Re: Bountysource campaign for gcc-vax

[maya%NetBSD.org@localhost]

On Thu, May 28, 2020 at 07:57:51AM -0400, Mouse wrote:
> > I don't understand why so many is so dismissive here.  All I wanted
> > to do is help you with GCC for VAX and I'm getting back a lot of
> > criticism because of something that could be avoided by just using
> > Github or Google for authentication.
> 
> (1) I haven't seen nearly as much criticism directed at you as I have
> at bountysource.  Maybe I've been missing part of the thread.
> 
> (2) Not everyone _can_ "just [use] Github or Google" for
> authentication; not everyone who can is willing to risk it to something
> that sets off their "scam!" flags.  And that's even assuming that doing
> so would work as well for them as it (apparently) does for you.
> 
> Even if it's _not_ an outright scam (one non-scam campaign does not a
> trustworthy organization make), it sounds as though it's badly run,
> badly enough that the risk that its authentication and authorization
> database has been, or will be, compromised is even higher than it is
> for most organizations (and that latter is already uncomfortably high
> to some, such as me).
> 
> > I fully agree that the performance of the Bountysource website sucks.
> > But it's currently the only crowd-funding website that's known to
> > work well and trustable.
> 
> Based on what I've seen here, it _doesn't_ work very well for some
> people.  But then, it _is_ another instance of the "the Web is a
> suitable interface for anyone to anything" disease....

If this is a serious issue and you'd willing to offer a bounty but not
through bountysource then we can ask TNF to act as a middle-man.
Presumably it is trusted enough that bounties offered by it are taken
seriously.