Me usingIn my situation, this code will probably benefit [email protected] perhaps more than it will benefit myself. I'd Basically, I'd like to permit users to log into my site and grant them additional permissions if they have a high SO rating. This will in turn get you more users through an "Affiliate" and sell more advertising. I'll have the benefit of weeding out spammers and non-technical people.
If you believe it's worthwhile to get payment for the library in this use case, perhaps you should sell it to team@stack[email protected]
I hope the adversarial tone I feel coming on is due to the limitations of the format. What I infer from your last sentence is that you feel that I am asking too much from you in providing free code for free usage but requiring an explicit agreement for taking it out of FLOSS.
Zero adversarial tone there... I totally appreciate your work and was trying tohope those ideas help you cross promote since. I think SO should pay for your library if it drives traffic to their site, since they are getting increased advertising traffic from that. Maybe you can get compensation from both sides (SO and the consumer).
code poet
Great. Now don't I feel like a dick. ;-) Maybe it will make interesting reading for others.
Regarding the 'users by hash' question, I know the issue has been raised in several posts, here, and in great detail in a meta post that I cannot find, but in short, the only way to do this is to maintain a complete list of users which you index yourself. This is a task that, if handled properly, is not unreasonable from both the perspective of maintenance and that of API usage. The utility of such a dataset goes far beyond simply finding users by email. I will post a CW dev-tip regarding this.
MakerOfThings7:
Not sure what a CW dev tip is, but I'll look for it when it's ready.