3 ms·
I'd pay for it, but only if they implemented the changes the community of users have been requesting for years.
by msephton 18d ago
I'd pay for it, but only if they implemented the changes the community of users have been requesting for years.
- carlosjobim 18d agoNo matter what they did, you'd have a new excuse for why you won't pay.
- msephton 18d agoAh, the old ad hominem attack. How refreshing. But anyway, no, I wouldn't keep finding reasons. I donate to them every year already. Somebody asked if I would be willing to pay and my answer was "yes, but". It would need to be improved because certain aspects of it suck right now, not only the error this post is about. They only need go as far as their forums and github repos to see the community feedback.
- jakderrida 18d agoIs it really an ad hom if he doesn't know the hom? Their reply is 100% based on the content of your post.
- Dylan16807 18d agoIf you make up a person to insult then yeah it's still ad hominem.
- carlosjobim 17d agoIf you're donating, then you are evidently willing to pay without any "buts". So aren't you arguing against your own actions?
- msephton 17d agoNot at all. I donate to Internet Archive, but we're talking here about paying for unobstructed access to but one part of their service: Wayback Machine. Two different things.
- carlosjobim 17d ago100% of the people who write "I would pay, if..." or "I would pay, but..." are people who are never going to pay even a dime. You might be the exception, and sorry for bunching you up with them. You have paid already by donation. I think that we should all pay when asked for things which we find useful, even if they aren't perfect. If nobody else is offering anything, then we have to take what's being offered. When there's a market, more providers will begin offering their versions.