Paying to have the streak back
I've read in some posts mentions on people having paid Duolingo to have their lost streaks back... and in real money not in lingots I would assume.
Is this true or just an urban myth?
Now, this sounds completely wrong to me... it's ethically very dubious on Duolingo's part preying on some people's psychological attachment to the streak. I could accept if getting a streak restored would cost... 200 lingots or whatever...but real money? C'mon...
And on the members part, as much irrelevant as the streak is regarding your overall learning process, the fact is that you've lost it... paying to get it back is cheating... your streak is not real anymore.
This is regardless of the quantity involved... it could be 1 dollar for all I care... It's about principles.
So, what do you think about this paying to have the streak back? If true of course...
Yes it's true... not a myth at all unfortunately...
I had a 134 days streak, and I (allegedly) have not practiced one day, and therefore lost the streak. Hence I was asked to pay £11.99 to have it restored... I would have given even 300 lingots, i don't care, I don't even know what to do with them, but money? real money? nah...
It is not cheating, if it is allowed by the rules. By definition.
You can't just call things cheating because you don't like the them.
My opinion? The rules should be whatever maximise the amount of learning. If adding a bit more forgiveness in the system (while giving Duolingo some much needed revenue) leads to more learning, then so be it. It is, after all, why we are here.
Duo is a for-profit company. They can charge what they like for any aspect of its use. It’s amazing to me that all this is free, but they do have to spend a significant amount of money to keep it going.
A streak is just a number, and not reflective of actual knowledge - which exists independent of a daily practice statistic. I wouldn’t ever pay to maintain it (and mine used to be over 500) but if there are others who would then fine, that’s an income stream.
Sure, but that would exempt Duolingo from potential dubious ethical behaviour... the fault would rely solely on the person.
Lingots, sure, whatever - they're such useless geegaws as it is that anything new on which to spend them would be fine. But real money? Hell no. The streak is just pixels and doesn't mean anything. It especially doesn't mean anything outside the Duolingo environment; I can tell you that no one I know cares how long my streak is, and they're quite right to not care.
And it's not an urban myth on the app. That's where they're trying to charge to "restore" streaks.
I have gotten that option but I have never taken it. I don't mind losing my streak as it's not a big deal.
I don’t really like the idea of paying with real money, since I don’t even think of it as rewarding (I personally would not feel any better by restoring it this way). However, I think it’s a bit sad not to be able to freeze for more than one day in lingots, since I can’t connect at all when I go on holidays (even though most of the time I still practice with papers) : loosing my streak when it’s not about being serious or not is a pity. I wish we could freeze the whole account for a specific period of time. For example : I know that I’ll be gone for exactly ten days, so I pay (like 200 lingots of even more, I don’t care) just the day before, stating on the calendar when I’ll be back. But well, I don’t think they will introduce such a feature. The only way for me to keep my streak despite my holidays would be to ask a friend to buy the one-day freeze on my account everyday, but I do not care enough for that xD
I think a lot of the people buying streak repair have lost their streaks through technical faults real or imagined, so they don't feel like it's cheating but rather rectifying a wrong that Duolingo generally doesn't rectify any other way. One could point to perverse incentives here, but most of the technical issues seem to be about actually connecting to the servers from the app, and I really don't think Duolingo is out there trying to open itself up for a class-action lawsuit in the uber-litigious U.S. by somehow having its finger unfairly on the scales.