See https://github.com/mackyle/sqlite/blob/3cf493d4018042c70a4db...

Just spent 5 minutes wandering through the sqlite source remembering how pretty it is.

Wow.

Although that particular case is as much about misattribution and misunderstanding as entitlement.

You would be surprised. I was yelled at on the regular by folks using gaim because I didn't want to add whatever random feature they were asking for.

I also had some dude, some how, figure out my cell phone number. He started calling me at 3am. He would always say that he "wanted to talk to me about his ideas."

I had to change my number to get away from that one.

I've recent learned from a PM friend of mine that a good response to features you have no intention of implementing (better than a flat no) is: I'll take that into consideration and see where I can fit it into our development timeline.

The end is the same result (no feature) but with a bit more comfort for both parties.

> The end is the same result (no feature) but with a bit more comfort for both parties.

I don't think this is true.

Same result? Agreed. More comfortable for the developer? Okay, sure (if being dishonest/disingenuous is no discomfort). More comfortable for the requestor? It depends on the person. I would loathe this, for example, and it would evoke in me a far worse feeling than a flat out "no" would; these kinds of responses abound in plenty of other areas of life, and they're very much one of those things that contributes that kind-of-kills-me-a-little-on-the-inside feeling. I suspect that I'm not alone.

But then, I'm not the kind of person who's going to be harrassing anyone over feature requests. I also suspect, though, that the inference that lots of the intended targets will be placated by this kind of response is probably overstated.

EDIT:

To give an example, an acquaintance of mine listed a room for rent last year. He got about, I dunno, a little over a dozen responses of varying quality; some were from people who essentially put in the least effort possible, while others had both indicated that the author had actually put some thought into considering whether it would be a good match and provided relevant info about themselves for review. His response to almost all of them? To treat the best of them with the worst; they got no response. The result as I'm gazing over his inbox? That slightly-less-optimistic-about-humanity feeling.

>More comfortable for the requestor? It depends on the person. I would loathe this, for example, and it would evoke in me a far worse feeling than a flat out "no" would;

The key here is that the requestor doesn't "deserve" anything, and the developer wants to be fucking left alone...

Weird use of quotes here, considering I used the word "deserve" nowhere. But on that note, I think every person does deserve to be not automatically lied to because of cynicism. See my comment about treating the best with the worst and the multiple times I point out the diminished-enthusiasm-for-a-humanity-filled-with-humans-that-don't-see-the-humanity-of-other-humans feeling.

"No, leave me alone" is much a better response than, "Sure, I'll think about that!" when the latter isn't true, the recipient would've been okay with the former, and hasn't given reason for you to believe otherwise.

Note also that I didn't bring up the comfort of the requestor; I mentioned it only because iaw specifically brought it up and said that lying would comfort them...

I wouldn't have written my comment at all if iaw had said, "The end is the same result, but it's more comfortable for the developer, and it gets the requestor to fuck off." But that's not what (s)he wrote.

This reminded me of the oft-repeated quote from Alicia Florrick in last week's episode of The Good Wife.

"All options are open to me, and I plan to decide in the next 48 hours."

LOL, I watched that episode. It is the exact same principal but seemingly easier to pull off because it is independent of any actual decision.

A nicer way to do that is quote a fee 50x more than you'd reasonably charge.

And the optimal way to do it? Just quote the actual figure that it would cost them for you to agree to it.

Which when taking into account the hassle, the risk of nonpayment, and the not wanting to do it in the first place, is going to be a very large multiple of your normal fee. So what hayksaakian said.

What happens if you quote a large figure and they take you up on it, despite the fact that you never intended to honor the offer? Congratulations, now you're a jerk.

When I wrote it, I had originally written "optimal" as "efficient", but "optimal" has multiple meanings here.

The point is, if you would arrive at a requirement of $x to implement the thing in an exercise where you decide to entertain all requests as a request for a legitimate bid, then don't quote an arbitrary figure of $y. Quoting $x works out the best for everyone in all possible cases, where the approach to quote an arbitrary figure falls down in more than one place.

1. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9313659

>Congratulations, now you're a jerk.

What? Why am I a jerk for getting paid well? Or do you suggest that huge pile of money won't change my mind? If I still say no I think that means the quoting instructions were followed incorrectly.

> Quoting $x works out the best for everyone in all possible cases

Quoting $x is much more likely to result in resentment because it's the bare minimum to get me to agree. If I charge triple that or more I'm much less likely to be disappointed later.

And it's no big loss to me if I don't get paid to make this feature. That was my default state of being. So I aim high.

I assume he means that one is a jerk if they quote high with absolutely no intention of doing it at any price. If the bluff is called then you have to go back on your word.

The main idea behind my thread was that everyone has a price.

Hell if you give me 10 million USD to build a random feature on an open source project, I would subcontract to someone happy to do it for 9 million.

> the risk of nonpayment

Charge upfront.

I set custom ring tone "none" and disable vibrate for any contact that annoys me.

I thought I was pretty clever when I figured out I could "block" calls to my dumbphone by adding a contact prefixed with "zzz" and setting their ringtone to a silent audio clip I recorded.

I wonder if there's an Android app that will let me intercept calls and immediately reply to them with a custom recording - something like "Calls from this number are blocked, direct further contact to [email protected]"

They were in another country where it presumably was business hours.

I had one guy literally stalk me until he found a DNS registration with my phone number (will never make that mistake again)

I do not have a phone any more, all phone calls go to voicemail and I will call you back if I want and when I want (over Voice-over-IP for free). Texts go through the two way email gateway at Anveo.

I just wanted to say thanks for this idea. I'm porting my old cell number to Twilio, sending all calls through Google Voice to get voicemail emails with transcription (Twilio charges extra for transcription), and getting a new number with no voice service through T-Mobile.

Go on...

I've seen this happen on multiple projects. A few years ago on HN, I think, someone posted some research showing that getting rid of the free tier members from a service improves the service since customer service can focus on customers who are bringing value.

Our app was Free App of the Day on amazon four years ago, which was a horrible mistake for many reasons, but the people who received the app that day and have emailed us are just the worst set of people I have ever encountered.

Absolutely true in my experience. We had a service with free and paid tiers. The paid customers were uniformly respectful and even helpful. The free users were usually demanding, sometimes abusive, and would spend hours trying to convince you that they can't survive without your service but they also shouldn't have to pay for it.

We don't have a free tier, and we get a funny support request more often than I would have thought: people who don't want to cancel their account, but don't want to pay anymore. I wonder how often this actually works.

I would be terribly tempted to counteroffer with a special plan where we disable their account but keep billing them at twice the rate.

I called to cancel my cell phone service and the carrier offered me half off. I was cancelling because I found out a competitor was half the price. (This is in the US where cell phone bills are unreasonable even at half price) It was so infuriating to learn that I was overpaying for months and months. I still cancelled.

Every year when the previous year's promotions expire, I cancel my TV and lower my internet down to something cheaper. Every time, within 10 business days I'll get a call for a better offer.

That usually works with internet and probably cable TV as well. Really any of the "utilities" that aren't actually regulated by a PUC.