^

i do hope there will be some other options for payment someday....

i do however see that more and more user's have joined it seems to be a younger base too....

Quote

To begin with Walter, and this has been said repetively, but not too many people click on those Ads. Alot of the members have admitted to having pop-up blockers/ad blockers. So, if the ads are blocked, how is SS making money off those Ads? I believe even Trevor has said, they aint making money from the Ads cus no one wants to click on them and no one wants to see them. So they block the Ads. See'ing the Ads don't make them any profit, it's when the Ads are clicked on, I believe that is how it works. So, if the Ads aren;t being seen by members who have the Ad blockers, what good is that doing for SS and Staff? None. So if their is no money being made from the Ads, how is it going to change if the site is to go ALL pay? It aint going to make a difference.

Edited on October 9, 2008 at 11:14 PM Quote

I also can't remember the exact thread or video, where it was stated that all things currently available to blue, would remain available, but that is my impression of what was said. I could be wrong.

Now, if Snap is still losing money with the current Gold base, what else could they do but cut costs, raise the Gold price, or go under? Sometimes things don't work out as planned. I don't wanna see em sink, but how do I know?

Are they losing money? I have no dea.

Maybe an explanation of why the shift to chop off blue songs would be in order?

Snap has created a loyal bunch of members, blue and gold.

Trevor has always seemed to me, to be an honorable man.

Lay it out there and trust that you have made enough friends to continue supporting the site. Just my dopey opinion.

Quote

Sum_Southern_Sugar wrote:I also can't remember the exact thread or video, where it was stated that all things currently available to blue, would remain available, but that is my impression of what was said. I could be wrong.

Now, if Snap is still losing money with the current Gold base, what else could they do but cut costs, raise the Gold price, or go under? Sometimes things don't work out as planned. I don't wanna see em sink, but how do I know?

Are they losing money? I have no idea.

Maybe an explanation of why the shift to chop off blue songs would be in order?

Snap has created a loyal bunch of members, blue and gold.

Trevor has always seemed to me, to be an honorable man.

Lay it out there and trust that you have made enough friends to continue supporting the site. Just my dopey opinion.

You probably phrased this, Sum, in a way that is more respectful and palatable to the site's defenders than my posts yesterday in which I felt I was saying the same thing about the song library decision for blues. Even tho my post was credited with being politely-worded, I still got attacked for it nonetheless. Hope your words are received more openly.

Quote

well, my posts are just what i think.

i don't sugar coat stuff, but i try (best i can at least) to not attack either. sometimes i fail. :-)

Quote

I've said this in other posts, and I'll say it here:

1. Ads: I ran a website a year ago. Had the ad thing. It payed a penny a click. That doesn't even pay for the electric considering that the companies that have the banners keep track of the IP's when they are clicked, so it only counts ONE time a day per user click.

2. SS from the start never GUARANTEED that the site would stay completely free. Otherwise, why put in the TOU:

"SingSnap and its licensors reserve the right to change, suspend, remove, or disable access to any services, content, or other materials comprising a part of the Service at any time without notice"

And:

You hereby agree that SingSnap reserves the right, at any time and from time to time, to update, revise, supplement, and otherwise modify these Terms of Use and to impose new or additional rules, policies, terms, or conditions on your use of the Service."

So what I see is the part of when we signed up "WE AGREED" to all of this. Does this mean that some people now DON'T agree?

Edited on October 10, 2008 at 8:23 AM Quote

You don't need to quote that out to us, Fitz. We're all perfectly aware of the legalities and fine print. Still, trust is a personal relationship that's about more than that, at least in my mind. It's built, or lost, over time in words and actions. I think it's now been badly lost here.

Quote

nope

i do agree to whatever i clicked 'i agree' on.

but i put more stock in what is said, then the legal mumbo jumbo, cuz i'm strange like that :-)

Quote

tomac626 wrote:You don't need to quote that out to us, Fitz. We're all perfectly aware of the legalities and fine print. Still, trust is a personal relationship that's about more than that, at least in my mind. It's built, or lost, over time in words and actions. I think it's now been badly lost here.

I see it as more than a legality. It IS pretty much straightfoward and tells us what SS does and does not do, or will and will not do. And I don't think EVERYONE is aware of what the TOU says or they wouldn't be making a ton of posts like "Hey, those songs belong to me, I sang them...how dare SS delete them", or the myriad posts that completely ignore that SS put in their TOU that they could change things.

And, I'm not sure about what SS "promised".
1. They said this would be a free site. It is.
2 They said people could sing free. They can.

They deleted a bunch of songs and people complained, even though SS told them that they had the option of doing that and did it for "lic" reasons. They did subscriptions, and people complained that it was unfair that subscribers got more stuff than non subscribers. They quit releasing new songs to non subscribers and people complained even though they never promised "we will always release new songs forever to everyone".
They never promised they would NEVER change the format, or limit the number of songs. I believe staff has already stated that, so I don't understand why people are complaining that SS is exercising their' options in doing exactly what they said they could do as they stated when people first signed up. I pay for a subscription on POGO...at one time it was free. Then they limited the number of games for "free" and gave more games and perks to subscribers. Same here. They too "promised" that POGO would remain free. They just never promised that it would never change.

Edited on October 10, 2008 at 9:35 AM Quote

Certain things were said in a video message about blues not losing anything that they already had, now obviously this was not written in any TOU's or in any legal documents...

Quote

Soulrebel1 wrote:Certain things were said in a video message about blues not losing anything that they already had, now obviously this was not written in any TOU's or in any legal documents...

Maybe that's why they're said in a vid rather than writing, so the standard is more gray and harder to pin down?

Jus sayin'.

Quote

Like everyone else here I also recall Trevor stating in one of his messages & possibly on a thread as well that what the blues currently had would remain free (assuming it didn't get licensed of course!!). I've said on his latest message that I think that removing access to some currently blue songs & making them gold ones is a BAD idea...

1) it goes against what he himself told us not so long ago
2) it will only stir up more ill-feeling amongst those unable to subscribe
3) All the time we are getting new & 'better' features, which Trevor continually tells us are wonderful & well worth the subscription price alone...& all the time we are having new songs added which are now gold only. So why not just keep doing that...we'll be getting 600 (or possibly more) new songs a year which will swell the ever growing gold-only content here...& anyone joining the site now gets to enjoy trying it out for free before deciding whether or not to opt for the additional features & songs enjoyed by the subscribers. Had this site been pay-only from the start would there be as many gold members now? I suspect not as we were all won over by everything the site had to offer first. & a lot of that has been down to the trust we have in Trevor & the staff here...by doing a U-turn & stating that non-subscribers will now have LESS than before, Trevor risks severely denting that trust...I would seriously advise a rethink on this one....let what is currently free STAY free & just don't add to it any further...keep bringing our more & more new features & gold only songs & the incentive to subscribe grows all the time...DON'T shoot yourself in the foot & alienate those who have stuck by you to this point. Let common sense prevail!

Quote

I'm usless with words it was all said above me by Miles^^^^

Quote

tomac626 wrote:

Maybe that's why they're said in a vid rather than writing, so the standard is more gray and harder to pin down?

I am pretty sure Trevor does not use video just so that he can't be "pinned down."

I think he does it because that's his style. It's more personal and makes for more of a conversation among friends than a corporate announcement.

I think it's refreshing that the president is such a visible and approachable presence on this site.

I, like most, am disappointed that the song catalog is apparently going to be reduced for free members. But to suggest that this decision reflects poorly on Trevor personally or that he is intentionally being vague or evasive in his communications, is unfair, in my opinion.

Edited on October 10, 2008 at 10:10 AM Quote

tomac626 wrote:

Soulrebel1 wrote:Certain things were said in a video message about blues not losing anything that they already had, now obviously this was not written in any TOU's or in any legal documents...

Maybe that's why they're said in a vid rather than writing, so the standard is more gray and harder to pin down?

Jus sayin'.

that is why I was so surprised by Trevor's latest video message, agree with you though, if it isn't written down it means nothing, just, kinda feel a bit sad by it all really.

Quote

milesofborg wrote:Like everyone else here I also recall Trevor stating in one of his messages & possibly on a thread as well that what the blues currently had would remain free (assuming it didn't get licensed of course!!). I've said on his latest message that I think that removing access to some currently blue songs & making them gold ones is a BAD idea...

1) it goes against what he himself told us not so long ago
2) it will only stir up more ill-feeling amongst those unable to subscribe
3) All the time we are getting new & 'better' features, which Trevor continually tells us are wonderful & well worth the subscription price alone...& all the time we are having new songs added which are now gold only. So why not just keep doing that...we'll be getting 600 (or possibly more) new songs a year which will swell the ever growing gold-only content here...& anyone joining the site now gets to enjoy trying it out for free before deciding whether or not to opt for the additional features & songs enjoyed by the subscribers. Had this site been pay-only from the start would there be as many gold members now? I suspect not as we were all won over by everything the site had to offer first. & a lot of that has been down to the trust we have in Trevor & the staff here...by doing a U-turn & stating that non-subscribers will now have LESS than before, Trevor risks severely denting that trust...I would seriously advise a rethink on this one....let what is currently free STAY free & just don't add to it any further...keep bringing our more & more new features & gold only songs & the incentive to subscribe grows all the time...DON'T shoot yourself in the foot & alienate those who have stuck by you to this point. Let common sense prevail!

Right on, Miles!
To me, the two most positive, and important things about this site, as far as what motivates me to come here is the size and selection of the SONG library as well as the spirit of the community, which involves the friendships and community relations here. In a nutshell, it's all about the songs and the community spirit. When the amount of free songs is cut way down and when the community spirit is way damaged by the trust feeling broken with this policy change and the blue/gold divide thrown wide open by it, the two most important things to me are drasticly altered in my mind and it doesn't seem nearly as positive a place to hang out.

Not saying at all that it's even as bad as other sites, and I'm not planning or interested in leaving. It just seems different for the worse now, but I'll stay because right now I still enjoy my friends here and can sing way more songs than I have time for. So, sorry to disappoint you, donny and whoever else is probably waiting to tell me"don't let the door.....", I'm not leaving anytime soon so you can hold off on or shove your usual "love it or leave it" response that I know this will predictably get.

Edited on October 10, 2008 at 10:15 AM Quote

Read my lips: No new taxes!

Quote

Very well put Flea. I totally agree.

FleaCDP wrote:

tomac626 wrote:

Maybe that's why they're said in a vid rather than writing, so the standard is more gray and harder to pin down?

I am pretty sure Trevor does not use video just so that he can't be "pinned down."

I think he does it because that's his style. It's more personal and makes for more of a conversation among friends than a corporate announcement.

I think it's refreshing that the president is such a visible and approachable presence on this site.

I, like most, am disappointed that the song catalog is apparently going to be reduced for free members. But to suggest that this decision reflects poorly on Trevor personally or that he is intentionally being vague or evasive in his communications, is unfair, in my opinion.

Quote

I don't know really what his intentions are about those communications, I'm not a mind reader, only he truly knows. I was not trying to impugn him, just wondering if there was a specific intent or not by using that form. Maybe it was simply about a convenient, comfortable form for widely spreading the word.... My point is I was only bringing up a question out loud.

Is that still allowed here???

BTW, I'm also an old die-hard blue and totally agree with ALL of Mick's last post.

Edited on October 10, 2008 at 11:00 AM Quote

I don't like the decision myself but it is what it is. A business ... As a business it must do what it has to do, to survive. I think it is a bad decision, for this moment in time with the way the money market is here in the US. Having the money to pay for little things, like a website, is becoming harder every day. SS can do as they like as the TOU is stated. All we can do is, say our opinions in hopes that we are heard and wait to see what happens. It hasn't happened yet, I don't think?

Quote

REALLYMAD wrote:My fear is whether or not this is the start of a very slippery slope. Us old die hard blues that up to now have had little use for any additional bells and whistles might begin to feel muscled out and almost coerced into dipping into our pockets. Are we being told that the free ride is over and we've been on it long enough? What's the next step? Restricted access to message boards?

It's not a bad thing that SS wants to give free members more incentive to subscribe. That's how they make revenue, and SS's goal is to get as many subscribers as possible. If up till now the blues don't care to pay for the "bells and whistles" then obviously that wasn't enough incentive, and SS won't make money. RM - you have to remember, SS's goal is to make YOU a gold member - so what you call "coerced" they call "incentive"! It's just business.

So to answer your "free ride" question - I'd say yes, this move would indicate a step in that direction - although not put quite that bluntly.

And as far as message board access, I believe (unless I heard/read it wrong) Trevor also said that Inner Circle message board threads were on their way. So actaully, that would be "restricted access to message boards."

Having said all that - I am disappointed that free members will be losing songs. If SS wants to further restrict free membership, I think they should have restricted the number of songs free members can record/save, not restrict access to the song catalog itself.

But I suppose that may come down the road, as well, if the current restrictions do not give free members enough incentive to subscribe.

Edited on October 10, 2008 at 11:17 AM Quote