5 ms·

Rats -- someone here said, "I'd be worried if I was kickstarter at this point...", and as I went to reply to that, they deleted their comment. But it's spot-on

Rats -- someone here said, "I'd be worried if I was kickstarter at this point...", and as I went to reply to that, they deleted their comment. But it's spot-on. Short term, this is going to bring a lot of publicity and attention towards kickstarter, and that will also benefit the projects on there. If you'd like to launch something via kickstarter, now is the time to do it. Because, odds are, what these guys roll out just isn't going to live up to the $100,000+ raised for it, and when that happens, that's going to reflect badly on kickstarter. I would guess that potential donors will be far more critical of future kickstarter projects; the foremost question on those projects is going to be, "Is this another Diaspora?" The funding for this thing stopped being about getting this project off the ground, and has started being about a protest against Facebook. There's more than enough money in there to launch Diaspora now. People are donating now just to moon Facebook, and that's gonna end up hurting kickstarter later.

jacquesm 17y ago
It isn't over until the fat lady sings. But if I were them I'd shut down the pledge site now, thank everyone and say that if after the launch they feel they need more funding they'll do a second round.
- madmaze 17y ago
  hmm but the question is if they can shut it down while still keeping the money. maybe with this money they can expand their team and develop faster and better.
- mrduncan 17y ago
  There really isn't any motivation to shut it down now though as far as I can tell. It seems like they're getting money with essentially no strings attached - might as well get it now while it's easy to get.
  - jacquesm 17y ago
    That's true. But they would come over a lot more credible (at least to me, that may be different for others). I you've misjudged your initial funding requirement by more than 10:1 you are already showing that you've done something wrong, so since they've received what they said they needed the logical next step would be to put up some proof they can deliver. Like that expectations stay within the realm of the feasible. On another note, this funding round is feeding off the facebook name recognition, not on the track record of these people. Everybody loves an underdog.
    - nirai 17y ago
      Shutting it down? are you for real?
      - jacquesm 17y ago
        Yes, absolutely. They initially asked for $10K. They now have 10 times as much. To pause the contribution round now and to show they can deliver would help them in avoiding the enormous risk of as someone else here already mentioned of becoming 'the next cuil'. Hype is a double-edged sword, it's great when you have it but you only get one shot at delivering and in an overhyped situation that is much harder than in one where expectations are still realistic. The more money they pull in the more this will be overhyped, the bigger the chance of a public disappointment when they launch.
        nirai 17y ago
        By your logic, a person winning the lottery should cap at 100K and say no thanks, I rather not piss of my friends family and colleges. Most likely the public interest in this project will die out within 1-3 months. Hopefully they will not ruin their future lives endlessly trying to reproduce this incredibly lucky strike. But while their at it, they should get as MUCH as they possibly can and totally and shamelessly go for it, hacking, hiring other people to work with them, getting drunk in parties at the other side of the globe, whatever... Giving that money back saying they are afraid to disappoint some anonymous crowd would be totally nuts.
- alex_c 17y ago
  Because of the context, I parsed that as "if I were [Kickstarter] I'd shut down the pledge site now", and was having a hard time following your reasoning. Assuming you meant Diaspora, your point is a lot more reasonable.
  - jacquesm 17y ago
    Diaspora, for sure. Sorry, that reference could have been more clear.
- ghshephard 17y ago
  This is a once-in-a-lifetime no repeatable event. And the money is really not that significant in the whole scheme of things for four people over a summer. Now, if they could get it to go over $400k, then it would be substantial.
  - jacquesm 17y ago
    At the current rate they're pulling in money they are less than 8 days away from $400K, if they get more mainstream press it might happen quicker than that. If the media hype dies down it will probably freeze fairly quickly, but the media is loving this story so far.
billturner 17y ago
I'm not clear on how this will damage Kickstarter's reputation. They're only hosting the project's donation collection system. They could have put up a simple webpage with a "Donate Now" button linking to Paypal to collect funds. Would that have made Paypal look bad? Or their web hosts's reputation? As for "Is this going to be another Diaspora," I'm not sure I would totally connect the Diaspora project to Kickstarter - unless it was Kickstarter writing the software that wasn't delivered (in the worst case scenario).
- jacquesm 17y ago
  For many people this will be their first exposure to kickstarter. First experience a negative one for a now very high profile project might damage the kickstarter brand.
edw519 17y ago
I would guess that potential donors will be far more critical of future kickstarter projects Good. Those of us who are serious, with actual working code and real customers, welcome the extra scrutiny. No one ever said that Darwinism was painless.
- OliverSmith 17y ago
  being critical of future kickstarter projects would be good, but being critical of kickstarter in general could be bad
icey 17y ago
Sorry, that was me. I thought a little bit more about it and decided that I was mostly wrong. The people who donate money on Kickstarter aren't donating with the expectation of a real return. In a sense, they're "voting with their wallet". I don't think people give Diaspora $20 bucks thinking "hey, this is going to be a Facebook killer!", I think they will donate with the idea that they'd like to see someone give it a go. Sorry for being so bipolar about it; I figured I'd delete the comment before having to defend a position I no longer agreed with.
- someone_here 17y ago
  Making a comment, deleting it, and then replying to a comment that agreed with it stating that what they are agreeing with you upon is wrong is an interesting way of creating an argument.
  - icey 17y ago
    And now everyone will know my secret shame of not being able to make up my mind. I still don't think it's great for Kickstarter, but I don't think it's as big an issue as I initially did. I was hoping nobody had seen my comment, but they did; and I wanted to explain the reason I deleted my comment.
    - neilk 17y ago
      I don't think it's a shame at all. You should take pride that you're trying to construct well-reasoned arguments, and in the course of that, sometimes you change your mind. Only cranks and trolls never have that experience.
      - jacquesm 17y ago
        That's why it would be great to have a 'preview' button the initial form is pretty small to work in and it is very easy to miss something before clicking 'reply'. It sure encourages brevity though.
    - Jun8 17y ago
rjett 17y ago
It seems like it would be an easy fix for Kickstarter to just let users implement a voluntary cap on total donated money.
neurotech1 17y ago
Maybe Kickstarter need to introduce "milestone" payments. This concept is used for freelancer.com and similar website. eg. If the total is over $5,000 then the first $5k is cleared as normal, and any additional funds are delivered on meeting a milestone.
inmygarage 17y ago
I disagree. For Kickstarter, I think this is what the "Paris Hilton cell phone hack" was for Digg. It has proved their model and their platform and will mainstream their service. Only good things for them - I actually think Kickstarter is the big winner in this entire situation, Diaspora is now saddled with sadly unreasonable expectations.

jacquesm 17y ago

It isn't over until the fat lady sings. But if I were them I'd shut down the pledge site now, thank everyone and say that if after the launch they feel they need more funding they'll do a second round.

madmaze 17y ago
hmm but the question is if they can shut it down while still keeping the money. maybe with this money they can expand their team and develop faster and better.
mrduncan 17y ago
There really isn't any motivation to shut it down now though as far as I can tell. It seems like they're getting money with essentially no strings attached - might as well get it now while it's easy to get.
- jacquesm 17y ago
  That's true. But they would come over a lot more credible (at least to me, that may be different for others). I you've misjudged your initial funding requirement by more than 10:1 you are already showing that you've done something wrong, so since they've received what they said they needed the logical next step would be to put up some proof they can deliver. Like that expectations stay within the realm of the feasible. On another note, this funding round is feeding off the facebook name recognition, not on the track record of these people. Everybody loves an underdog.
  - nirai 17y ago
    Shutting it down? are you for real?
    - jacquesm 17y ago
      Yes, absolutely. They initially asked for $10K. They now have 10 times as much. To pause the contribution round now and to show they can deliver would help them in avoiding the enormous risk of as someone else here already mentioned of becoming 'the next cuil'. Hype is a double-edged sword, it's great when you have it but you only get one shot at delivering and in an overhyped situation that is much harder than in one where expectations are still realistic. The more money they pull in the more this will be overhyped, the bigger the chance of a public disappointment when they launch.
      - nirai 17y ago
        By your logic, a person winning the lottery should cap at 100K and say no thanks, I rather not piss of my friends family and colleges. Most likely the public interest in this project will die out within 1-3 months. Hopefully they will not ruin their future lives endlessly trying to reproduce this incredibly lucky strike. But while their at it, they should get as MUCH as they possibly can and totally and shamelessly go for it, hacking, hiring other people to work with them, getting drunk in parties at the other side of the globe, whatever... Giving that money back saying they are afraid to disappoint some anonymous crowd would be totally nuts.
alex_c 17y ago
Because of the context, I parsed that as "if I were [Kickstarter] I'd shut down the pledge site now", and was having a hard time following your reasoning. Assuming you meant Diaspora, your point is a lot more reasonable.
- jacquesm 17y ago
  Diaspora, for sure. Sorry, that reference could have been more clear.
ghshephard 17y ago
This is a once-in-a-lifetime no repeatable event. And the money is really not that significant in the whole scheme of things for four people over a summer. Now, if they could get it to go over $400k, then it would be substantial.
- jacquesm 17y ago
  At the current rate they're pulling in money they are less than 8 days away from $400K, if they get more mainstream press it might happen quicker than that. If the media hype dies down it will probably freeze fairly quickly, but the media is loving this story so far.

billturner 17y ago

I'm not clear on how this will damage Kickstarter's reputation. They're only hosting the project's donation collection system. They could have put up a simple webpage with a "Donate Now" button linking to Paypal to collect funds. Would that have made Paypal look bad? Or their web hosts's reputation? As for "Is this going to be another Diaspora," I'm not sure I would totally connect the Diaspora project to Kickstarter - unless it was Kickstarter writing the software that wasn't delivered (in the worst case scenario).

jacquesm 17y ago
For many people this will be their first exposure to kickstarter. First experience a negative one for a now very high profile project might damage the kickstarter brand.

edw519 17y ago

I would guess that potential donors will be far more critical of future kickstarter projects Good. Those of us who are serious, with actual working code and real customers, welcome the extra scrutiny. No one ever said that Darwinism was painless.

OliverSmith 17y ago
being critical of future kickstarter projects would be good, but being critical of kickstarter in general could be bad

icey 17y ago

Sorry, that was me. I thought a little bit more about it and decided that I was mostly wrong. The people who donate money on Kickstarter aren't donating with the expectation of a real return. In a sense, they're "voting with their wallet". I don't think people give Diaspora $20 bucks thinking "hey, this is going to be a Facebook killer!", I think they will donate with the idea that they'd like to see someone give it a go. Sorry for being so bipolar about it; I figured I'd delete the comment before having to defend a position I no longer agreed with.

someone_here 17y ago
Making a comment, deleting it, and then replying to a comment that agreed with it stating that what they are agreeing with you upon is wrong is an interesting way of creating an argument.
- icey 17y ago
  And now everyone will know my secret shame of not being able to make up my mind. I still don't think it's great for Kickstarter, but I don't think it's as big an issue as I initially did. I was hoping nobody had seen my comment, but they did; and I wanted to explain the reason I deleted my comment.
  - neilk 17y ago
    I don't think it's a shame at all. You should take pride that you're trying to construct well-reasoned arguments, and in the course of that, sometimes you change your mind. Only cranks and trolls never have that experience.
    - jacquesm 17y ago
      That's why it would be great to have a 'preview' button the initial form is pretty small to work in and it is very easy to miss something before clicking 'reply'. It sure encourages brevity though.
  - Jun8 17y ago

rjett 17y ago

It seems like it would be an easy fix for Kickstarter to just let users implement a voluntary cap on total donated money.

neurotech1 17y ago

Maybe Kickstarter need to introduce "milestone" payments. This concept is used for freelancer.com and similar website. eg. If the total is over $5,000 then the first $5k is cleared as normal, and any additional funds are delivered on meeting a milestone.

inmygarage 17y ago

I disagree. For Kickstarter, I think this is what the "Paris Hilton cell phone hack" was for Digg. It has proved their model and their platform and will mainstream their service. Only good things for them - I actually think Kickstarter is the big winner in this entire situation, Diaspora is now saddled with sadly unreasonable expectations.