4 ms·

So charge everyone $2 per month to use it? shrug If you're not going to show how much money you get via donations, I'm not donating. I'm not going to donate mo

by olah_1 3y ago

So charge everyone $2 per month to use it? shrug If you're not going to show how much money you get via donations, I'm not donating. I'm not going to donate more than you actually need, for example.

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
bongripper 3y ago
Signal already has a very hard time competing against the network effects of WhatsApp and Telegram and getting people on the app, a fee would only increase that. But making it n$/year but with the option for an account withiot a phone number like other people are suggesting sounds nice, peace
- AnonHP 3y ago
  > Signal already has a very hard time competing against the network effects of WhatsApp and Telegram May not be the best thread to say this in, but Signal isn’t as good as Telegram and WhatsApp on features. People can be persuaded to switch, but may have different expectations than what Signal can satisfy.
frivoal 3y ago
https://projects.propublica.org/nonprofits/organizations/824506840 https://projects.propublica.org/nonprofits/organizations/824...
lxgr 3y ago
Their competitors are free. Charging $2 would make Signal a non-alternative for many of their users, and due to how the network effect works, it would greatly reduce the utility for everybody willing to pay as well. And that's all without even considering the significant overhead of collecting low-value payments internationally.
- olah_1 3y ago
  If you have a sustainable business model, you don't need the network effects. Threema is fine with a smaller userbase because they have a business model that works.
  - lxgr 3y ago
    Yes, but Signal and Threema seem to have a pretty different mission.