This is the direction I thought now-defunct Contenture should have taken. Previous discussion links: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1117012
(1) You and your circle can't get more out than you pay in, or convince other people to give you freely
(2) Who cares about those who would go through so much trouble to save a few bucks? The point is to make it easy for those who want to pay, with subtle encouragements to pay. If the easiest thing is paying, enough people will -- and your network of strawman sites is a fringe rounding error.
And it should be pointed out that while there's a 2-euro/month minimum out-going payments, that money can come from people sending you money. If they get critical mass, that shouldn't be hard to achieve.
Personally, I want more precise controls over who gets what proportion of my money. Or multi-flattring, or something. Not all flattrable-content is of equal quality.
Interesting. I was about to find a quote to prove you wrong, but you're right! You can only Flattr a thing once per month (http://flattr.com/support/faq, the "Why can I click the same flattr button again all of a sudden?" question)! That seems like a needless restriction. Allowing you to multi-Flattr a site would make a ton of sense.
I'm of a mixed mind on if I truly want them to change, or if it's something I accept as a positive aspect of the system. As a geek, I deeply desire control over what my money does. As a human-studier, I recognize at least some of the benefits of not having that control (enforced simplicity being a big one, as this must reach critical mass to succeed where quite a few have failed).
edit: oh, and a correction to my other post: it does not in fact cost them for you to withdraw money. It's still a useful thing for bringing more people into the mix, and this kind of system only exists if it exceeds critical mass.
While the future of flattr is still TDB - I wonder what the problem with tipjoy was that they didn't have similar spikes - not enough emphasis on traction/getting the idea out or not enough iteration on the idea when they didn't have traction?
Just goes to show, you need to know who your customers are and how to reach them effectively and efficiently - and in the end that's the harder thing compared to building a great service.
FTA: In fact it’s the brainchild of a group of people formerly associated with The [infamous] Pirate Bay, including Peter Sunde Kolmisoppi.
I think this concept is interesting but I don't think it's going to work (for them) - if you put $5 in your account and at the end of the month it's split between a couple dozen sites then each is getting pennies for sending their audiences off to give Tippr whole dollars.
If anyone can make this work it'll be Facebook with their credits system I think.
Of course no-one outside the pyramid will pay (we've proved paywalls always fail and donate buttons won't pay for their pixels), and the lot will collapse when the marks realise they've lost their audience for a few cents.
Not as evil as those "pay to bid" auction scams, but it has promise.
this may be the solution. I'm definitely interested.
"By using this Service you agree not to:
11) to create or modify a competitor product or service;"
That's a pretty sweeping noncompete...
I mean, did they ever have PayPal account and not being influenced by it? (I don't know how similar the actual working, didn't register yet)
Also agree not: "to advertise to, or solicit, any user to buy or sell any products or services."
They say it is for example bloggers. So if I review my new smartphone and tell the world it is the best thing since sliced bread and everyone should have one - is it a ToS violation?
I'm conflicted. Like the idea a lot, but don't like the ToS much... :/
Nearly all German blogs I’m reading now have a flattr button (and nearly everything that can be flattred is in German which could be a problem for international adaption. Or not.)
The logo is a bit confusing to me, though. When I first saw the button on a blog I thought I could downvote posts, which would be absurd(if it means i post a negative amount of money)