People like this ruin crowdfunding for everyone else, they played on emotions to raise a significant amount of money (whether or not that amount was enough to complete the project at hand does not matter) and have nothing to show for it. Sure "We have apps but they are bad so we don't want to release them" is "something" but by not OS'ing them or releasing them as-is they have effectively nothing that they delivered on.
If they realised they were in over their head at the start then they should have sat down and planned it out instead of throwing money at the problem till it is all gone. They should have turned around and refunded at least a partial amount of each pledge (sans fees/processing) once they realized this was beyond what they could do.
This "Give me money" and then "Yeah... about that money, it's all gone..." is akin to theft in my mind. If I pay into a crowdfunding campaign I am buying into the idea you sold me. If you didn't think through your idea all the way then that's your fault. It's little better than ponzi scheme with the difference being intent to defraud customers in my opinion...
Lastly I've seen some comments about how crowdfunding is not a certain thing and some things fail. I don't disagree but if a project goes silent then that's theft in my eyes, not just failing. If a refund is not possible then at a very least donate what is left to the EFF (publically) or similar because to keep that money is just dead wrong in my book.
People like this ruin crowdfunding for everyone else [..]
People like this will cause crowdfunding to mature. It would be good if we got to the point where you will only get funded if you first demonstrate you have a reasonable chance of succeeding. There's currently a lot of money going to doomed projects, initiated by people with only an idea. That money would be better spent on similar projects by people with a concrete plan and relevant skills and experience in addition to ideas.It's not that people are malicious: they are just unprepared. Which is why many startups fail: people have no idea what they are getting themselves into. At least burning through your own money teaches a harsh lesson. Burning through free money hurts a lot less.
The goals are simply too pie-in-the-sky. Set some very simple goal like getting an app with xmpp working first. Then do another campaign to add some security features. And so on.
Even better was if you had a startup mentor that approved expenses.
Couldn't agree more. I agree crowdfunding should require a little more upfront from the project managers (or rather we as a community should refuse to fund projects that don't) which will no doubt turn some people away from seeking crowdfunded money but that's probably for the best.
scrolls to the bottom
Yeah, thought so. It's amazing how you can raise more than $100k with this bullshit without having even basic qualifications to accomplish your plans. It's amazing how people fall for this kind of crap again and again. See also: Ritot watch, Arist coffeemaker and so on.
[1] http://blog.brokep.com/2015/04/22/update-on-heml-is/#comment...
Pretty disappointing, but it sounds like a totally reasonable series of events so I don't have hard feelings.
Signal / Textsecure are great apps, so I'd look to that if you're looking for security.
What? They received $147,210 from 10074 backers, even if every SMS sent costs you $0.04 (pricing from twilio for my country) you can send 50 millon before it's costing you "millions of dollars".
Do you really think that 10k backers is going to translate into whatsapp-scale from launch?
Maybe try blaming it on server prices next, because the thousands of servers you will surely need are going to cost you millions too.
Ouch... sincere condolences.
P.S.: I contributed and i understand your reasons to let it go. Fine with me. At least you tried, which is someting most of "us" don't even do.
There are other ways to do lock-in besides closed-source clients. If it has "private" or "crypto" anywhere in the title, it needs to be open source.
"We’ll release the usable parts of the code as free software with the most free license we can. It belongs to the community (and the community paid for it)."
[1] http://blog.brokep.com/2015/04/22/update-on-heml-is/#comment...
[Sorry for the multiple comment replies, I realized a top-comment might be better]
"We’ll release the usable parts of the code as free software with the most free license we can. It belongs to the community (and the community paid for it)."
[1] http://blog.brokep.com/2015/04/22/update-on-heml-is/#comment...
This is what people did before crowdfunding. Maybe we all don't need $100K just to start and publish something useful.
That's called "being arrested for breaking the law."
So if you have 8 milestones you get 1/8 of the money up-front and then each time you achieve a milestone. If you take twice as long to achieve that first milestone and run out of your initial payment.... welp then you have to go back to the community and ask to renegotiate the arrangement.