[xvolter]

This is completely ignoring the useful use cases of "disposable" emails like privacy. I have a domain that I specifically use as a catch all, so anytime I sign up for a website I use the domain as the username, like [e-mail]

This helps protect me in many ways. If my email is sold or leaked, not a big issue, I can just add that specific email to a blacklist and I never need to get spam from it again. Or if I cancel and keep getting spam about rejoining, blacklisted. It makes it easy to keep my spam and newsletters to a minimal.

It has the built in advantage that I can always sign up for new trials if I want, just do thatdomain.com1@ thatdomain.com2@ and so on. Although I don't do this often, I have had to do it for various reasons.

I've hit on occasion websites that block their domain from being in the email address, likely a poorly implemented security check because their software might say anyone with a "@service.com" email is an admin or something. In that case, I enter some random crap. I never have to remember the emails, since I can just search my email history for the address the service sent the registration confirmation to.

However, the downside is privacy. I use my own domain, which contains my full name, so when I sign up to some services and want to do so without giving my name, I still rely on a disposable email service such as hidemyass.com; and I do this for many online services. I am not a believer that everything I sign up for needs to know my full name, address, and email - often services ask for this information for no reason.

So attempting to block these types of services, that have valid and useful benefits to users, simply harms your users. You can avoid spam users with a captcha, and for trail abusers you already can't do much because @gmail.com already allows for a lot of aliases to work like @googlemail.com, or [e-mail] or [e-mail] etc, or [e-mail]

Don't harm your users with useless validations.

[sadasd21asda]

I disagree. I run a SaaS product and disposable emails are a bane to my existence. I get thousands of signups a day from people all around the world using disposable email addresses trying to milk the free tier of the product.

You have no idea the lengths people will go to.

If all you wanted to do was test a product out, create a real email address even if it's full of bogus details.

If you won't try my product without a real address then you're a customer I don't want and don't need.

[xvolter]

As people already pointed out that your product isn't free, if you require knowledge about a person then they're giving you their information. Facebook doesn't cost a user money, but it costs them plenty else.

For a product with a "free tier" that doesn't work where a user needs to sign up several times, the product itself is flawed.

However, disposable emails again are not the problem, as there are tons of ways to get valid, working emails to bypass any unique email requirements. Blocking disposable emails aren't going to help you with that. The only thing you're removing it a user's access to better privacy. Again, if you require knowing who your users are then you are not a free service.

If you don't care about having users unless you know their real email addresses then you should consider validating their identity in other means, besides an email address. Many services use a text message to validate you also have a phone number that works, which is much harder to anonymize (although I personally have four different numbers for this very reason, based on the trust I give a service I decide which number I want to provide them - since to me, my privacy is worth something, I don't share it for free).

[parenthephobia]

I was involved with running a SaaS which also had issues with free tier signups.

Two observations.

1. Prioritise paying customers. Use spare provisioned capacity to provide for the free tier: don't spin up new capacity for free tier customers - or at least do it on your own terms. Now it doesn't matter if people milk your free tier unless you believe, almost certainly incorrectly, that these people would pay if they couldn't sign up for more trials.

2. We had repeat signups from gmail accounts, but almost none from disposable addresses as such. Any service that lets you have multiple email addresses for free is a potential "risk". That obviously includes any self-run email server, or any corporate email server from the perspective of a user allowed to add new addresses to their mailbox.

[pmoriarty]

Your "free" tier isn't really free, then. As payment, you're asking for the sacrifice of your users' privacy.

Some users may value your service so much or their privacy so little that they may pay up, but for the rest of us it's back to the disposable email arms race.

PS: Kudos for being open and considerate enough to defend an unpopular position on here, though it's ironic that you did so using a disposable HN account.

[joshmanders]

> Your "free" tier isn't really free, then. As payment, you're asking for the sacrifice of your users' privacy.

Is that what asking for an email to sign in to create an account to use a service that probably doesn't work well without having an account is now, invasion of privacy?

Where do we put our foots down and stop saying that everything a SaaS does is sacrificing the user's privacy... Soon we're gonna start seeing "Whoa, asking them to pay and input their credit card? You're asking for the sacrifice of your user's privacy."

[relearn]

As a business, the onus is on you to provide a service that incentivizes consumers to move up from the free tier. If your free trials are being abused, that's an issue with the way your business is structured, not how people register.

You are well within your rights as a business to decline potential customers over something like this, but you need them more than they need you.

[joshmanders]

I'd probably wager if they're going through the process of creating a throw away email and resigning up with it, they need the service pretty badly.

[drivingmenuts]

The problem is the assumption that I, as a tester, want to be talked at by sales. I don't. I want to test the product and yea or nay, that's it. Unless you're in a specialized industry, there are probably competitors out there and I can judge the applicability and function without the help of a salesperson.

[sklivvz1971]

Are you sure your monetization strategy is the right one? Do people have the right incentives to pay? Not allowing people to stay in the free tier is a pretty bad motivator.