+1 here for "I'd gladly pay for Tiddlyspot!" Of course, if there's a pricing structure being hammered out, I'd vote for allowing trial interval, and/or up to ??MB worth of TW storage, for free.
For my own purposes, though, tiddlyspot has been such a game-changer that I'd not only pay, but even pay fair "back rent" for the server costs associated with my TW 5projects. (This is saying a lot, given my own lack of disposable income!) The convenience of a url-based, password-protectable, auto-backup TW5 system has become something I really don't know how to be productive without. (As noted a few months back, I've also been lobbying for mountable access to a university web server, but IT seems to treat TW5 with suspicion, and wants to sell me on some other "approved" platform for my tasks.) -Springer On Friday, October 30, 2020 at 12:23:04 PM UTC-4 Alvin wrote: > What André said about paying a fee. I concur, although "reasonable" means > something different to those of us on a fixed income. > > On Friday, October 30, 2020 at 11:07:58 AM UTC-5 André Carvalho wrote: > >> Thank You Simon and Daniel! >> I got my data back. And yes, I'll backup more often ;) >> You have a very nice service with TiddlySpot and I would not mind to pay >> a reasonable fee to help maintaining and developing it. >> >> Best regards >> André de Carvalho >> >> PS: Continuing the "not a lawyer..." before I got hooked on software I >> did studied Law up to the 4th year in a 5 year course in Coimbra University >> ;) >> The facts are : >> - that if DreamHost didn't provide Simon and Daniel access to the >> DreamObject they would become "Controllers" of the information >> - the information contains personal data of mine (name, e-mail, personal >> thoughts, opinions and facts) >> - Article 15 ( >> https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELEX:32016R0679&from=EN#d1e2513-1-1 >> >> ) grants me the right of access >> - the jurisdiction issue is arguable (US company, EU person, EU data, >> transnational facts, ...) Preamble (23) extends controller obligations to >> non EU entities >> >> I would not say this is the worst case I saw .... but in fact I didn't >> studied it properly... >> >> Just saying... not trying to start any flame here especially with guys >> from whom I've already learned a lot. >> >> On Tuesday, October 27, 2020 at 4:54:10 PM UTC Mark S. wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> On Tuesday, October 27, 2020 at 8:02:46 AM UTC-7, Eric Shulman wrote: >>>> >>>> On Tuesday, October 27, 2020 at 7:18:47 AM UTC-7, André Carvalho wrote: >>>>> >>>>> There is, at least, a violation of good-faith and a right of accessing >>>>> my data under EU law that I'll exercise if there is no other solution. >>>>> >>>> >>>> In keeping with the "I'm not a lawyer but I play one on the Internet" >>>> theme... >>>> >>>> >>> Continuing your "not a lawyer" theme, DH is a California company, so >>> it's likely EU laws won't apply. Even Prop 24 doesn't seem to provide "data >>> guaranteed" rights. >>> >>> Having read the Wikipedia page, I'm really hoping this is just a fluke. >>> They went to bat to fight for their customer's privacy rights, moving them >>> into the "good guy" category. Of course, maybe they wrote the wikipedia >>> page ;-) >>> >>> -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TiddlyWiki" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/ee6083bc-7ea5-4c39-ba3f-2231b57f949an%40googlegroups.com.
