Code Sponsor is shutting down on December 8
1–10 of 54 posts
Re: Code Sponsor is shutting down on December 8
#2Good. I would hate to see OSS go the route of online content, where it's generated primarily for clicks. GitHub is no saint but I'm glad they have this policy.
Re: Code Sponsor is shutting down on December 8
#3Good. I would hate to see OSS go the route of online content, where it's generated primarily for clicks. GitHub is no saint but I'm glad they have this policy.
Totally agree, I see more and more ads on Github. I even get a bunch of SPAM to put ads on my projects since I got a couple of fairly popular projects.
Monetization is still a huge problem, just this is not the way to go about it.
Re: Code Sponsor is shutting down on December 8
#4For what it's worth, I skimmed Gitlabs terms (https://about.gitlab.com/terms/) and don't see anything about it.
The few Code Sponsor ads I saw on Github were pretty benign, but I can understand why Github wants to keep them off of their platform.
Re: Code Sponsor is shutting down on December 8
#5> ... we have raised over $10,000 towards open source sustainability.
In October, they brought in $7,437.20 from sponsors. They paid out $3,413.20 to open source developers.
40% was to be paid out to developers. I realize there are some "administrative costs" and it takes a while to ramp things up but that seemed like way too little being paid out.
On the other hand, that's $3,413.20 that otherwise might not have went into the pockets of developers so I'm still not entirely sure how I feel about Code Sponsor.
Re: Code Sponsor is shutting down on December 8
#6Right, this is disappointing.
But it doesn’t mean that Codesponsor needs to shut down. They could easily check the referrer and show the ads only on npm, dockerhub, gitlab, hackage etc and they would still get good coverage.
Re: Code Sponsor is shutting down on December 8
#7> ... we have raised over $10,000 towards open source sustainability. In October, they brought in $7,437.20 from sponsors. They paid out $3,413.20 to open source developers. 40% was to be paid out to developers. I realize there are some "administrative costs" and it takes a while to ramp things up but that seemed like way too little being paid out. On the other hand, that's $3,413.20 that otherwise might not have wen…
Hi. This is Eric, the founder of Code Sponsor. I appreciate your concern here. Please understand that for the last four months, I’ve been getting up at 5am and working till 7:30. I then would go to my day job every day and then get back to Code Sponsor in the evenings. I also worked every weekend. It was a huge struggle for me and my family to put in the time.
The reason I had a 40% rate was in hopes that I could make the business sustainable enough to pay me. Not once did I take a distribution.
Re: Code Sponsor is shutting down on December 8
#8For what it's worth, I skimmed Gitlabs terms ( https://about.gitlab.com/terms/ ) and don't see anything about it. The few Code Sponsor ads I saw on Github were pretty benign, but I can understand why Github wants to keep them off of their platform.
Unfortunately, Github is where open source lives. The success that Code Sponsor saw was due to the minimal steps it took for a developer to start getting paid for open source. Asking developers to move their open source projects to Gitlab would not work.
Re: Code Sponsor is shutting down on December 8
#9What was the difference between code sponsor and general "donate" buttons?
Re: Code Sponsor is shutting down on December 8
#10Good. I would hate to see OSS go the route of online content, where it's generated primarily for clicks. GitHub is no saint but I'm glad they have this policy.
Totally agree, I see more and more ads on Github. I even get a bunch of SPAM to put ads on my projects since I got a couple of fairly popular projects. Monetization is still a huge problem, just this is not the way to go about it.
What other solutions do we have to provide scalable funding to open source projects? This comment really frustrates me. Do we put more buttons on our repos asking for money from other developers? Do we try to find corporate sponsorship and hope that they don’t try to influence the project? And if we did want to go that route, how do we do it?
Why is this not the right way to go about it? The “ads” were relevant, unobtrusive and ethical. There was never any click tracking, never any remarketing, nothing.
Code Sponsor provided the FIRST and ONLY means of scalable funding for open source projects. It was not depending on charity from others. It was a business transaction between sponsors and developers. The sponsors saw a return and the developers got paid to continue doing what they love.
If anyone else has a better idea, please share. Until then, I claim that it’s IS the right way to go about it.