3 ms·

My instinct is that trying to run multiple Backers at the same time might make it harder for any one of them to succeed, and thus it might make sense to run the

by dalton 13y ago

My instinct is that trying to run multiple Backers at the same time might make it harder for any one of them to succeed, and thus it might make sense to run them serially. We are certainly open to trying things like this out, and sharing the best practices of what works best with the public.

MWil 13y ago
I'd like to see it attempted (or am interested in being the guinea pig if need be) of building almost an entire service the way I described. It works for the project I'm thinking of because I work with the law and it's jurisdictional and categorical. To devote finite resources to a different area of the law or different jurisdiction might not be worth it if there is such demonstrable demand to expand features within an area/jx already present. For example, I could build a product for attorneys and law students in my home state that focuses on a small area of law and never expand outside of that area/jx - if those customers/clients are gracious enough that they can effectively block any attempt to expand elsewhere, why wouldn't I reward them? Conversely, if another area or jx can steal my attention with their efforts... Sure, you could use surveys and contact forms but even if the amount you're raising is not correlated to the development cost, you're awarding your most valuable customers first - those that are willing to put their money where their mouth is. For example, if every major feature, regardless of actual or estimated cost, had a $2000 Backer page - the order in which the Backer succeeds would determine priorities. Obviously, I'm just spit-balling b/c I just saw this but it's got me thinking. I wouldn't want it to look like a nickel-and-dime operation but one where it actually makes sense to use this method. I think the law lends itself well in that situation.
- ericecook 13y ago
  I'm not sure if this is quite what you're looking for, but I've been working on developing a service that tries to solve this kind of problem. It's project centric with crowdfunding for different "problems" on the project. We've got a coming soon page up now if you'd be interested in taking a look at it, feedback is always welcomed. We should be posting to HackerNews officially in a few days. http://crowdlink.io/ http://crowdlink.io/
  - MWil 13y ago
    how can you cost effectively allow penny donations? Isn't the cost of running the campaign and the cost of accepting credit cards something like $.35/transaction?
    - ericecook 13y ago
      We actually have an account system for users that maintains a balance. So the $0.30/transaction is charged on funds entering the network, but once funds are in the network all transfers between accounts are charged a percentage fee regardless of amount. More info on how our fees will be assessed is available from the help link at the bottom of the page.

by dalton 13y ago

MWil 13y ago

I'd like to see it attempted (or am interested in being the guinea pig if need be) of building almost an entire service the way I described. It works for the project I'm thinking of because I work with the law and it's jurisdictional and categorical. To devote finite resources to a different area of the law or different jurisdiction might not be worth it if there is such demonstrable demand to expand features within an area/jx already present. For example, I could build a product for attorneys and law students in my home state that focuses on a small area of law and never expand outside of that area/jx - if those customers/clients are gracious enough that they can effectively block any attempt to expand elsewhere, why wouldn't I reward them? Conversely, if another area or jx can steal my attention with their efforts... Sure, you could use surveys and contact forms but even if the amount you're raising is not correlated to the development cost, you're awarding your most valuable customers first - those that are willing to put their money where their mouth is. For example, if every major feature, regardless of actual or estimated cost, had a $2000 Backer page - the order in which the Backer succeeds would determine priorities. Obviously, I'm just spit-balling b/c I just saw this but it's got me thinking. I wouldn't want it to look like a nickel-and-dime operation but one where it actually makes sense to use this method. I think the law lends itself well in that situation.

ericecook 13y ago
I'm not sure if this is quite what you're looking for, but I've been working on developing a service that tries to solve this kind of problem. It's project centric with crowdfunding for different "problems" on the project. We've got a coming soon page up now if you'd be interested in taking a look at it, feedback is always welcomed. We should be posting to HackerNews officially in a few days. http://crowdlink.io/ http://crowdlink.io/
- MWil 13y ago
  how can you cost effectively allow penny donations? Isn't the cost of running the campaign and the cost of accepting credit cards something like $.35/transaction?
  - ericecook 13y ago
    We actually have an account system for users that maintains a balance. So the $0.30/transaction is charged on funds entering the network, but once funds are in the network all transfers between accounts are charged a percentage fee regardless of amount. More info on how our fees will be assessed is available from the help link at the bottom of the page.