Anyone see the 40 people limit as a problem with this working? I would think limiting connections would limit the usefulness of the service, leading free users to dismiss ADN.
I would like to see ADN become a fully armed and op.. err fully sustainable service (I paid up when they started), but I'm wondering if they should have went further with the free tier.
For a lot of people, the only ADN functionality they really care about is that which replicates Twitter. How do you provide a free tier to these people that doesn't remove any incentive to go paid? Limiting the number of people you can follow seems like a great way to do this.
I'm interested to see what uses people come up with for ADN's storage. If there are some neat uses, that could be a great incentive.
I don't disagree with the limit providing a great incentive to go paid, but when a free user joins, there is a point where the user decides this service is neat/useful enough that he wants to pay for it. I wonder if this limit might hinder people reaching that point.
If anything, it gives incentive to follow only people you truly care about instead of the "everybody follow everybody" model Twitter has. Probably a lot less people willing to follow companies and more following users & interacting with a smaller pool of them.
I would like to see ADN become a fully armed and op.. err fully sustainable service (I paid up when they started), but I'm wondering if they should have went further with the free tier.