I just won a bet with three people on the contents of the first HN comment about this. Whee!
Seriously, though: as an empirical prediction of human behavior, you're just wrong with regards to the last sentence. With regards to your desire to just get the video, I politely decline. If you don't want to give me your email address, cool. There's plenty of stuff you could watch on Youtube instead. My understanding is it typically features more kittens and less make-you-money.
There was never any doubt on that bet. Which is my point - it's an annoying behaviour.
Yes, people will give you their email, but they won't like it. That damages your brand (just a little).
EDIT: One technique that'd make this cool is to offer the full video for free, then give the option to sign up for more. Too many people have been burnt by teaser "sign up now for secret material" that turns out to be lame.
I'm not going to try to convince you that your preferences are irrational, because I probably won't change your mind and have better things to do.
I will try to convince you that the preferences you are attributing to "people" are unlikely to be universally accurate in describing "people". You should probably recalibrate your understanding of people's behavior, because when you understand what people actually want you're more capable of delivering things which both you and they will benefit from.
I once thought that people hated getting email. I hated getting email. Except from, well, all the people I didn't hate getting email from. I have substantial evidence from clients and other people I find credible that people not only like getting email but will actually respond in predictable and positive fashions to the right email. I also have a stock of anecdotes which bewildered me when they happened, like people emailing me asking why I didn't send them a November BCC newsletter (Me, mentally: "Don't you know its going to be the October one with gsub applied to it?" Her, literally: "I really really really want to hear about Thanksgiving bingo." Me: "Wait, people pay me money for that all the time, how did I not see that sentence coming.")
There are almost certainly people in the world whose preferences are more similar to you, in that they would not like to get emailed by me. That's cool. They should not give me their email address and instead do something they would prefer. Cat videos or something, whatever.
You've misunderstood me. I love getting mail. If you're going to make a list full of useful information sign me up!
In fact I'm subscribed to a few lists that I really enjoy reading every month. So I'm not against email.
But don't bait, "force", or use subterfuge to get me to sign up. "first five minutes free!" doesn't do your brand any good.
There is, as you pointed out, a (shady) implied back-door to getting the video without giving him your real email address. You can think of that as a kind of escape valve for the sentiment you're trying to express here.
One caveat I think might apply to using that escape valve: if you're so upset by the idea of trading customer contacts for promised software value that you'd lie about your contact information, you probably won't get much value out of the 45 minutes of your life this video will consume.
Patrick has thus done you a favor by demanding your email address; he's pre-screening you from the video to save you time.
It's funny. I see the clear value in what patrick is doing here. I respect Patrick (and yourself). I just don't like the approach he took. For that it seems I'm being told I'm not welcome.
Saying that once was fine. It was even somewhat helpful, as it gave Patrick an opportunity to clarify his strategy.
Saying it repeatedly simply because Patrick does not agree with you is less fine. I hope it is a little unwelcome.
You made your point. He made his. He's not going to do it your way. I think you should let it go now.
I was also being sincere in my previous comment. This being how you really feel about Patrick trading email addresses for access to a video, I sincerely think you won't get much value from that particular video.
I've never been more excited to give a website my email. Half the reason I check HN these days is to see whether Patrick has posted anything interesting and actionable. If giving him my email and some money will incentivize him to take some time from his products and consulting to share what he's learned, that's a win in my book.
I would have been glad to sign up even if the landing page had just been a text field to enter my email and a disclaimer saying "Every second email I sent you will be spam intended for Latvian philatelists.", so I think offering a 45 minute video and a transcript is a gracious touch beyond what Patrick needed for his email list MVP.
Comments
I just won a bet with three people on the contents of the first HN comment about this. Whee!
Seriously, though: as an empirical prediction of human behavior, you're just wrong with regards to the last sentence. With regards to your desire to just get the video, I politely decline. If you don't want to give me your email address, cool. There's plenty of stuff you could watch on Youtube instead. My understanding is it typically features more kittens and less make-you-money.
There was never any doubt on that bet. Which is my point - it's an annoying behaviour.
Yes, people will give you their email, but they won't like it. That damages your brand (just a little).
EDIT: One technique that'd make this cool is to offer the full video for free, then give the option to sign up for more. Too many people have been burnt by teaser "sign up now for secret material" that turns out to be lame.
I'm not going to try to convince you that your preferences are irrational, because I probably won't change your mind and have better things to do.
I will try to convince you that the preferences you are attributing to "people" are unlikely to be universally accurate in describing "people". You should probably recalibrate your understanding of people's behavior, because when you understand what people actually want you're more capable of delivering things which both you and they will benefit from.
I once thought that people hated getting email. I hated getting email. Except from, well, all the people I didn't hate getting email from. I have substantial evidence from clients and other people I find credible that people not only like getting email but will actually respond in predictable and positive fashions to the right email. I also have a stock of anecdotes which bewildered me when they happened, like people emailing me asking why I didn't send them a November BCC newsletter (Me, mentally: "Don't you know its going to be the October one with gsub applied to it?" Her, literally: "I really really really want to hear about Thanksgiving bingo." Me: "Wait, people pay me money for that all the time, how did I not see that sentence coming.")
There are almost certainly people in the world whose preferences are more similar to you, in that they would not like to get emailed by me. That's cool. They should not give me their email address and instead do something they would prefer. Cat videos or something, whatever.
You've misunderstood me. I love getting mail. If you're going to make a list full of useful information sign me up! In fact I'm subscribed to a few lists that I really enjoy reading every month. So I'm not against email.
But don't bait, "force", or use subterfuge to get me to sign up. "first five minutes free!" doesn't do your brand any good.
There is, as you pointed out, a (shady) implied back-door to getting the video without giving him your real email address. You can think of that as a kind of escape valve for the sentiment you're trying to express here.
One caveat I think might apply to using that escape valve: if you're so upset by the idea of trading customer contacts for promised software value that you'd lie about your contact information, you probably won't get much value out of the 45 minutes of your life this video will consume.
Patrick has thus done you a favor by demanding your email address; he's pre-screening you from the video to save you time.
It's funny. I see the clear value in what patrick is doing here. I respect Patrick (and yourself). I just don't like the approach he took. For that it seems I'm being told I'm not welcome.
Perhaps this could be A/B tested.
Saying that once was fine. It was even somewhat helpful, as it gave Patrick an opportunity to clarify his strategy.
Saying it repeatedly simply because Patrick does not agree with you is less fine. I hope it is a little unwelcome.
You made your point. He made his. He's not going to do it your way. I think you should let it go now.
I was also being sincere in my previous comment. This being how you really feel about Patrick trading email addresses for access to a video, I sincerely think you won't get much value from that particular video.
"force"?! "subterfuge"?! What?! He offers you something ("sign up and get a video") and that's subterfuge?!
I've never been more excited to give a website my email. Half the reason I check HN these days is to see whether Patrick has posted anything interesting and actionable. If giving him my email and some money will incentivize him to take some time from his products and consulting to share what he's learned, that's a win in my book.
I would have been glad to sign up even if the landing page had just been a text field to enter my email and a disclaimer saying "Every second email I sent you will be spam intended for Latvian philatelists.", so I think offering a 45 minute video and a transcript is a gracious touch beyond what Patrick needed for his email list MVP.