I like Brave's Defaults (har har) in a lot of places but I am firmly against their monetisation schemes. There is an attitude among a lot of people in the foun

I like Brave's Defaults (har har) in a lot of places but I am firmly against their monetisation schemes. There is an attitude among a lot of people in the founder space that "subscription models are what everyone says they want - but no one actually pays up". This is demonstrably false. Plenty of content creators are making modest but sustainable incomes via Patreon, even despite the skew towards the top 2% of creators. I think what the phrasing should be is, "I could make a modest income via the subscription model, but a notably higher income via other methods. Because this is my primary means of evaluating an approach, I therefore consider the subscription model unviable, assuming maximal competition." That would at least be more defensible if one could justify their concern that their sector is high-competition.