I'm going to go for the Pro for a year, but like everyone else I'm urging you not to limit the number of checks and other vital ICM features for free users. If this site site becomes ICheckMoviesOnALimitedBasis.com, it will die rapidly. You want free users to feel like they are getting a great deal already.
I know it's been said, but a monthly quota of checks for non-paying members really could be the downfall of the site. I don't mean "downfall" in the sense that I wouldn't like it; I mean "downfall" in the sense that it would stall all momentum of a building community, leading to a stall and eventual collapse of the site as we know it. The stakes are extremely high, it seems to me. You have to get the details right: make it an incentive for veterans to get the Premium accounts, but you MUST leave the site as fully functioning and inviting for non-paying members (functioning much as the site does now). If you don't, it will mean the end of iCM.
Please keep providing us with your feedback! So far, we've seen a lot of very interesting ideas. As you probably know, we take our user's input very seriously.
mjf314: Doesn't the site already have that function? I just clicked on your name and saw that you've watched Midnight in Paris recently. Is that not what you mean?
1. I'll be jumping in at the $25 level.
2. I am another voice agreeing that basic checking-- unlimited checking-- is the one main thing that should remain free.
3. "Amount" is for things that cannot be counted (amount of sugar, amount of dirt), while "number" is for things that can be counted (number of pencils, number of trees). So -- amount of money, but number of dollars; amount of food, but number of calories. Therefore, it should be "number of movies" and "number of checks," etc. Also, "amount" is used the same way as "less" or "much," while "number" is used the same way as "fewer" or "many." Yes, it's your unsolicited English grammar lesson for the day! ;0)))))))
I think you should allow non-paying members to join groups, and only restrict the creation of groups (but still allow them to create 1 group). If you restrict joining, then the groups will be small and not very fun.
I was hoping to compete against my friends from a video game community to see who can watch the most movies. There are at least 100 of them, but I'll be lucky if I can convince 2 of them to donate to iCM. It won't be a very interesting competition if I can only compete against 2 of them. In addition, the group stats won't be an accurate representation of the community's movie-watching habits.
Add your comment
Comments 61 - 75 of 98
niesl2
I've just donated! And the only way to go is Pro, of course ;-)Local Hero -- aka MestnyiGeroi
Kasparius: Hear, hear.Kasparius
I think you guys need to focus on coming up with more features for pro account and leave the free account users almost exactly as they are now.Kasparius
I'm going to go for the Pro for a year, but like everyone else I'm urging you not to limit the number of checks and other vital ICM features for free users. If this site site becomes ICheckMoviesOnALimitedBasis.com, it will die rapidly. You want free users to feel like they are getting a great deal already.jeroeno
$50 have been added to your account ICM.If everybody donates quick perhaps we'll see 2.0 even sooner?
Local Hero -- aka MestnyiGeroi
I know it's been said, but a monthly quota of checks for non-paying members really could be the downfall of the site. I don't mean "downfall" in the sense that I wouldn't like it; I mean "downfall" in the sense that it would stall all momentum of a building community, leading to a stall and eventual collapse of the site as we know it. The stakes are extremely high, it seems to me. You have to get the details right: make it an incentive for veterans to get the Premium accounts, but you MUST leave the site as fully functioning and inviting for non-paying members (functioning much as the site does now). If you don't, it will mean the end of iCM.Sobchak
Donation sent. Dont usually do that, but I love this site :)piet
@mjf314 / dirtyharry98 That's a pretty cool idea :)piet
What Erik said. We really do :)ErikSchierboom
Please keep providing us with your feedback! So far, we've seen a lot of very interesting ideas. As you probably know, we take our user's input very seriously.Local Hero -- aka MestnyiGeroi
dirtyharry98: OK, thanks.Local Hero -- aka MestnyiGeroi
mjf314: Doesn't the site already have that function? I just clicked on your name and saw that you've watched Midnight in Paris recently. Is that not what you mean?mjf314
Another idea for a premium feature - a friend activity page, where you can easily see which movies your friends recently checked.Local Hero -- aka MestnyiGeroi
1. I'll be jumping in at the $25 level.2. I am another voice agreeing that basic checking-- unlimited checking-- is the one main thing that should remain free.
3. "Amount" is for things that cannot be counted (amount of sugar, amount of dirt), while "number" is for things that can be counted (number of pencils, number of trees). So -- amount of money, but number of dollars; amount of food, but number of calories. Therefore, it should be "number of movies" and "number of checks," etc. Also, "amount" is used the same way as "less" or "much," while "number" is used the same way as "fewer" or "many." Yes, it's your unsolicited English grammar lesson for the day! ;0)))))))
mjf314
I think you should allow non-paying members to join groups, and only restrict the creation of groups (but still allow them to create 1 group). If you restrict joining, then the groups will be small and not very fun.I was hoping to compete against my friends from a video game community to see who can watch the most movies. There are at least 100 of them, but I'll be lucky if I can convince 2 of them to donate to iCM. It won't be a very interesting competition if I can only compete against 2 of them. In addition, the group stats won't be an accurate representation of the community's movie-watching habits.
Showing items 61 – 75 of 98