However, given how light it sounds like it was, and Alec's attitude in this thread, I probably would never have minded the DRM had I purchased the non-Steam version.
You are entitled to that decision, but I still must ask you at what point are you willing to "put your foot down" so to speak?
I don't think activation-on-install is a consumer-unfriendly deal in 2008, when the internet is so pervasive. It can be used for valuable statistical data which would improve the product. It's fair. Software which phones home on every launch is unacceptable.
The original post sounds inflammatory. I don't think that sort of tone is appropriate.
I respected Bit-Blot for how they are interactive in their community, but activation is too far IMHO and they lost it. Taking it out has restored my respect for them, and so I wish to speak more effectively than a forum post by even buying a copy of their hard work. I also wanted to make sure that it was known that this choice was out of respect than simply a random sale.
Disclaimer: I didn't read the thread, but I felt it was necessary to point out how my opinion was different from the original post, since otherwise it could have been interpreted that I was in the same boat as you. So my last line was added as a sort of afterthought.
My feeling is that your original post spreads FUD about DRM in any form, no matter how simple it is. That's not how we are going to change the software world or reopen the second-hand market. You have to rationally judge each usage of DRM in context. You came here and treated it like SecuROM. That's not rational, and your tone can invalidate your opinion, depending on the reader. I'm sorry to sound condescending, but for the sake of the cause we philosophically align with, please remember your audience.
Edit:
In the interest of preventing further FUD:
For the record, Aquaria never had internet-based activation.
