Quote from: rhinomonkey on January 23, 2017, 08:21:49 PM

....while simultaneously allowing patrons to change the direction of development by donating. Huh

Now this is very revealing. Cheesy

I will quote you:

Quote from: rhinomonkey on December 16, 2016, 04:22:37 PM

I still think that Georgem is taking steps in the right direction with his community engagement. I'm not sure if you have seen what he posted in Spreadcointalk but here it is from (http://spreadcointalk.org/index.php?topic=762.msg4101#msg4101):

Quote from: georgem

So, I wanted to say something about the "patronage" funding I brought up earlier.
It should be the best way to incentivize a regular steady financial support for the developers of spreadcoin (currently only me), without the need to do the scammy things many other devs/communities have been doing in the altcoin sphere. (ICO, instamine, taxing miners, and other crap etc...)

here is an idea how "patronage" could look like:

...

BTW, what I describe here is for the spreadwallet only.
As the other project (the spreadminer) progresses I will start a similar separate "patronage" scheme for it too. (More about it later this month)

This way people will be able to donate towards whatever project they find more "important" / "pressing" at the moment.

What do you say, guys?

If you ever wanted to create the wallet you always dreamed about.... here's the opportunity to do so!

I have highlighted in bold what I think can be a framework for the community to have more of a voice. I was discussing the issue of communication and transparency a few posts back - maybe you saw. Essentially, I think the Patreon can be used by the community to negotiate with Georgem over communication. You are right that he might not 'naturally' be inclined to post about more 'feelings' issues. But if the community finds a problem with some aspect of development (whether that be communication, transparency, or that Georgem doesn't post enough photos of hamsters) to be important enough, then they can donate under the condition that the issue will be addressed. I think it could work.

I didn't yet have an opportunity to give you proper feedback on this weird interpretation you did here back then.

So what you highlighted here as "a framework for the community to have more of a voice" you now use to claim the opposite that "this will allow patrons to change the direction of development"?

That's insane, make up your mind, you can't have it both ways.

First, let me explain what I meant in that old post when I talked about ...

Quote

This way people will be able to donate towards whatever project they find more "important" / "pressing" at the moment.

I always assumed that you understand english? So read the actual words as they are written here.

I merely meant that patrons will have the ability to decide whether they would rather want to spend their money on...

spreadwallet,
spreadminer

or

servicenode development.

We have miners that give a fuck about the wallet or servicenodes, and I have seen people who don't care at all about servicenodes but are very interested to see the spreadwallet succeed.

I want to give them an opportunity to decide where they want to invest their money.

Do you get it now? How could you misread this?

That's literally the only thing that this meant.

Also, I am always open for good ideas.
Why would good ideas require that someone first pay me money before I accept them?
LMAO.

BUT, if I got a penny for every bad idea I heard in this thread I would be rich by now.

Seriously, I heard you argue the case AGAINST decentralization more than once in the past few months,
and you seriously think that I would allow you to change the direction of development with such fatal ideas?

No, ofcourse not, if your idea is bullshit and goes against the principles of decentralization then I will just LAUGH AT YOU.

Holy fuck, some people are dense.