On Saturday, 24 June 2017 at 12:11:29 UTC, Wulfklaue wrote:
I never considered that D has a bountysource account. Its way, waaaay at the bottom of the monthly listing page. It did not even show up until 3 days ago.

It was somewhat active for a while a couple years ago, but I found it to be simply offensive and a demotivator. They (including a large corporation that you've heard of having gigabucks) attached $50 bounties to bugs that would take several days of work to fix... then, of course, you have to go though the review process which has an indeterminate wait and frequently shifts goalposts.

If any other client treated me like that, I'd walk away and never look back. (Heck, if any other client offered me what amounted to maybe $5 / hour, I'm not even sure that I'd waste my time actually telling them no - I might just ignore their emails as being a bad joke.)


Bountysource has changed since then, and now has the salt program, but I think I'm not the only one who found it counterproductive in its early iteration and finds the brand damaged. If we wanted to revive it, it'd have to be clearly done differently than it was before.



Electronic wire transfer or bank check *bwahaaha*. What are we: 1980?

That's the way big donors actually prefer do business. Avoids having x% of their donation go to some for-profit middleman, and is easier accounting with the IRS. (D, being a legally incorporated not-for-profit organization, is required by US law to keep track of its financial information and publish an open report each year. Also, individuals and businesses donating to it can list that as a tax-deductible expense on their own annual returns - provided they have the necessary documentation.)


There is no focus on raising funds. I talked about D Foundation being obscure but this blow my mind.

Perhaps we need a new director of development!

Reply via email to