zlacker

>>waxpan+(OP)
I'm a participant in a community that explicitly refuses money from outside its membership. If that means we can't grow fast, or have fancy digs, so be it.

The reason for that, is to avoid having influence from outside. Even "angel" investment can be problematic, as the "angel" has the ear of the leadership.

I have found that even well-meaning outsiders can have highly destructive influence, because they don't understand the culture and they aren't the ones on the hook, if things go pear-shaped, as opposed to the ones that have a real, personal, stake (like all those Ello users, who lost so much).

>>ChrisM+t21
The issue is that without funding a projects velocity is low and that can frustrate the community.

Everyone says they are on board with supporting the little guys, until they hit bugs and start complaining.

>>darcys+481
Sometimes -- those times when you're breaking entirely new ground with a thing, when you're starting with just a vague vision of where the thing might go -- slow is better. Slow gives you time to understand the effects of what you've already done and the possibilities that affords.

I guess it depends on whether you're looking to achieve something unique and truly new, or just "get rich fast".