I don't think the idea is exploitive...just opportunistic, which is an awesome mindset to have in business if you stay on the right side of things. So, kudos on the idea.
That said, I do have a problem with the execution:
The section "Please don't buy this shirt if you died. That's just lying, and nobody likes a liar..." is obviously intended just for laughs, but it's not really that funny and you run the risk of offending someone that, say, knows someone who actually died in the "Snowpacalypse." My wife, for example, knew one of the seven people that are known to have died in Chicago as a result of the blizzard. I'm one of the least sensitive or "PC" people on earth, but I think you might rethink what you gain vs. what you lose with that particular sentence. Offending people can be fine (and inevitable), but there should usually be a reason for it. [BTW, "I survived X" is a common T-shirt meme and Snowpacalypse is a recent meme, so I didn't think anything of it until the one sentence made a more concrete connection between 'death' and the blizzard...which made me think of the news reports etc. - which might tip the creepy scale for some potential buyers. Maybe A/B test it?]
You're right, I really didn't think that far into it, and probably should have A/B tested it... but I have never even setup an A/B test before and that certainly would've slowed things a bit. With things like this, time is of the essence, so I don't regret not running an A/B test.
Based on non-statistical analysis: the only comments I've heard about that particular line are that it was really funny, so mission accomplished I guess. I understand where you're coming from and how it could be offensive, but your comment is the first (from any network) to even mention it in that respect.
It didn't offend me personally at all, but I like to try to put myself in the shoes of potential customers when I view sites like this and my wife is one of the 'personas" I use. [Honestly, she probably wouldn't have been offended either, unless she saw it right after after she saw the news. It's a context/frame-of-mind thing, I think.] Many people are emulating that type of ThinkGeek/Groupon writing these days, and I think sometimes they fall a bit flat. I was just curious about your results with it...and I thank you for updating me. I wish you would do some A/B testing - not just with this, but everything - because lost customers don't usually speak up.
I know there are several HN members that have easy A/B testing services (http://visualwebsiteoptimizer.com/ is one that springs to mind, but I know there are others.)
It didn't offend me, dickhead. I was just offering my opinion about something that might lower sales conversions. Why piss off a potential customer just for a weak joke...?
Thanks for the D, no need to be aggressive, my point is just that if you offend a very few and get attention of the mass, somewhere, you win.
Piss off a potential client isn't a big deal when you got hundred other to laugh!
I also think that making fun of dramatical situation might help to get over the trauma. But I guess you are to sensitive to follow this.
I think most people on HN like case studies because they help them learn things that they can apply to their own businesses. If you have no interest in improving your business, or learning new techniques, or getting "fresh eyes" - then I'm sorry you are here. Part of hacking culture is testing and trying out things, not just making assumptions and saying fuck it. Little things on landing pages can make a big difference in sales. Why not test some of them? The OP himself said that this promotion was an "experiment." My point was that I think the OP could get "hundred other to laugh" without using the lines that may creep out a few. I'm not saying I'm offended by what he wrote...I'm saying "try to make more money." Testing some stuff like that would offer spice to his case study when he posts it on his blog. Controversy is a great sales tool. Humor is a great sales tool. I didn't think the sentences in question were enough of either to outweigh the potential downsides, and they seemed like throwaway lines anyway and not something he was attached to emotionally.
------
Re: my 'aggressiveness.'
I called you a dickhead about half in jest (we were talking about being offended), and half because you replied to me with a cliche that I had already addressed and an instruction to "get over it." Dickhead is one of the least offensive-offensive words I could think of - it's my grandmother's term of endearment for my grandfather ;-) HN guidelines say, "Be civil. Don't say things you wouldn't say in a face to face conversation." I wasn't exactly civil, but I would totally say that to you in a face to face conversation.
I keep thinking that auto-censoring to gain some sale isn't a good thing. That line amused a lot of people (me included) and as you'll always offend somebody at some point, specially when you play with humor, I think that playing as far as you feel like is the way to do. It keep the thing spontaneous and that the strength of that project, natural joke quickly implemented and that amused and talk to the target.
------ Re: my 'aggressiveness.'
Abt the "Dickhead" word, I have no idea if it's a casual or a tough word, as a non-native speaker I can't really say, and I don't really care, was more the tone that bugged me, but as my first reaction wasn't really well formatted either, let's say it was certainly well deserved, the "get over it" wasn't a good thing to write, I agree. .
And I am sorry I called you a name that added nothing to the discussion. It is not a 'casual' word, but I have a very developed vocabulary of obscenities ;-) - so it was just the first thing that came to mind that I thought would make a point about offensiveness and your tone bugging me. In any case, it was flippant and I regret it.
Re: auto-censoring. I may be completely wrong about the lines...I thought they were mildy funny, just not worth losing sales over. It was just a suggestion. If it were the OP's actual stance/belief on something, then that's different. I just thought he could put in something funnier that wouldn't necessarily be creepy to anyone. I have a different perspective than most, maybe. My companies have (aggregate) revenues in the low billions, so a small tweak can be a big thing for me. I don't want to offend a customer unless I think there is a good reason. I started out with exactly this kind of small, opportunistic approach as the OP's t-shirt, so I thought I might have something to contribute. I was apparently wrong.
That said, I do have a problem with the execution:
The section "Please don't buy this shirt if you died. That's just lying, and nobody likes a liar..." is obviously intended just for laughs, but it's not really that funny and you run the risk of offending someone that, say, knows someone who actually died in the "Snowpacalypse." My wife, for example, knew one of the seven people that are known to have died in Chicago as a result of the blizzard. I'm one of the least sensitive or "PC" people on earth, but I think you might rethink what you gain vs. what you lose with that particular sentence. Offending people can be fine (and inevitable), but there should usually be a reason for it. [BTW, "I survived X" is a common T-shirt meme and Snowpacalypse is a recent meme, so I didn't think anything of it until the one sentence made a more concrete connection between 'death' and the blizzard...which made me think of the news reports etc. - which might tip the creepy scale for some potential buyers. Maybe A/B test it?]