User talk:Tepples/Bribe me

From Pin Eight
< User talk:Tepples
Revision as of 12:28, 20 April 2019 by Tepples (talk | contribs) (Patreon: I made no plans to lock down editing privileges.)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to: navigation, search

Donation page redux[edit]

This page appears to be something we could link to in the wiki's navigation bar with the text "Donate." Does this sound about right? (Compare previous discussion.)

OT: Is ZapPing a new name for the Zap Ruder project or something else? Eighty5cacao 14:26, 3 October 2011 (MST)

ZapPing is part of Zap Ruder 0.02. Yes, this is the new donation page, and after I get it fixed up, I plan to have pineight.com/donate redirect here. --Tepples 16:46, 3 October 2011 (MST)

Note to self[edit]

Consider mediawikiwiki:extension:SidebarDonateBox --Tepples 20:15, 4 October 2011 (MST)

Patents as of 2011[edit]

Should the "as of" in the "Speech compression demo" section be updated? I have some doubts about this one, though admittedly I'm too lazy to go through every patent and rigorously calculate the expirations. Eighty5cacao 19:39, 18 May 2012 (MST)

The applicable patents appear to be from the 1970s and early 1980s at the latest. In any case, a statement that an exclusive right granted "for limited times" has expired is the inverse of a typical Wikipedia "as of" statement intended to reflect recent developments, which becomes dated after a while. Saying a patent had expired by 2011 is stronger than saying it had expired by 2012. Unlike with the EU Copyright Duration Directive of the 1990s, I haven't seen a patent term extension restore a large class of expired patents. So I'd leave it until I can dig up more of Mozer's patents and come up with a more precise max(file+20, grant+17) date. --Tepples 04:17, 19 May 2012 (MST)
"Saying a patent had expired by 2011 is stronger than saying it had expired by 2012," which was exactly why I posted here rather than BOLDly editing — sorry for not making my understanding clear in the first place. I do agree that by that logic, we should make a note on our task lists to calculate the actual expiries. Eighty5cacao 10:31, 19 May 2012 (MST)

mcvans link needs fixing[edit]

Status of FK Convey[edit]

It looks like FK Convey is one of the puzzle games you discontinued, given that it doesn't seem to be listed on this website outside the wiki. What would happen if someone tried to donate toward that bribe? --Eighty5cacao (talk) 18:48, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

The original announcement of FK Convey was on tetrisconcept just before TC.com broke up. Google klax clone brings up the TC.net thread on the first page. It hasn't been pulled; I just never made a page for it here because of all the commotion. Or has Tengen's parent WB raised a stink about Klax clones? --Tepples (talk) 19:05, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

Bribe.io[edit]

Note to self: Look harder at bribe.io. --Tepples (talk) 14:17, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

Fixed syntax; no comment --Eighty5cacao (talk) 17:20, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

Consider IssueHunt or Bountysource[edit]

A comment by stoborrobots on Slashdot suggests IssueHunt or Bountysource to place a bounty on a GitHub issue. Both charge a 10% fee. --Tepples (talk) 16:07, 18 February 2019 (UTC)

Patreon[edit]

I apologize in advance that I have no real budget for donations nor any good criteria for picking a favorite content creator. I also feel that the premise behind extant methods for recurring crowdfunding (i.e., Patreon as opposed to Kickstarter) is fundamentally broken, as they implicitly assume the creator either has no day job or a flex job at which (s)he is free to work fewer hours or otherwise put in less effort in proportion to the donations received. However, that's a topic for one of these future essays.

This is not about that. I have three simple questions:

  1. Do any of the bribes formerly listed here remain at all valid? If you don't want to say too much, a simple yes or no will suffice. I admittedly haven't bothered to look at your Patreon page.
  2. What do you consider appropriate and inappropriate uses of patron-exclusive content? What do you consider an appropriate duration for a blog post or other textual content to remain patron-exclusive? (You previously referred to the concept of a protected Twitter account as being no more desirable than a news site that requires free registration, but this has the difference of not being gratis.)
  3. Will my privileges on this wiki be restricted in any way if I do not become a patron within a certain time? You may assume I do not substantially increase nor decrease my editing activity from present levels; this also means I promise not to conduct any more breaching experiments on project scope on the scale of "HTTPS Everywhere/rulewip."

--Eighty5cacao (talk) 05:11, 19 April 2019 (UTC)

0. I currently consider myself underemployed. 1. If someone wants to PayPal me money and earmark it for a particular project that I've mentioned, that's still valid. 2. Being this new to the platform, I haven't yet figured out what I'll make for patrons only. The only perk I've put into place as of yet is current patrons' names in the credits of projects where it applies. Nothing else changes yet. 3. I made no plans to lock down editing privileges. --Tepples (talk) 12:28, 20 April 2019 (UTC)