RW for All or none?


#41

If I have understood correctly this post is about how can we ensure that developers and people who are able to help get recognition/value/monetary value. A sentiment that I would completely agree with and support.

BUT…
Paul:
a) I was one of the people who asked for the Apple mini site document and
b) I cant abide discrimination in any form.

You say there are two types of people on this forum - givers or takers. This implies givers - good, takers - bad.

How do you know which category a person falls into? How have you the right to judge which of these arbitrary categories a person falls into? Do you know any one of our personal circumstances or who we are away from a keyboard?

IMHO: When we divide people up into good and bad (givers and takers or indeed as the UK government has done for several years now - scroungers and strivers) we immediately demonise one side or group as “bad”

So for instance: A person has used RW for several years but is really interested in developing their skills/buying the most useful stacks, but this person is living on a meagre income. This person also would like to help with answers on the forum but does not have the knowledge (yet)… Which of your categories do you think they would assume they fell into? And if you were this person would you feel included and valued if they read your post? Would you feel safe to post?

IMO There are no such categories. We are just people who are doing the best we can. But when someone is labeled as you have done (directly or indirectly) then we start to discriminate and have to justify that we are not “bad”/a taker!

So to put your question back to you - is this forum RW for all or just RW for the (perceived) givers?

And for me the labelling of good/bad takes away from the actual quality discussion which is:- how can we ensure that developers get quality recompense?


#42

@alixnotes - Alix - if you actually read the first part of my post I state “So here are my views for what they are worth: There are categories of RW “users” and they fall into categories (not inclusive) e.g. developers, designers, pro users down to newbies.” I never said anything about good or bad - thats your interpretation! What I meant by givers and takers in context is the givers are the ones that develop and the takers are the ones that can not - LIKE ME!
My post is exactly as you state in your first lines “If I have understood correctly this post is about how can we ensure that developers and people who are able to help get recognition/value/monetary value. A sentiment that I would completely agree with and support.” thats all!
Apple Mini site - I think this is brilliant - I downloaded it - however my feelings as stated above is I would have happily paid something towards it.
My intentions are the same now as before reading your post - you are entitled to your opinion but I never said anyone was good or bad - you did that!


#43

@steveb Good day awesome! Its the old man here - not only are you giving 20% VAT you are also giving 5% fees and 5% profit too! so you pay £12 and the patron gets £9. Thats why my suggestion give 100% to developer.

From Patreon website:

Low, transparent fees -You keep 90%We keep 5% -Transaction fees average 5%


#44

I haven’t read everyones post here so sorry if I repeat - but I have never understood how creating stacks can exist as a viable business without a subscription. Buy a stack for 5 bucks and expect life time support? really? I’m def right behind the subscription model. Buy once with a year of support, after that, stacks still work but no updating or support… unless you subscribe for another year. I used to buy every stack that was released but in reality I never used them - I have a set of core stacks that I always use - these I would happily subscribe too… It’s still a mega, MEGA cheap way of getting your dev issues fixed. To put it into a bit of context - my developer charges $800 a day…


#45

@alixnotes I also responded to the OP’s post and also used the words ‘Givers’ and ‘Takers’.
I don’t think that Paul was actually suggesting ‘Good’ or ‘Bad’ and I certainly wasn’t either.
Was I expressing disappointment in the human race as a whole? Yes.
Homo sapiens is a hunter and gatherer. He takes what he can (whether needed or not) and does so because he can.
Is human nature ‘bad’?
That’s a whole philosophy for a discussion of its own…


#46

@rob - correct I didn’t mean it as good or bad - but had no reposes from @alixnotes on my response o him.

You do a great job and you are entitled to your opinion - it’s good to have one - sometimes not everyone agrees with it! :-) The world would be bland with opinions - just off clubbing - see what i can get to eat! :-)

I hope my response to you about charities was a help?


#47

I didn’t feel a response was necessary Paul. I made my point, you made yours.


#48

@alixnotes - THANKS but I can assure you I was NOT discriminatory!