Shannon's Journal Discussion Thread, Vol. 5

[Catman]

The thing you like to forget, CM, is that the program isn't being worked on because I don't have the information I need yet. I literally don't know how to move it forward just yet. In reality, I am working on it, every day, because every day I am dedicating some time to figuring out the solution to how to move it forward. I cannot do what I don't yet know how to do.

It is true that I need to keep the business funded, and DMSI is intended to be a free upgrade for the next 2 upgrades, but that's not what is holding me back. It's knowing how to do the job. Causing a user to hear an instruction set, and then communicate that instruction set through their aura to someone else in a way that causes them to subsequently execute and be affected by it, as if they are using FRM 4.9, is at least 2-3x more difficult to do than designing and scripting FRM 4.9, and it will take time. I'm not interested in spending 4-6 more years just working on this one point, so we will either figure out the solution, or find an alternate solution that works.

I've been working on both. I believe an alternate solution is more likely at this point, but both options are still on the table. It is being worked on, but the work is going on in my head. Sometimes it just be like that.

I like the compromise suggested by RTB that allows me to honor what I said I would do, and allow you guys to pay for it if you wish to, but I don't see how we are going to implement that without putting ourselves in a position to let first time "buyers" just get access to the pay what you want page from a friend, and pay nothing.

I didn't "forget" it at all, Shannon. That was in fact my point. You said you needed time to focus on the effected-FRM, but didn't want to do so because you needed cash flow through other programs. I get it, it's a business issue, makes perfect sense.

I tabled a way to achieve both, help you, and help us. Help you prioritise it to solve the problem, while paying you to do so like any other program. That was the idea.

The fact I recognise your difficulty in that issue, is why I offered this approach. To help both parties involved to get what they desire.

I like the spirit of that idea too, yes. But then just don't have a "nothing" option, introduce a minimum perhaps. But, I still say it's easier to implement, and safer due to the other "tip" way having abuse as you spoke of...just buying a fresh copy from you from scratch, that's the most practical and beneficial to you too. I wanted to do that to give you full value for the work to focus on DMSI, that was my purpose here. Just like OF V2's proposal.

If you need to raise the price of DMSI to reflect the work, let's do it. I just wanted to help you out of the deadlock issue so it's more worth the time investment is all. Just tabling options and warming people up to it, in case it strikes your fancy like OF V2 .