Chat freely about anything...

User avatar
By rudy
#71944 For me, I didn't have an issue with the price. Anyone who has put together decent documentation knows how much work it takes. The problem I had was flogging it here. Its bad enough with all the included advertisements. The silly four posts per page with the sole reason for obtaining more advertisment potential. But it costs time and money to operate a site so I will keep my bitching to a minimum.

If everyone who had some kind of ESP8266 product offering posted here in order to obtain free advertising this forum would go for sh*t. And being a retired guy wanting to make a few bucks is not nearly good enough reason for me. I'm a working guy and I have limited time to waste.

I would prefer this site stay as a place where people can come and contribute information for the benefit of others. To come here and ask for help after getting stuck with a problem and having made a reasonable attempt to search for an answer before asking.
User avatar
By McChubby007
#72047 Right! I've resisted for a few days, but I feel I have to reply.

I am retired, in fact medically retired due to chronic ill health and under 50 years of age : I will never work again. I support myself without state aid, and was sensible (and fortunate) to spend part of my wages on a pension throughout my life. I scrape by.

I do NOT charge for advice or information. AND, I certainly do not charge for information that is a copy of someone else's! I treat the internet and the open source/information world with respect : it offers me tremendous resources, and occasionally I pay back with some of my experiences.

Since I won't pay to read the book, perhaps someone who has can answer the following:
1. Is all material unique and attributed to the peprson charging for the book?
2. If no to 1. : Does the material have the relevant permission from the original source for its reproduction and profit thereof?
3. Is all relevant material referenced to its original source?

If any of the answers to the above are negative, then it's as simple as theft. I'm annoyed, I'm blunt!

Perhaps some can argue a legal case, but I challenge any reasonable person to find any moral value in it.
The end does not justify the means, and if we all played this way we would all be poorer for it. This is principle, and the reduced price has no bearing on it whatsoever.

I won't be replying to anything else on this subject, nor reading anyone else's replies, so go ahead and fill yer boots. Here endeth the lesson.