Seeking feedback on my accessible markdown editing app

I am interested in testing this product if you dont mind. I have a mac book air and I wanted to try this out. Thanks.

I will regard and respond to your post seriously, assuming you're also serious and not making fun of us.

1. We can use other free and accessible apps like EZText, which supports a broader range of formats rather than being a dedicated markdown editor, and MarkdownEditor, which supports exporting/converting markdown files to .pdf and .html. So yes, both are free, both are accessible, and they do what your unique (sarcastic) app does, at a much higher (sarcastic) price of 0 dollars and 0 cents.
2. Those who have a Windows PC can use an NVDA add-on to use browse mode navigation commands while editing markdown files without having to purchase this app at all. Wait, you have to subscribe to it; it's not a lifetime purchase. No free features, no one-time purchase, and no extra convenience that this app can give you as long as you have a Windows PC and use NVDA, because you can even use the good old basic Notepad to create and edit markdown files.
3. Those who have a mac, in turn, can just use MarkdownEditor to convert their markdown files into .html and then browse them like any web page.

So the developer aims to keep the price competitive in terms of expensiveness. The current exchange rates for the US dollar vs. the Turkish lira is something like 45 or so, so there's no way I would pay for such a trap-I mean such an app... Sorry for the typo... (sarcastic) but I also strongly recommend those living in the United States to push the developer to acknowledge the fact that this app offers nothing for such a heavy price, and promoting it as "accessible" alone doesn't make it the single indispensible option; you have other alternatives.

i am interested in testing. I as well, intend to pay for the lifetime subscription when this app is released. my email address is daniel.angus.macdonald@gmail.com. thanks.

Criticism is fair.
What's not is attacking a developer who's come on here to ask for feedback. Sarcasm achieves nothing and makes you look needlessly angry, aggressive, and quite frankly a tad obnoxious.
Oh, also, I find a wonderful thing I can do when I don't want to pay for something... Is not pay for it. It works rather well.

Hi InfoRover,

Enes did not attack anyone, and commentary like his above is welcome on AppleVis. Additionally, calling out the perceived misbehavior of another member is not helpful and can lead to unnecessary conflict. I ask that if you have concerns about the conduct of another member on AppleVis, rather than trying to handle it yourself, that you please contact myself or another member of the AppleVis Editorial Team for assistance.

Thanks,
Michael

I think you’ve misunderstood what I was objecting to.

I literally started by saying the criticism was fair. I had no issue with Enes questioning the price, comparing it with free alternatives, or saying it wouldn’t fit his workflow.

What I objected to was the sarcasm directed at the developer — things like “your unique (sarcastic) app” and “such a trap—I mean such an app.” Those comments add nothing to the criticism itself. They’re just digs.

If AppleVis’s position is that members shouldn’t call that sort of thing out publicly and should contact the editorial team instead, fair enough. But I do find it a little rich that I’m being told to extend that courtesy to other members when nobody extended the same courtesy to me before correcting me publicly.

And if sarcastic digs at a developer are considered welcome commentary, while calling those digs obnoxious is considered unnecessarily confrontational, that seems like a pretty obvious double standard.

I’m not objecting to criticism. I’m objecting to people being needlessly nasty, and I don’t think that distinction is especially difficult to understand.

Hi InfoRover,

My specific issue, and really my only issue, is with your characterization of Enes as “obnoxious,” as this moves from critiquing his comments about the app into a personal insult.

AppleVis exists, in part, as a place for people to speak freely and openly about Apple and developers serving our community. While developers are of course welcome here, our primary responsibility is to the users of AppleVis, and the bar is therefore very high when it comes to moderating criticism of Apple, developers, or anyone else providing products or services to our community. Users are allowed to be critical, even strongly critical, of Apple and developers. That does not mean every criticism will necessarily be expressed in the way that others might choose, of course, but criticism of a product, company, developer, or business decision is very different from making a negative personal characterization of another community member.

I am sorry if our handling of this gave the impression of a double standard. That was certainly not my intention. I handled this publicly because I felt it was important for Enes, and for others reading the thread, to see that the concern had been taken seriously and was not simply being ignored by us.

More broadly, to give you some context about what is going on behind the scenes, over the past few weeks we have heard from an increasing number of users who feel that the level of toxicity on AppleVis has been getting worse. We have also had developers tell us that they no longer want to participate on the site because of the way some discussions have been going. This is feedback that we take very seriously, and we have realized that we need to make some changes in how we handle these situations and moderation more generally going forward.

In the past, when a guideline violation occurred, our approach was generally to reach out to users privately, remind them of our guidelines, and ask them to change their behavior. While that approach works in some situations, and we will still use private outreach where appropriate, we have also seen some limitations with it. One is that, when we handle something privately, the broader community usually has no way of knowing that anything was done at all; and this has sometimes led people to believe that we were ignoring problems when, in reality, we had addressed them privately. More importantly, though, we have continued to see many of the same kinds of problems even after that private outreach.

We also historically tended to leave smaller conflicts between users alone in the hope that they would resolve themselves. Given the broader concerns we are now hearing about the tone and climate of the site, we have concluded that this is no longer an approach we can continue to rely on. We are therefore going to be more proactive, and more public where appropriate, in addressing these situations when they arise.

Taking a firmer approach to moderation is not something we particularly want to do; we would much prefer that people self-moderate and resolve disagreements in a polite and respectful way. However, our previous approach has not been working as well as we would like, and we cannot continue on the path we are currently on.

Thanks,

Michael

Thanks for explaining the thinking behind it. I do understand the reasoning a lot better now, especially the point about private moderation sometimes making it look as though nothing has been done.

I also completely agree that AppleVis needs to remain somewhere people can criticise developers, products and pricing freely. I don’t want that watered down at all.

Where I still disagree is over the distinction being drawn here. Calling a price too high, saying an app doesn’t offer enough value, or comparing it unfavourably with free alternatives is criticism. That’s fair.

Things like “your unique (sarcastic) app” and “such a trap—I mean such an app” don’t really add anything constructive to that criticism though. They’re just digs. You can make exactly the same substantive argument without them.

I should also clarify one point about my own comment. I didn’t simply call Enes an obnoxious person. I said that the sarcasm made him come across as “needlessly angry, aggressive, and quite frankly a tad obnoxious.” That was a criticism of how the behaviour came across in that exchange, not a general judgement of his character.

If you’d still prefer me to reword that part, I’m happy to do so.

But I don’t think the answer is to treat the sarcasm itself as though it’s simply ordinary product criticism either.

If developers are already telling you they’re stepping away because discussions are becoming toxic, then I think that kind of needlessly hostile wording is probably part of the problem too.

So I do understand your position more now, and I appreciate the explanation. I just think we may still disagree on where the line between robust criticism and unnecessary nastiness actually sits.

Just want to respond to everyone, but not before thanking Michael and also mentioning another alternative: Just use the Find dialog to search for the relevant markdown symbol/character without even having to convert the file (e.g., "###" for heading level 3, "*" or "-" for list items/bullets). And I think I do have the right to be sarcastic because I can comfortably say that I wasn't attacking the developer in person if InfoRover claims that his/her objection wasn't meant to offend me but rather criticize my attitude and style. Fine, but the developer's pricing, promotion, and wording are at least as deliberate as my response, and I can definitely object to that, feel exploited, make a strongly critical comment, and even use sarcasm where I deem appropriate, provided I express my first impression and stance about the app itself rather than attack the developer in person. And I apologize to him and everyone because the $129.99 thing is a lifetime purchase rather than a recurring payment and I couldn't pay much attention to that because I was so shocked and disappointed to hear the prices, but you still have to use the app for more than three years because you will be paying more than three times the annual subscription fee, and no one guarantees that the app will even be available for download on the App Store after three years. Lose, sell, or otherwise reset your device, and the app is gone, and your money is totally wasted.

Thanks @Tactile Dragon for posting about GhostWriter Markdown, a totally free app that offers the same functionality. And thanks for the timing as well! Now let's find out what Mr. Morris has to say in response to that.

Enes,

I think everyone understands where you're coming from regarding the price, and you're certainly entitled to feel that it's too expensive. There's also nothing wrong with pointing out other apps that you feel offer the same or similar functionality for less, or even for free. That's useful information for people following the discussion.

That said, I think we're getting to the point where this is becoming less about sharing your opinion and more about repeatedly challenging Zach to justify his pricing and his app.

Zach did respond to the concerns you raised and explained what he feels makes his app different and why he's chosen the pricing that he has. You don't have to agree with his answer or find it convincing. At the same time, though, he doesn't have to keep defending that decision until he gives an answer that you, or anyone else, finds satisfactory.

That's really where I'd like to draw the distinction here.

For example, sharing another free alternative and explaining why you think it compares well with Edit.md is perfectly fair. But following that with, "Now let's find out what Mr. Morris has to say in response to that," starts to come across more like putting the developer on the spot and expecting him to defend himself again.

I also understand that sarcasm can be part of how we express ourselves, particularly when we feel strongly about something. But in a discussion like this, it can very easily come across as condescending or dismissive, even if that wasn't the intention. When it's combined with repeatedly challenging someone to defend their choices, it can change the tone of the conversation pretty quickly.

Nobody is asking you to change your opinion about the price. Personally, I think you've made your position on that very clear, and Zach has made his position clear as well. It's perfectly okay for those two positions to remain miles apart.

So let's leave room for that disagreement and move the conversation forward. You're welcome to continue discussing the app, its accessibility, alternatives, pricing, or anything else that's useful to people considering it. We're just asking that everyone keep things constructive and avoid turning the discussion into a back-and-forth where someone is continually expected to defend a position they've already explained.

Thanks, Enes. I hope you can understand where we're coming from.

Are you seriously asking for $130 for an editor designed to write in a format that was designed to be handwritten? If we're talking US Dollars, That's over twice the price of a AAA console game! From the description, that app is worth $5 once, not $130 once or any kind of subscription. Be realistic, you didn't build anything extraordinary or even needed in my personal case. I wouldn't mind paying $5 for the convenience, but $130 is complete nonsense. Also subscriptions only make sense when you're paying for backend services to serve your customers, which is unlikely to be the case here. Your income should come entirely from selling licenses to copies of the app, and you are always free to stop developing it and move on once the revenue stream dries out.