Continuing the discussion from Github on oss sustainability:
I’ve noticed that FLOSS funding has been something of a hot topic on Hacker News recently. Articles about it regularly make the front page… and usually have the same misguided discussion in the comments. I often feel like I’d like to chime in and mention Snowdrift.coop, but usually don’t, for two reasons:
- We haven’t been ready for visibility yet — no longer applicable!
- I’m often not prepared to spend the time and effort to write a comment and follow up with replies (which I’d feel obligated to do, since I’d be representing Snowdrift.coop).
- It’s also extra work to follow up on HN, since there’s limited quoting/formatting options and no reply notifications.
I feel like this is a significant missed opportunity to raise awareness about Snowdrift.coop and I’d like to figure out a way to make it less work for me to engage.
Right now, I’m thinking of just writing a template. Obviously each comment should be an actual reply, not just a generic copy-paste, but there’s a lot that would be the same in any comment I write, especially the first in a given thread:
- Introduce Snowdrift.coop (“nonprofit cooperative for crowdfunding FLO works”)
- Mention our research
- Link to the relevant wiki pages.
- Disclaimer: I’m part of the (fully volunteer) team
- Briefly describe Crowdmatching (1-2 sentences)
- Link to learn more (to crowdmatching page or to info about us?)
- I’ll try to follow up with replies, but sometimes that’s hard on HN
- Link to this forum?
Alternatively, I could make a generic post here (or blog post) that says similar things, and just link it. And/or a maintained post, “Common HN Misconceptions about FLOSS funding” that I could add to, etc. Or just post a link to the HN discussion here so other people can see it and chime in
Open to feedback and ideas!
This isn't a dig against the commenters, just that they're drawing on their thoughts/experiences, without research like ours, so they end up proposing solutions like bounties, that we know don't work. ↩︎