Ecency and PeakD make sense as they are open source projects but in a way they should start to be developing revenue themselves now instead of constantly feeding off of the DHF.
We are moving to web3, if we force web2's funding models onto it how will it differ from it?
IF we persist with crapitalism's methods, can we expect to move on to something that sacrifices fewer babies on the profit alter?
The people using these apps should be paying the freight to keep them running.
In a free world that means donations.
How many people are paying the devs for the use of hivetasks, or hive.vote?
Not even a nickel?
Shame, I say.
Paying for these projects out of the inflation equalizes the tax across the platform.
Clearly the authors are not gonna set beneficiaries to pay their own freight, absent a push to shame them for their leaching.
In return for funding from the dhf, we can demand that the projects care about rewards pool abuse.
Some of the projects mentioned above don't give a damn.
They sell votes by proxies and hide that fact behind rhetoric about it not being a direct exchange.
We forked to escape the leaching that is vote selling, then we turned a blind eye to variations on the theme.
Smdh.
IF users want any of those platforms to persist, they need to finance them either directly from their posts, votes, and/or (heaven forbid!) gifts, or indirectly through the dhf.
Until the playing field levels out some more, funding through the dhf is involuntary taxation for some percentage of the users.
The people using those apps need to step up into their adulting roles and stop leaching off the rest of us, at some point, imo.