4 ms·

As a developer, wouldn't it seem odd to do the work up front, and then have a group of people you don't know vote on whether or not you should be paid? I can't

As a developer, wouldn't it seem odd to do the work up front, and then have a group of people you don't know vote on whether or not you should be paid? I can't imagine that would be very attractive.

drewcrawford 18y ago
If they vote no, you can always take the project somewhere else. Contributors are voting on demos or samples, not on the real code. We don't release that until the election passes. The hope would be, of course, that developers would resolve their differences with the contributors. But if they don't, developers can walk and take their code with them (shareware it, say, or take it to a third party)
- tsetse-fly 18y ago
  It's shareware except you've made it much more complicated. What happens if I vote yes and the other contributors vote no or vice-versa? Does the vote need to be 100%? That sounds like a pain in the ass -- I want my software, now. This is also not very good for the developer. They have to perfect the software to please all the contributors before getting paid. How long until everyone agrees that it's ready? Where am I supposed to take it if I walk? I just wasted all this time writing code, thinking I was going to get paid and now I have to try and sell software that I didn't even come up with the idea for. At least with Rent A Coder, I don't have to please a group of random people.
  - drewcrawford 18y ago
    The amount of votes required is definitely not 100%. That would be way too hard for any developer. Our election algorithm looks at a lot of metrics before deciding whether to pass a project. Our goal is to pass projects that have broad community consensus that they meet the project requirements. We obviously want to fail projects that have obvious stability problems, or that don't do what the proposal says. We're working hard to make it difficult to game the system, and I'd be interested in any thoughts you might have to make things more fair.
    - deleted 18y ago
      [deleted]
    - tsetse-fly 18y ago
      What happens if I vote 'no' but the project still passes? Do I still have to pay even though I wasn't satisfied? If a bunch of contributors vote 'no' and pull their money then how do I improve the project and get them onboard again if it's going to be OSS? With shareware, I can improve the product and catch them on the next release.
      - drewcrawford 18y ago
        If the project passes, the developer gets paid. If there's some sort of dispute, we can manually arbitrate. Again, our metrics are for broad consensus and having the shipped product match the original proposal. If those two conditions are met, I think in all fairness, the developer should be paid. Contributors can only pull money if it's been more than 30 days since they made the contribution. After that 30 day holding period, they can walk. We've considered playing with that number, or letting it be variable. Contributors don't have great incentive to let an election fail; if it does, they don't get any software (other than whatever demo the developer posted). While I'm sure there will be cranky contributors here and there, hopefully we can factor them out to some extent in our election process. At the macro level, people are going to want the project they contributed to released.
  - Hexstream 18y ago
    Yeah, it seems in the most common case ALL parties won't be satisfied.

As a developer, wouldn't it seem odd to do the work up front, and then have a group of people you don't know vote on whether or not you should be paid? I can't imagine that would be very attractive.

drewcrawford 18y ago

If they vote no, you can always take the project somewhere else. Contributors are voting on demos or samples, not on the real code. We don't release that until the election passes. The hope would be, of course, that developers would resolve their differences with the contributors. But if they don't, developers can walk and take their code with them (shareware it, say, or take it to a third party)

tsetse-fly 18y ago
It's shareware except you've made it much more complicated. What happens if I vote yes and the other contributors vote no or vice-versa? Does the vote need to be 100%? That sounds like a pain in the ass -- I want my software, now. This is also not very good for the developer. They have to perfect the software to please all the contributors before getting paid. How long until everyone agrees that it's ready? Where am I supposed to take it if I walk? I just wasted all this time writing code, thinking I was going to get paid and now I have to try and sell software that I didn't even come up with the idea for. At least with Rent A Coder, I don't have to please a group of random people.
- drewcrawford 18y ago
  The amount of votes required is definitely not 100%. That would be way too hard for any developer. Our election algorithm looks at a lot of metrics before deciding whether to pass a project. Our goal is to pass projects that have broad community consensus that they meet the project requirements. We obviously want to fail projects that have obvious stability problems, or that don't do what the proposal says. We're working hard to make it difficult to game the system, and I'd be interested in any thoughts you might have to make things more fair.
  - deleted 18y ago
    [deleted]
  - tsetse-fly 18y ago
    What happens if I vote 'no' but the project still passes? Do I still have to pay even though I wasn't satisfied? If a bunch of contributors vote 'no' and pull their money then how do I improve the project and get them onboard again if it's going to be OSS? With shareware, I can improve the product and catch them on the next release.
    - drewcrawford 18y ago
      If the project passes, the developer gets paid. If there's some sort of dispute, we can manually arbitrate. Again, our metrics are for broad consensus and having the shipped product match the original proposal. If those two conditions are met, I think in all fairness, the developer should be paid. Contributors can only pull money if it's been more than 30 days since they made the contribution. After that 30 day holding period, they can walk. We've considered playing with that number, or letting it be variable. Contributors don't have great incentive to let an election fail; if it does, they don't get any software (other than whatever demo the developer posted). While I'm sure there will be cranky contributors here and there, hopefully we can factor them out to some extent in our election process. At the macro level, people are going to want the project they contributed to released.
- Hexstream 18y ago
  Yeah, it seems in the most common case ALL parties won't be satisfied.