I do agree with your point. It was a highly requested feature, indeed. It's available only with our Pro plan, so it's not widely available to everyone.
Sorry but that makes it even worse. You can't just push ethical decisions to your customers. You are the one building the product and you are the one defining the ethical boundaries within which it can be used by your customers. As technology builders we are at forefront of pushing all kind of societal boundaries and often end up redefining them in the process. As technology moves so fast it can take years for society to catch up and decide that something definitely was a bad idea but by that time it's often too late. No one wants to be the engineer realising years later that what their build was harmful to society, so try be more conscious of the decisions you take. One good framework to reason about the impact of what we build is to simply ask ourselves if there would be any negative long term effects to society of a billion people would use the feature. Right now from your perspective that seems far away and unlikely but in our field this happens all the time, either through scaling or others copying you.
So either put a big disclaimer yourself at which point no one will probably want to enable it anymore except for edge use cases (which hopefully are ethical even though I can't really think of one right now) or just remove it fully. It's a huge breach of privacy and most customers who have issues with drop rates probably should redesign their form and CTA. Unless the reason for people dropping of is that they're doing something sketchy and/or asking for way too much personal information of course, which is exactly the case where I absolutely do not want to have that data nor would I consent to them collecting it before I click submit.
That wasn't my point. I meant the feature is available to a very small subset of our users. Then even a smaller subset chooses to use it and I believe, it's up to the form creator to add a disclaimer on why this is necessary for their use case.
I'm not usually a big privacy person, but the way you're responding to this is a dealbreaker. This feature is fundamentally unethical. The fact that it's paywalled and not everyone uses it changes nothing.
Consider an implementation of "draft" submissions. Imagine you wanted to implement such a feature on top of some form builder. You would require such a feature.
I don't necessarily agree or disagree with the points raised on ethics here, but there's a very real consideration when you're offering a library/package/feature, sometimes you have to expose guts that can be used improperly in order to enable certain featuresets. I think it's obvious why someone building such a tool as OP would offer such a feature as is in discussion, because they would lose money otherwise from implementations that require this feature.
So, if a subset of things that can be done with your work are nefarious, how much effort are you meant to put in to make it ethical to sell your work? Is it inherently always unethical to build a tool which can be used to nefarious ends?
You can build anything you want after acquiring the end user's informed consent.
A user knows what a draft is, and would agree to such a feature upon pressing a button that indicates that the draft will be saved for later by submitting the form verbatim as-is to the server
Saving everything a user types in, without a user's informed consent, is a severe trust violation.
Well, that was a ridiculously non-general treatment of my attempt to lift this question to an actual abstraction.
Again, OP isn't selling things directly to end-users, so I don't know how the OP is meant to acquire the end user's consent, informed or not. The OP is exposing abilities in a tool which enables his end users to turn around and deliver something to their end users. My question is how culpable OP is for abuse of his tool's abilities, and what level he must go thru to put abuse protections in place to be not morally culpable for his end user's treatment of their end user's, and your answer is "OP needs to get informed consent". Ridiculously simplified.
That's ridiculous. If you provide a whitelabel solution, you simply add consent checkboxes and and explanatory text, the same way shop systems and virtually all other whitelabel software meant to be embedded works.
> how culpable OP is for abuse of his tool's abilities
Regulators don't care where you sourced the software from that you provided. You provide it, you host it, you're culpable.
The people filling the forms aren't the people paying the bills, so their opinions on the matter are moot. The actual customers want the feature, so it would be silly to not offer it and leave money on the table.
Is there a more convenient way to pre-populate form fields, not via URL? What if I have a form with 50 questions and long answers, and I want the user to be able to go back the form and update their responses?
Redirect on completion can point to a form field (those include calculated fields). So you can use conditional logic to determine when an application is accepted/rejected and based on that set the redirect URL in a calculated field. Then you can use this calculated field in the Redirect on completion.
You can read more about the above mentions features here:
We are in it for the long haul and I would love to learn how we can make this more clear/explicit - what's the page/message/resource from cal.com, for example, which convinced you of this?
While it's true that Typeform has a free plan it allows you to collect 10 submissions per month, which I would say is not sufficient for any size of business, or even personal use.
Filip & Marie here, makers of Tally — the simplest way to create forms for free.
---
Why Tally? As makers and frequent form users, we were unsatisfied with the existing tools out there. They either force you in a specific format or bombard you with countless limits and paywalls. We wanted a simple, yet powerful form builder that allows you to create any type of form without breaking the bank. We set off building Tally—a new type of form builder for makers and no-coders.
1. Works like a doc: Just start typing, Tally is a form builder that you will enjoy using. It makes form building easy and accessible to everyone. Use shortcuts to create any type of form in seconds. Take it for a spin, no sign-up needed: https://tally.so/create
2. 99% FREE: We built Tally with a different business model in mind. Unlike other form builders, most advanced features are free and without limits.
3. Tally Pro: Simple pricing. Tally Pro offers empowering features tailored to the needs of teams and creators, at $29/month or $290/year.
---
Powerful features for FREE:
Unlimited forms, unlimited questions, unlimited responses, collect payments, file upload, custom logo & cover, custom "Thank you" pages, form logic, calculator, hidden fields, answer piping, Zapier integration, Integromat integration, Notion integration, Google Sheets integration, Airtable integration, email notifications, redirect on completion, schedule a close date, close on response limit, custom closed message, and many more.
---
Tally Pro features:
Team collaboration, workspaces, custom domains, no Tally branding, no payments commission, unlimited file uploads.
---
Tally is made from the heart and we couldn’t be more excited for you to check out our work. We would love to hear from you and get your thoughts on how to take our product to the next level. Feel free to leave a comment below, join us on Slack (https://tally.so/slack), or reach out via email (hello@tally.so), anytime.
Shameless plug: I recently needed a super simple, clean and fast way to create a poll. Since I didn't find anything to fulfill my requirements, I built my own - http://tally.tl/
If there was an option in Tally to hide votes so they don't influence decisions, it would be more useful. We used it at Techstars recently and didn't find the results very accurate. That said, it's very slick and simple, which I really liked.
That's a very good point Patrick. It was intentional because I didn't want to add extra buttons and clutter the interface, but I might rethink it. It's always tricky to add functionality without sacrificing simplicity.
What about http://strawpoll.me/ ? Is there something that your site does differently than that one? Heres the same poll at strawpoll: http://strawpoll.me/2716564 so you can compare. This site is commonly used at twitch.tv so that the streamer can ask the viewers a question, all results update in real-time. I have seen thousands of people use it simultaneously with no problem.
What I really need from straw poll is an option for better voting methods, if we're deciding between more than three choices for streaming we always need to use instant runoff to get an accurate measurement of what people want to watch. Something popular like Schultze voting (maybe implemented with sliders from one to ten instead of entering rank numbers; so it stays as idiot-proof as strawpoll.me)
It's not perfect if you're worried about people voting more than once. We tried doing an office poll about something people held strong opinions about -- what video game to bring in for an office tournament -- and within twenty minutes, coworkers had rewritten ballot stuffing scripts in bash, PHP, and Python.
Not to mention that you can submit multiple votes by opening the page in an incognito window in Chrome.
Backend: Node, Express, Typescript, Sequelize (MySQL)
Hosting: Google Cloud