61–70 of 205 posts
I use like 50 different software heavily. Each of these has like tens of developers. I can donate to some and rotate each month, but how about the rest, and dependencies? There is just so much software there that seems hopeless (although there are also billions of users).
The UI imposes a 5% minimum (and 15% default) value for "Tip thanks.dev" under "How much would you like to donate each month?" on https://thanks.dev/settings This implementation is clearly for-profit. I want to directly tip open source projects using a system that doesn't involve other third parties taking a significant cut.
https://thanks.dev/faq says: What are your fees? Tips at time of donation. You decide. If payment is required to use a service then that payment is not a "tip" - it is a "fee". Anything over the required payment would be a "tip". This FAQ answer implies that the required payment is zero, which, it turns out, is false. There is absolutely nothing wrong with charging a fee for a service, but there is something wrong wi…
The UI imposes a 5% minimum (and 15% default) value for "Tip thanks.dev" under "How much would you like to donate each month?" on https://thanks.dev/settings This implementation is clearly for-profit. I want to directly tip open source projects using a system that doesn't involve other third parties taking a significant cut.
The irony of "someone should build something for free" when complaining about a donation system for helping open source projects get paid for their work.
Take money, don't wait for people to give you money for the free value that you provide.
The UI imposes a 5% minimum (and 15% default) value for "Tip thanks.dev" under "How much would you like to donate each month?" on https://thanks.dev/settings This implementation is clearly for-profit. I want to directly tip open source projects using a system that doesn't involve other third parties taking a significant cut.
Absolutely appreciate & respect your perspective. We're passionate about making open source sustainable & understand that there can be multiple ways of achieving this goal. The more ways money is channeled to the community the better...
You open source guys need to figure out a way to charge people for the value that you provide. You ran the experiment for a very long time and it looks like this "beggar" model really doesn't seem to be working for the vast majority of your projects. Take money, don't wait for people to give you money for the free value that you provide.
I use like 50 different software heavily. Each of these has like tens of developers. I can donate to some and rotate each month, but how about the rest, and dependencies? There is just so much software there that seems hopeless (although there are also billions of users).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
https://thanks.dev/faq says: What are your fees? Tips at time of donation. You decide. If payment is required to use a service then that payment is not a "tip" - it is a "fee". Anything over the required payment would be a "tip". This FAQ answer implies that the required payment is zero, which, it turns out, is false. There is absolutely nothing wrong with charging a fee for a service, but there is something wrong wi…
How do you suggest we can better word/explain it?
You open source guys need to figure out a way to charge people for the value that you provide. You ran the experiment for a very long time and it looks like this "beggar" model really doesn't seem to be working for the vast majority of your projects. Take money, don't wait for people to give you money for the free value that you provide.
Nice idea. Like a personalized vanguard index for open source donations. If this takes off people will be inventivized to make lots of small dependencies that are likely to be needed in tier 1 (or tier 2). The trick will be to find a bug in a first dep of webpack for example, fork it and fix some bugs there then convince webpack to switch to you. Algorithmic decisions can be gamed. I suggest instead the app lists the…
Re gaming the system you're totally right. Although slightly unintuitive, we've also heard the opposite from maintainers. That they'll be motivated to remove the silly one line packages from their dependency trees due to the imbalance of value they provide vs extract.
We also prune self dependencies, circular dependencies and a few other cases to keep things level. Hopefully we'll be at a stage to open source our codebase soon and can better leverage community feedback in this space :)