THIS POST WAS STARTED AND COMPLETED BEFORE READING POSTS 17-20, scary huh.
Steve,
You are blinded by your underlying and invisible but respectable standards. You, as I frequently find myself, can't see the validity in the criticism because we don't see the conflict they do, primarily because you don't and have no need to constantly reconsider your ethics. They are simply part of your SOP. Many, do not have that foundation and quantify everything on a calculator. I'll attempt to explain.
Just as an example, when/if they subscribe and spend $60 for 200 songs each month, they value each song at .30. A real bargain in my book, but I digress.
If they only foresee playing/using 50 of those songs, only 25%, they consider 150 x .30, $45.00, or 75% of the expense as waste or overpaying, i.e being ripeed off.
They either electively or selectively fail to calculate the value using a more reflective and intelligent equation. 50 songs delivered to your mail box, usually prior to the songs getting major airplay, in a format that is immediately usable, transferable, and at such high quality as to almost be overkill, for only $1.20 each is such a bargain that no intelligent, ethical contradiction can be offered.
The insidious and unspoken entitlement attitude, that typically also travels in the "I'm obviously being ripped off" lane, leads many to simply leech the music and avoid the conflict, a conflict that doesn't really exist.
Steve,
You are blinded by your underlying and invisible but respectable standards. You, as I frequently find myself, can't see the validity in the criticism because we don't see the conflict they do, primarily because you don't and have no need to constantly reconsider your ethics. They are simply part of your SOP. Many, do not have that foundation and quantify everything on a calculator. I'll attempt to explain.
Just as an example, when/if they subscribe and spend $60 for 200 songs each month, they value each song at .30. A real bargain in my book, but I digress.
If they only foresee playing/using 50 of those songs, only 25%, they consider 150 x .30, $45.00, or 75% of the expense as waste or overpaying, i.e being ripeed off.
They either electively or selectively fail to calculate the value using a more reflective and intelligent equation. 50 songs delivered to your mail box, usually prior to the songs getting major airplay, in a format that is immediately usable, transferable, and at such high quality as to almost be overkill, for only $1.20 each is such a bargain that no intelligent, ethical contradiction can be offered.
The insidious and unspoken entitlement attitude, that typically also travels in the "I'm obviously being ripped off" lane, leads many to simply leech the music and avoid the conflict, a conflict that doesn't really exist.
