That’s the beauty of have a multitude of different apps. You choose the one that feels right for you. Much like how you can choose another Lemmy instance.
Yes, sure, you can choose whatever you want. It doesn’t make my opinion wrong. It’s not in the philosophy of the fediverse. People can use it with an ads tracked app of they want. I respect it.
It’s a hard no for me and I will express it. It could be a hard yes if they will be a one time payment version without free ads base one.
The dev said there already will be. I hope you’ll support a hard working, singular dev who puts a lot of work into an app and engages with its users like LJD.
I don’t think your opinion is wrong. It’s an opinion, and that’s fine.
As a developer myself, I do understand that the dev wants to be compensated for all the hours he puts in, but I am also aware that we’re all using software everyday in many different ways that are made in the free time of many people, without any compensation. Both are valid.
an opinion cannot be wrong. but it also cannot be right. you make a fair point with what you’re saying. the dev is already planning on a single time purchase, but a sub option is definitely not “morally wrong.”
It can be morally wrong depending on the person’s visions. It’s not that this vision is wrong or right. It’s a personal one. Nobody did this vision mandatory.
That’s the beauty of have a multitude of different apps. You choose the one that feels right for you. Much like how you can choose another Lemmy instance.
Yes, sure, you can choose whatever you want. It doesn’t make my opinion wrong. It’s not in the philosophy of the fediverse. People can use it with an ads tracked app of they want. I respect it.
It’s a hard no for me and I will express it. It could be a hard yes if they will be a one time payment version without free ads base one.
The dev said there already will be. I hope you’ll support a hard working, singular dev who puts a lot of work into an app and engages with its users like LJD.
I don’t think your opinion is wrong. It’s an opinion, and that’s fine.
As a developer myself, I do understand that the dev wants to be compensated for all the hours he puts in, but I am also aware that we’re all using software everyday in many different ways that are made in the free time of many people, without any compensation. Both are valid.
an opinion cannot be wrong. but it also cannot be right. you make a fair point with what you’re saying. the dev is already planning on a single time purchase, but a sub option is definitely not “morally wrong.”
It can be morally wrong depending on the person’s visions. It’s not that this vision is wrong or right. It’s a personal one. Nobody did this vision mandatory.
The Dev has just announced he’s pushed beta version 25 that adds a one time payment option.
One time payment update was just pushed out!