←back to thread

2339 points JustSkyfall | 2 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
fdsfdsfdsaasd ◴[] No.45287622[source]
>A few years ago, when Slack transitioned us from their free nonprofit plan to a $5,000/year arrangement, we happily paid. It was reasonable, and we valued the service they provided to our community.

>However, two days ago, Slack reached out to us and said that if we don’t agree to pay an extra $50k this week and $200k a year, they’ll deactivate our Slack workspace and delete all of our message history.

>One could argue that Slack is free to stop providing us the nonprofit offer at any time, but in my opinion, a six month grace period is the bare minimum for a massive hike like this, if not more.

This summary from your website misses a lot of relevant detail. I love to rag on big corp as much as the next free thinker, but the dishonesty makes me much less sympathetic to this particular story.

replies(1): >>45287675 #
sd9 ◴[] No.45287675[source]
What details? Are you privy to them? If so, please share.
replies(1): >>45287704 #
fdsfdsfdsaasd ◴[] No.45287704[source]
Reading between the lines in the top comment on this link, they received a bill earlier this year, and have been in communication with Slack since then.

The transition away from Slack's nonprofit pricing is also a key element to this story, but that is glossed over.

replies(1): >>45290169 #
1. NetMageSCW ◴[] No.45290169[source]
You seem to think you know details the people involved do not and have an axe to grind against them.
replies(1): >>45290288 #
2. fdsfdsfdsaasd ◴[] No.45290288[source]
No - it's very clear that the people involved know details that we do not, and are withholding them for the sake of a better story. I have an axe to grind against people who use technical platforms to air mismanaged and misrepresented grievances.