3 ms·
As a flattr user from both sides (site owner and site visitor), I can't say I was entirely happy with it. Although it's well implemented. I find it difficult t
by elcapitan 10y ago
As a flattr user from both sides (site owner and site visitor), I can't say I was entirely happy with it. Although it's well implemented.
I find it difficult that they constrained the concept to payoff = $monthly_amount/$number_of_clicks. From both sides I would prefer to be able to set and see prices, not arbitrary equal results for all the sites I click. That had kept me from clicking in most cases, because I wouldn't want to give the equal amount to go to some 1-paragraph blogpost as to a 1 hour podcast. Even though I would want to contribute for both.
- splatcollision 10y agoPotential to integrate the amount of micropayment as a star rating - think a combined "donate & rate" action after reading / watching. Let people contribute from 0.01 to 5.00 units of currency, in easy increments, that also indicate how much they liked it. Automatically bill and aggregate monthly.
- elcapitan 10y agoI guess the charm of their solution is that they don't have to put these complex semantics into place. It sounds like a good idea, but rating and paying are two very different things - in my example, I would merely want to reward more effort (1h podcast) with more money. That doesn't mean I didn't like the short blogpost.
- porsupah 10y agoWouldn't one solution be to simply Flattr the podcast more than once? Click three times, and the podcaster will get three times the slice your blogposter will.
- elcapitan 10y agoThat's also not possible, unfortunately. There's the option to also flattr the side-wide button, but that also kind of defies the idea of putting it where you want it to be (because that's also feedback for the publisher, obviously).