Bootstrapping 10er, a Patreon-similar service for Danish creators(failory.com)
failory.com
Bootstrapping 10er, a Patreon-similar service for Danish creators
https://www.failory.com/mistakes/10er
50 comments
wtf, 100% cpu scrolling at 1fps, no thanks.
What are you browsing with? I had perfectly smooth scrolling on MacOS + Safari.
I'm on iOS/Safari. I only get a black page with no content. Clicking reader mode shows text intermingled with ad text, I assume.
I gave up
I gave up
Strange. iOS on an iPhone 6 here with no problems. It’s a perfectly normal looking blog page.
Works great with javascript turned off -- 12kb, finished in under a second.
Inspecting the HTML, the rendering seems to be blocked by a script loading the google fonts.
Huh. Wonder what this is doing here. Probably hiding the whole website while googlefonts finishes loading.
Inspecting the HTML, the rendering seems to be blocked by a script loading the google fonts.
Huh. Wonder what this is doing here. Probably hiding the whole website while googlefonts finishes loading.
<style>.async-hide { opacity: 0 !important} </style>Hide the page until script loads or 4 seconds pass, some optimization that is!
I like that they are open about their expenses[0]. That's unusual.
I wish they would be able to accept payments w/o requiring users to run non-free JS.
[0]: https://10er.co/open
I wish they would be able to accept payments w/o requiring users to run non-free JS.
[0]: https://10er.co/open
If I wanted to accepted payments with open source JS / no JS, are there libraries that make that easy?
The benefit of using the drop-in iframes / client side AJAX is that I get to take money without worrying about PCI compliance -- whereas if I hit some API serverside I'm handling people's credit card information myself, no?
Would be curious to know what options are out there.
The benefit of using the drop-in iframes / client side AJAX is that I get to take money without worrying about PCI compliance -- whereas if I hit some API serverside I'm handling people's credit card information myself, no?
Would be curious to know what options are out there.
I haven't done web payments for quite a while, but the way it was done 12 or so years ago was, that you generated some signed data for inserting into a hidden input inside a <form action=https://payment-processor.com/...>, and put that into a page server side. This would include all the order and merchant info. You'd also add a submit button with a "Pay now" text.
User would then submit the form and that would take him to the payment processor. The rest was payment processor calling some webhooks on your server with payment verification/other status. You wouldn't see/handle any ccard info at all.
No iframe trickery, no javascript necessary at all.
User would then submit the form and that would take him to the payment processor. The rest was payment processor calling some webhooks on your server with payment verification/other status. You wouldn't see/handle any ccard info at all.
No iframe trickery, no javascript necessary at all.
Users dislike that because it bounces them to a different site.
Going to a different site was sold as a benefit (given that the different site is/was the biggest and the most used bank in the country - so this helps with the trust issue).
Also it's strictly superior to iframe hackery anyway. At least you can check that the site is not trying to scam you for your CC info, which you really can't (as a normal user) when the site is using iframes, because you'll not see iframe's URL in the URL bar.
Also it's strictly superior to iframe hackery anyway. At least you can check that the site is not trying to scam you for your CC info, which you really can't (as a normal user) when the site is using iframes, because you'll not see iframe's URL in the URL bar.
I'm sure that's correct, but I doubt most users are that sophisticated.
Speaking of which, how do you know?
Not that many people fall for phishing e-mails, for example. It's somewhere between 10-30% based on email type, if that's anyhting to go by.
I couldn't find any research on purely web based phishing.
Not that many people fall for phishing e-mails, for example. It's somewhere between 10-30% based on email type, if that's anyhting to go by.
I couldn't find any research on purely web based phishing.
I'm not talking about people falling for phishing, I'm talking about legitimate customers getting irritated or suspicious and abandoning the purchase after being bounced to another domain to put in their credit card details.
Our conversion rate got much better when we switched to a single-page purchase flow. My theory is that because "real" sites like Amazon don't force users over to a separate bank page, users have come to expect that experience. Redirecting out to Paypal (or whatever) marks you as a "disreputable" fly-by-night operation in users' minds.
Our conversion rate got much better when we switched to a single-page purchase flow. My theory is that because "real" sites like Amazon don't force users over to a separate bank page, users have come to expect that experience. Redirecting out to Paypal (or whatever) marks you as a "disreputable" fly-by-night operation in users' minds.
I guess it depends on the country. Where I'm from, people were used to push payments (like free wire transfer), or cash on delivery payments, when shopping online. Banks worked hard to change that in the last decade+, so now debit cards are used much more than before. Credit cards are used very little (10% of online purchases).
I only guess that this leads to a feeling where when you give a card info to someone, it's like giving them access to your bank account. But 1 in 2 users can't tell a difference between debit and credit, so who knows.
Users don't like giving card info to companies and almost no companies, including very big online stores, handle card info themselves, or use single-page purchase flow. I rememeber only two local websites that didn't redirect me to some payment gateway in the last 10 years. Amazon is not a thing here at all.
I only guess that this leads to a feeling where when you give a card info to someone, it's like giving them access to your bank account. But 1 in 2 users can't tell a difference between debit and credit, so who knows.
Users don't like giving card info to companies and almost no companies, including very big online stores, handle card info themselves, or use single-page purchase flow. I rememeber only two local websites that didn't redirect me to some payment gateway in the last 10 years. Amazon is not a thing here at all.
Thanks! I like to share.
JS is he way Stripe works and without Stripe there's no 10er. You're the first one to mention this though. So while I agree that it's not without problems, I'm not sure it's holding that many donators back.
JS is he way Stripe works and without Stripe there's no 10er. You're the first one to mention this though. So while I agree that it's not without problems, I'm not sure it's holding that many donators back.
I would be surprised if even 1‰ of the potential donors would care about this aspect. Best of luck with the business!
"I never created a Patreon account for us though. Everytime I began I never finished signing up. The whole thing just seemed like a hassle. Too many input fields and things to consider and graphics to provide. Patreon expects creators to create more content for patrons. We felt we were already giving away lots with our already free content."
I actually really like this philosophy. I run a tiny, niche miniatures wargaming blog, and while I have a Patreon account, I don't feel like I really fit with the Patreon "idea" of heavy engagement with patrons.
I actually really like this philosophy. I run a tiny, niche miniatures wargaming blog, and while I have a Patreon account, I don't feel like I really fit with the Patreon "idea" of heavy engagement with patrons.
Similarly, I find it awkward when creators email me about secret stuff only available to patrons. The magic is that your stuff is free! I don’t want to be incentivising this. The free content led me to donate in the first place.
The only way to achieve this is to donate so little, you don’t get any access to secret material.
Patreon defeats the purpose of Patreon.
The only way to achieve this is to donate so little, you don’t get any access to secret material.
Patreon defeats the purpose of Patreon.
Never thought about it that way but I see your point!
Patreon is a nice service and I use it to give back to several projects. But I don't use any of the things (I suppose) I get in return.
Patreon is a nice service and I use it to give back to several projects. But I don't use any of the things (I suppose) I get in return.
Fair point! As a creator thinking about creating a Patreon presence, I wouldn't have realized this.
How would you feel if the content is still free, but you get a sneak peek at it a bit earlier? I'm currently considering postponing all the schedules I have for seven days, and offering content a week earlier to those who pay. In my mind, that sounds good: the content I create is still free, while there's still an incentive for the consumers to support its creation.
How would you feel if the content is still free, but you get a sneak peek at it a bit earlier? I'm currently considering postponing all the schedules I have for seven days, and offering content a week earlier to those who pay. In my mind, that sounds good: the content I create is still free, while there's still an incentive for the consumers to support its creation.
This is actually how a lot of content creators do it
Completely agree! Patreon misses the point of Patreon.
I guess people are more likely to become patrons if there's some reward, and Patreon wants to encourage growth. But in doing so they are creating an environment where there's an expectation that we, the creators, spend precious time making special, walled-off content when the whole point of my needing Patreon is because my content is free. Besides the irony of the situation, I'm too busy also making content for other social media in order to promote my work. Please make it stop!
I guess people are more likely to become patrons if there's some reward, and Patreon wants to encourage growth. But in doing so they are creating an environment where there's an expectation that we, the creators, spend precious time making special, walled-off content when the whole point of my needing Patreon is because my content is free. Besides the irony of the situation, I'm too busy also making content for other social media in order to promote my work. Please make it stop!
That's an interesting idea. I watch videos, and I don't mind videos that promote their Patreon page and/or other member exclusive benefits. They are free to make videos how ever they like, but I wonder is promoting member exclusive content actually undermines their success.
For example, in this SciShow video => https://youtu.be/fsS6d4byK4A?t=143
- make free content, get free viewers
- promote Patreon to viewers, get patrons
- promote premium content to free viewers, alienate free viewers
- lose free viewers, shrink pool of potential patrons
I guess some pitches are more invasive than others.
For example, in this SciShow video => https://youtu.be/fsS6d4byK4A?t=143
- make free content, get free viewers
- promote Patreon to viewers, get patrons
- promote premium content to free viewers, alienate free viewers
- lose free viewers, shrink pool of potential patrons
I guess some pitches are more invasive than others.
Here's a counter example: https://m.youtube.com/user/Dogen
He does what could be described as stand up comedy around the japanese language.
And his patreon has comprehensive japanese pronunciation and intonation lessons. https://www.patreon.com/dogen
They're different but related things with different but overlapping audience.
He does what could be described as stand up comedy around the japanese language.
And his patreon has comprehensive japanese pronunciation and intonation lessons. https://www.patreon.com/dogen
They're different but related things with different but overlapping audience.
I wonder why it’s Danish only
It actually isn't! I've recently done most of the work of translating it to English. So anywhere Stripe Connect is, I am.
Are you at all worried that stripe might pressure you to remove certain users from your site like patreon is currently doing? Do you have any future plans to use alternative non-US payment providers?
For example Subscribestar can no longer accept paypal payments. [1]
[1] https://www.subscribestar.com/subscribestar
For example Subscribestar can no longer accept paypal payments. [1]
[1] https://www.subscribestar.com/subscribestar
Not really. I have the same policy of not allowing hate speech and the like. I don't see myself as a "Patreon competitor" in that sense. Without getting myself into a debate I've only read a little about, I think good on them for controlling who gets to use their platform. I don't think of that as censorship, really.
I have no plans to add anything but Stripe, no. I realize how vulnerable that makes me and my relationship with them but you have to trust someone. I have used Paypal before and I didn't like it at all.
I have no plans to add anything but Stripe, no. I realize how vulnerable that makes me and my relationship with them but you have to trust someone. I have used Paypal before and I didn't like it at all.
> I have the same policy of not allowing hate speech and the like
For whoever is interested: this is the (Google translated) text in the Terms of 10er:
"The service must not be used for any illegal activity. Nor should the service be used in connection with violent, hateful, racist or similar activities. Brainbow defines in its own right what can be classified as being in one of these categories."
You are indeed not a competitor for Patreon. The biggest problem people seem to have with Patreon is exactly this: every company creating its own definition of hate speech, which could result in their customers (creators) being cut off their income for things they say, even on other platforms. Which effectively creates censorship, and a growing administrative cost for all companies.
For whoever is interested: this is the (Google translated) text in the Terms of 10er:
"The service must not be used for any illegal activity. Nor should the service be used in connection with violent, hateful, racist or similar activities. Brainbow defines in its own right what can be classified as being in one of these categories."
You are indeed not a competitor for Patreon. The biggest problem people seem to have with Patreon is exactly this: every company creating its own definition of hate speech, which could result in their customers (creators) being cut off their income for things they say, even on other platforms. Which effectively creates censorship, and a growing administrative cost for all companies.
I don't understand this.
Why not base it on what is legal by law in your country? Require a court order to have things removed.
Take Paypal and who ever to court in your country if they deny you service because of this and threaten to have their permits to do business in your country removed.
Why not base it on what is legal by law in your country? Require a court order to have things removed.
Take Paypal and who ever to court in your country if they deny you service because of this and threaten to have their permits to do business in your country removed.
Quite a lot of people don't want to facilitate this kind of thing, and certainly don't want to have their name associated with it.
Exactly. I fully support anyone’s right to say what they want. But I’m a business and if your business is racist bullshit (for example) I don’t want to do business with you.
I’m not censoring nor silencing nor putting anyone in prison. But I’m politely refusing to receive your money and work with you.
Money isn’t everything.
I’m not censoring nor silencing nor putting anyone in prison. But I’m politely refusing to receive your money and work with you.
Money isn’t everything.
That's all fine and dandy, but the problem is that in this case there is no alternative, and if they are created, they are shut down, because payment processors like Paypal and Stripe refuse to do business with them.
Payment processors currently have too much power. They should be legally refrained from choosing their customers, just like telecom companies for example. In most free countries telecom companies are not allowed to refuse/block customers based on people's political views. And rightly so.
Payment processors currently have too much power. They should be legally refrained from choosing their customers, just like telecom companies for example. In most free countries telecom companies are not allowed to refuse/block customers based on people's political views. And rightly so.
There is the underlying issue. If you don't fight for those people who you don't agree with or despise although legal you will eventually loose your freedoms too.
If you want free speech you need to protect all of it.
If you want free speech you need to protect all of it.
On the other hand, if I facilitate people arguing for fascism I will also eventually lose freedoms if they win. And in the meantime make a number of other people just that little bit more miserable.
"Fascism" has never won by arguing, though. It isn't even a well-defined ideology! Fascism means using political violence (i.e. beating people up, or worse) to seize power in something very much like a coup d'etat; it really is as simple as that. That's not free speech, and it's not even something that our government protects. Threats are illegal. Purported "speech" that poses a clear and present danger is illegal.
> It isn't even a well-defined ideology! Fascism means using political violence [...] to seize power in something very much like a coup d'etat; it really is as simple as that.
First, though fascism is isn't particularly well-defined, it is definitely better defined than that (since you're describing a tactic rather than an ideology), and that just isn't what fascism means[0], second, even if it was, it would still be possible to advocate for it without crossing that line and leave facilitation to other (usually covert) channels.
Still, although advocacy for fascist views would be legal, I have no particular problem with public platforms restricting speech that promotes those views[1].
The analogy elsewhere in this thread to the phone system is flawed, as that implies regulating private speech.
OTOH, so long as money equals speech, there is an argument for creating payment infra that is more along the lines of a public utility or common-carrier for transactions that may not discriminate, since there are other categories of public speech besides fascism that are often unjustly denied access to payment infra.
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance
First, though fascism is isn't particularly well-defined, it is definitely better defined than that (since you're describing a tactic rather than an ideology), and that just isn't what fascism means[0], second, even if it was, it would still be possible to advocate for it without crossing that line and leave facilitation to other (usually covert) channels.
Still, although advocacy for fascist views would be legal, I have no particular problem with public platforms restricting speech that promotes those views[1].
The analogy elsewhere in this thread to the phone system is flawed, as that implies regulating private speech.
OTOH, so long as money equals speech, there is an argument for creating payment infra that is more along the lines of a public utility or common-carrier for transactions that may not discriminate, since there are other categories of public speech besides fascism that are often unjustly denied access to payment infra.
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance
It may not be defined, but it can certainly be characterised. Umberto Eco has a good list: http://interglacial.com/pub/text/Umberto_Eco_-_Eternal_Fasci...
Missing from that page is the preamble in which he describes growing up under Mussolini.
> Purported "speech" that poses a clear and present danger is illegal.
Speech that leads to or implies violence at slightly greater remove is, however. Circulating pictures of targets with people's faces on; calling for violence or that people should arm themselves against an outgroup; that kind of thing.
Missing from that page is the preamble in which he describes growing up under Mussolini.
> Purported "speech" that poses a clear and present danger is illegal.
Speech that leads to or implies violence at slightly greater remove is, however. Circulating pictures of targets with people's faces on; calling for violence or that people should arm themselves against an outgroup; that kind of thing.
Bold hypothesis: fascism has never won in a free-speech environment. Only in an environment where everybody was a-ok with opposing opinions being suppressed, which allowed fascists to suppress different opinions.
Following this reasoning, GP's stance enables fascism.
Following this reasoning, GP's stance enables fascism.
> Bold hypothesis: fascism has never won in a free-speech environment
Ah, why look at history when we can have hypothesis! I mean, you could have chosen some wrong or out of context examples of fascism to cite, but instead it's much easier to just pretend, right?
Ah, why look at history when we can have hypothesis! I mean, you could have chosen some wrong or out of context examples of fascism to cite, but instead it's much easier to just pretend, right?
Fascism didn't win by arguing alone, but arguing was a very important part of their strategy - please notice that the creator of fascism, Mussolini, became famous as a (vitriolic) journalist.
Also see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance
Also see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance
The idea is good, but the execution is lacking. I get it's a one-man project so far, and that's going to leave you uncertain about its future unlike Patreon. And while Patreon definitely needs competition, creators also needs assurances before they rely on a service.
I honestly wonder why he did not reach out to a few people, who were passionate about the same thing, to help build this service further. As plenty here have already noticed, the website has some quirks right now that might take months to fix, if ever, considering it is just one person running it.
However, I hope all that will turn around, as he gets more press interest, and others might offer to help. And in a year's time, it has become something people might actually want to rely on. I wish him a lot of luck.
I honestly wonder why he did not reach out to a few people, who were passionate about the same thing, to help build this service further. As plenty here have already noticed, the website has some quirks right now that might take months to fix, if ever, considering it is just one person running it.
However, I hope all that will turn around, as he gets more press interest, and others might offer to help. And in a year's time, it has become something people might actually want to rely on. I wish him a lot of luck.
>>and that's going to leave you uncertain about its future unlike Patreon
Given the events of the past month or so, I wouldn't be completely sure about the future of patreon. It's definitely shown the way forward in terms of supporting creators, but the repercussions of their actions seem to be gaining a lot of traction and putting doubt into trusting patreon for people who supported creators via the platform in the past.
Given the events of the past month or so, I wouldn't be completely sure about the future of patreon. It's definitely shown the way forward in terms of supporting creators, but the repercussions of their actions seem to be gaining a lot of traction and putting doubt into trusting patreon for people who supported creators via the platform in the past.
the repercussions of their actions seem
to be gaining a lot of traction
It's based on a significant number of people who are large Patreon account holders closing their accounts (Sam Harris is the first one to spring to mind, I believe he had the 13th largest account by monthly donation), and also a number of people saying their income via Patreon has decreased significantly as a result of patrons leaving the platform.
Plus there seems to be a lot of disquiet about Patreon and people trying to set up competition for them (SubscribeStar, Dave Rubin/Jordan Peterson's project) which seems to be gaining a lot more attention than it would have otherwise - up to this point many people (myself included) were completely happy with Patreon.
Plus there seems to be a lot of disquiet about Patreon and people trying to set up competition for them (SubscribeStar, Dave Rubin/Jordan Peterson's project) which seems to be gaining a lot more attention than it would have otherwise - up to this point many people (myself included) were completely happy with Patreon.
Creator of 10er here! Happy to answer any questions.