5 ms·

It's been a while since I started using Brave but I felt they were pretty up front with how the payments worked. I do understand the frustration though of thos

It's been a while since I started using Brave but I felt they were pretty up front with how the payments worked. I do understand the frustration though of those who don't see this. Brave could warn visitors donating when the content owner hasn't set up Brave Payments. Brave could refund said money back to the visitor if it goes unclaimed after a while. Just random ideas from someone who actually likes their attempt.

deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
jacques_chester 8y ago
My understanding is that automatically refunding as part of the agreement with the Brave user is probably workable. Even more workable is to be opt-in only. That's what I would do (to the point that I developed a protocol that's purely opt-in).
- brandnewlow 8y ago
  After all the very passionate feedback yesterday here and on Twitter, we're reworking things to make it clear who's participating in Brave Rewards and will receive tips and who's not and won't. We erred in shipping UI/UX that didn't make this clear enough. We're fixing this.
  - davidgerard 8y ago
    You erred in "opt-out" versus "opt-in". Literally your founder advocated this spammy method.
    - alpacaarmy 8y ago
      I mean the founder created JavaScript. Can't expect a lot of good design from him, can we?
    - brandnewlow 8y ago
      We erred in making it appear non-participating creators had opted in at all when they have not.
- brandnewlow 8y ago
  We just posted a list of the many changes we're pushing live to address the problems found in our UI: https://brave.com/rewards-update/ https://brave.com/rewards-update/ One of the items listed is looking into blocking all tips to unverified publishers altogether. We hear people's concerns and are going to look into it. In the meantime we've dropped all creative assets (photos) for unverified publishers and are also adding a clear alert saying unverified publishers are in fact not-participating yet in the program. Screenshots in the link. Thanks for your feedback and for caring about this being done properly.
  - jacques_chester 8y ago
    It's good you are trying to listen to feedback. But do pay attention to a common thread: most publishers don't want opt-out, they want opt-in. I'm biased because I designed a different scheme[0] some time back which I guess in some universes would have made me a competitor. So speaking as an alt-universe competitor, opt-in is the safest move. You can just as easily calculate an imaginary amount of money that would be collected and tell potential publishers that number (that was my plan, because of this exact scenario). One more thing: you should lawyer up. You need a firm with strengths in consumer law, trademarks, charities fraud and trusts law, preferably able to opine across each of your physical HQ jurisdiction, the governing-law jurisdiction in your ToS and wherever Tom Scott lives. [0] https://patents.google.com/patent/US9853964B2 https://patents.google.com/patent/US9853964B2

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

jacques_chester 8y ago

My understanding is that automatically refunding as part of the agreement with the Brave user is probably workable. Even more workable is to be opt-in only. That's what I would do (to the point that I developed a protocol that's purely opt-in).

brandnewlow 8y ago
After all the very passionate feedback yesterday here and on Twitter, we're reworking things to make it clear who's participating in Brave Rewards and will receive tips and who's not and won't. We erred in shipping UI/UX that didn't make this clear enough. We're fixing this.
- davidgerard 8y ago
  You erred in "opt-out" versus "opt-in". Literally your founder advocated this spammy method.
  - alpacaarmy 8y ago
    I mean the founder created JavaScript. Can't expect a lot of good design from him, can we?
  - brandnewlow 8y ago
    We erred in making it appear non-participating creators had opted in at all when they have not.
brandnewlow 8y ago
We just posted a list of the many changes we're pushing live to address the problems found in our UI: https://brave.com/rewards-update/ https://brave.com/rewards-update/ One of the items listed is looking into blocking all tips to unverified publishers altogether. We hear people's concerns and are going to look into it. In the meantime we've dropped all creative assets (photos) for unverified publishers and are also adding a clear alert saying unverified publishers are in fact not-participating yet in the program. Screenshots in the link. Thanks for your feedback and for caring about this being done properly.
- jacques_chester 8y ago
  It's good you are trying to listen to feedback. But do pay attention to a common thread: most publishers don't want opt-out, they want opt-in. I'm biased because I designed a different scheme[0] some time back which I guess in some universes would have made me a competitor. So speaking as an alt-universe competitor, opt-in is the safest move. You can just as easily calculate an imaginary amount of money that would be collected and tell potential publishers that number (that was my plan, because of this exact scenario). One more thing: you should lawyer up. You need a firm with strengths in consumer law, trademarks, charities fraud and trusts law, preferably able to opine across each of your physical HQ jurisdiction, the governing-law jurisdiction in your ToS and wherever Tom Scott lives. [0] https://patents.google.com/patent/US9853964B2 https://patents.google.com/patent/US9853964B2