3 ms·

Perhaps I'm mistaken, but I see it more as crowd-funding (I feel dirty using that term) a useful service with the added benefit of being able to run it yourself

Perhaps I'm mistaken, but I see it more as crowd-funding (I feel dirty using that term) a useful service with the added benefit of being able to run it yourself. The goal was to spur more/better discussions (than what private chat or crappy forums currently do). We could certainly open up the code sooner, it just won't be polished enough to use from the get-go. Most of all, it's an experiment for us. Do other people want this service as much as we do? Is this a valid way to try to bootstrap something? Can a service 100% (K, so 95%) open-source itself & still make ends meet?

petercooper 14y ago
Perhaps I'm mistaken, but I see it more as crowd-funding (I feel dirty using that term) a useful service with the added benefit of being able to run it yourself. That's a better way for me to interpret it actually. I latched on to the "open source" aspect as being of utmost significance, but really it seems you are taking the well trod route of getting funding for your product - much like anyone who applies to YC or seeks investors - and the open source part is a nice big cherry on the top when you're done. Given that, your approach makes a lot more sense vs my initial "we wanna do an open source project, give us $ to start!" interpretation ;-) Well, good luck! You have certainly picked an area of software that is crying out for better solutions.