Re: [tlug] kickstarter for open source...

[Ulrike Schmidt <ulrike@example.com>]

Am 13.06.13 10:19, schrieb Stephen J. Turnbull:
> Ulrike Schmidt writes:
>
>   >  I would find arguments more convincing,
>
> No, you wouldn't.  I've presented arguments, but you've chosen to
> ignore them.
Not delibaretely, as long as I could detect it being an argument. I 
claim that you did not reply to mine and critisized my choice of words 
instead of understanding the idea I wanted to transport by using them.

But while I think the source of our miscommunication is an interesting 
topic in itself it is probably off-topic regarding this list.

> Here, have a few more:
I like these, were are getting somewhere :-)
>   >  Why are proprietary games and graphic novels economically more
>   >  attractive for crowdfunders than FLOSS projects?
>
> Because the crowdfunders can get the FLOSS for free if they wait a
> bit, rather than pay now.
Not neccessarily. Maybe noone ever does what they want, or they don't do 
it when they want it.

> They can't get the proprietary stuff at all
> unless they pay, now or later.  These factors will only increase in
> importance as the number of projects of both types increase.
Being open source will probably be an advantage in the eyes of the 
crowdfunders. If the projects cover the same topics, that is.
>   >  Are these really the same markets?
>
> As usual in social science analysis, the answer is yes and no.  Yes,
> in the sense that they are competing for some of the same
> contributions.  No, in the sense that some of the contributions that
> will go to games would never go to FLOSS and vice versa.
Games and graphic novels need not neccessarily be proprietary. There are 
two questions: what types of projects are people interested in? Is a 
project open source or not?

Kids might spend more of their pocket money on games, companies more on 
spam filters. All things being equal I think an open source project has 
good chances to win.

Crowd funding or some other permanent feedback on how you can influence 
a project by giving money that is not too complicated for average human 
information processing might help all these projects.

Visibility is of course a problem. But that is not limited to 
crowdfunding. If you are now looking for software to get your job done 
you have a lot possibilities to check, and they are getting more every 
day. I admit there might be even more projects if crowdfunding becomes 
more popular.

In the end it will be more a question of a good search 
enginge/directory/project feature comparison that caters to the 
information processing and decision making preferences of a human brain.

Maybe the combination of artists, games, serious software and FLOSS 
would be most appealing to the grey matter, and possibly financable with 
crowd fundig.