3 ms·
Let me try to de-baffle you -- it is the shitcoin-oh-god-yet-another-ICO aspect, not the monetize-aspect which is causing friction. If Signal switched to a 'Li
by verytrivial 6y ago
Let me try to de-baffle you -- it is the shitcoin-oh-god-yet-another-ICO aspect, not the monetize-aspect which is causing friction.
If Signal switched to a 'Lite' vs 'Pro' model, or other incremental features, or had more donation related nagging, I doubt it would raise the slightest bother.
Many people switched from other messaging apps on princple, much of that signalled (pun intended) by actions of the founders. This moves seems to be incompatible with many people's principles.
- orangeoxidation 6y agoYup. Before WhatsApp was bought by facebook they just charged people. This was fine and seemed fair. Same with 'pro features' or such. The crypto scheme however does not seem like a fair deal. It looks like monetizing through a backdoor under false pretenses. Exploiting the unsavvy rather than dealing in good faith. This is especially bad as signal was 'the app we trust' for many of us.