Incentive TOS: Restrictions on contacting users about feedback
Opened this issue · 2 comments
The language in the incentive TOS says:
Approved Developers may not communicate directly with end users for the purpose of influencing the feedback used to calculate Incentive Payments.
Although probably not intentional, this may give the impression that contacting users with "How can we improve our app?" types of communications or other communication about feedback in general may be prohibited. Certainly, communicating directly with end users in order to improve my application or service will influence the feedback used to calculate Incentive Payments.
I suggest changing it to restrict direct communications with end users that attempt to coerce or incent artificially high app rating feedback. Provide an example, such as offering individual quid pro quo/rewards such as "if the app achieves X rating, we'll send you a shirt" as not allowed. Also add a statement that makes it clear that communicating with end users to gather feedback on the application or service for the purpose of improving the application or service is an allowed and encouraged activity.
As a caveat to this -- I can see a developer, out of practicality, making statements to her user base such as "If I can get to $X per month (or Y rating) then I can support adding Z feature!" I don't think that should be restricted because it's just the nature of being an app developer and trying to support a business. (It's in the flavor of kickstarter model, after all!) Similarly, encouraging users to participate in the rating process in general should not be seen as a negative, even if it is phrased as "When App.net asks for your feedback, please submit it and rate FooBar app highly if it was useful!"
Actually, as I'm writing this out, I'm not even sure if there should be any restriction at all. It's normal for a company to send a tshirt or something else to users who provide extraordinary feedback and input as a way to say "thank you." I know that is not quite the same as rewarding high app rankings in this process, but we're talking about approximately $1/ADN user split among all apps, and actual incentives may be as low as $0.10/user or lower for a normal popular app, which is too small to profitably game the system by giving out virtual or physical goods to each user. This holds true even if ADN gets 1M users and the incentive pool is $1M/mo.
I think you should be able to encourage feedback ("Remember, if you love Foo, please think of us when you fill out your feedback form!"), but not do tangible quid-pro-quo (no "All current users get a free upgrade download/shirt if we hit $100 next month!").
"If I can get to $X per month (or Y rating) then I can support adding Z feature!" should probably be allowed, but it's border-line.
I've been thinking about that clause today as well, and I tend to agree with @JoshBlake at the end of his post.
While Mixed Media Labs, Inc. clearly doesn't want anyone gaming the incentive program, and no one wants waves of "OMG rate my app highest plz" spam posts rolling over the system, it is most likely a "problem" that would solve itself quickly, particularly at this stage of the userbase.
Personally, and speaking as a user, if a developer kindly asked me to rate her app if I enjoyed it, I would do so. If same developer asked me every hour for a month, I'd likely never touch her app again. Self-policing system...