3 ms·
The one thing I dislike about Patreon (which I notified them about as well) is that I need a subscription for everything. Say I have a few dollar of disposable
by aequitas 8y ago
The one thing I dislike about Patreon (which I notified them about as well) is that I need a subscription for everything. Say I have a few dollar of disposable income I just want to donate to opensource indiscriminately I need to make a choice of which. And there are only so many levels (each with a baseline) in Patreon that a lot of smaller projects get left out.
I would like to have just one amount per month that gets withdrawn that I don't have to think about any further. And that just gets distributed over projects. With the idea that a lot of micro payments make more than a few big payments.
- chimprich 8y agoI'd be happy to chuck some cash at free software. Things like Emacs are far more valuable to me than software I've actually paid for. I know a few developers are on Patreon but that requires figuring out who deserves it the most or a fair bit of admin to spread out payments. Maybe the FSF or someone could distribute cash but they don't seem very interested.
- icebraining 8y agoI preferred Flattr's model - you just donated a fixed amount per month, and they divided it by project. But it wasn't indiscriminate - you had to click on a button for each project. Now it seems they use a "smart, privacy-friendly algorithm [which] measures attention on websites", which is a no-go for me. The problem with indiscriminate is that there are many, many, many OS projects out there. You need some curation, and that opens a can of worms. Maybe they could allow people to share and use lists?
- trextrex 8y agoFlattr's model seems really well suited for conveniently contribution back to open source. Does Flattr not work for software anymore? I'm trying to figure out why it's not more popular as a way to contribute to open source software.