zameermfm

This is the way to go

True, several sides, 1. It's not bait and switch, you have a preview of the text and if you like continue, its upto platforms which publishes the link to mark it as paid or free - or by crowdsourcing. 2. Just because a model isn't perfect that doesn't justify a illegal or unethical action. If you don't like it, don't consume.

I agree with you on advertisements, I don't like an ad ridden internet either, but I have come around to thinking, the alternative and the incentive to ad free internet is an easier payment access

Agree with the above commentor, I don't think you are not legally safe by putting that disclaimer. I know you may have done in good faith, but online news and article sites are in a long battle to get the monetization models right for their users, kinda feel bad for them, even if its one off reading.

is this legal? or even ethical?

We need to find better ways to sustain great journalism while making it easy for people to pay and consume.

E.g Could we just have one consortium of media contents to subscribe and use it across the web for a month, than buying in each website.

Love this!

wondering the same today

Stop the qtip when there's resistance

True, they fill a beautiful gap

True, Machine to machine is interesting to think about

Yeah, Reading it clearly in the editor - Probably MD to HTML happens in the editor anyway. So what we are dealing with here are a battle between ease of writing, readability and various cost dimensions.

May be they should coexist for utilities they provide