3 ms·

Given the whole concept of Kickstarter is letting the crowd decide if a project is worth funding, it seems to me that in keeping with this mantra, they would be

Given the whole concept of Kickstarter is letting the crowd decide if a project is worth funding, it seems to me that in keeping with this mantra, they would be open to allowing any idea be opened up for funding. Not allowing GMOs as 'rewards' seems like a silly cop-out. Giving in to complaints such as this by the community sounds good in the short-term, but will be very bad in the long-term. It is basically saying, if you don't agree with our morals, you're not welcome on Kickstarter. This will open up the door for many other niche crowdfunding sites to support projects that Kickstarter doesn't allow, and will ultimately bring them more competition.

dnautics 13y ago
It's worthwhile thinking that maybe kickstarter is just CYA (CIA?). Imagine this scenario: a GMO project is backed by kickstarter. Someone takes the seeds to somewhere in a foreign country that kickstarter operates in where GMO is banned. A fuss is raised, lawsuits, kickstarter is fined big time by this operating country (or is forced to close shop).
- bsbechtel 13y ago
  That's a good point. While the analogy isn't 100% correct, this seems similar to giving DMCA immunity to file sharing sites. They are just the enablers or pass-through agents, not the ones who commit the crimes. I'd be curious to know what laws actually could apply to this situation. Regardless, you can't innovate by not taking risks and having a cover your a attitude. If you don't take the risks, your competitor will, and if those risks pan out for your competitor, you'll go out of business anyway.