Agreed, however, what is the purpose of a "free" version of software?

Is it not to aquaint a user with the functions, and advantages of using it and to have them ultimately purchase the registered version. If a software developer determines that they do not want to provide "official" support for the free version, thats all well and good, however, it only leaves a bad taste in the users mouth, so to speak, because they have a problem and cannot get or find an answer from the source. Thus, making them look for similar software that does provide support.

You can read, over and over again, on these forums of the same or similar problems, not just from unregistered users but also REGISTERED users. Is that an indication of the "alternative forms of support" referred too? How many times have you seen a post stating, "I am a registered user, have contacted support, and received no response".

I agree that censuring may not the the best answer, but in some cases necessary.

Maybe, just a thought, that the developers need to spend a little more time thinking about the people who are using the software, and not so much about the $$$$$$ made from bundling trash (excuse me for referring to it that way). That only adds to a further dislike if there are also other unfixed problems. I think you will agree that many of the problems that users are experiencing are being caused by the extra bundled software. If the software does what it is advertised to do, with as few problems as possible, then people will be more willing to pay for it. And providing support for the product, whether it be free or paid for, only makes good marketing sense.

On a final note, I did not mean to demean those that are volunteering and dedicating their time in trying to help, this includes the moderators. I was only trying to make a point that someone (and the moderators are the ones that are in a position to take action) needs to "clean up", the forums, so to speak.