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
It’s very interesting and telling that most of the technology that connects us does not have us as a customer, or a financial beneficiary. One of the key aspects of technofeudalism is the extractive nature of most of our platforms.

>>laurex+G41
Because given the choice it seems many people prefer free with ads to paid?

I'm just thankful that mobile phone networks haven't switched to a "free with ads interspersed into your texts" model yet.

(Of course there are still ads in my texts, but at least those are officially spam rather than network endorsed.)

>>klipt+y51
Actually they tried. WhatsApp fucked them up.

Literally in a span of months SMS usage went the way of the dinosaur.