[Ardour-Users] Could this solve Ardour's financial headache?

[Justin M. Streiner]

On Wed, 14 Jan 2009, John Emmas wrote:

> As the person who started off this thread, I'm dismayed by the above
> comment - and yet I feel bound to admit that it's exactly the same
> conclusion I was coming to myself.  One or two people have posted here
> to say they're already contributing financially - but if my observations are
> anything to go by, for the majority, the only funding model they want to see
> succeed is a model where somebody else ends up paying.

There might be a grain of truth to that, unfortunately, but I won't 
belabor the point, as it's already been discussed from many different 
angles since the thread started :)

My first post to the thread might have gotten lost among all of the 
others, but how feasible is it to allow users to subscribe for more than 
$10/month?  I would be willing to do so, if the option was available.

I realize it only partially solves the problem - more money to fund the 
development of Ardour, but the number of subscribing users among Ardour's 
user base doesn't change.  There was some reluctance toward wanting to 
make up some of the funding shortfall by getting more money from users who 
already contribute financially, but if subscribing at a higher level is 
completely voluntary, I would hope people don't lose sleep over it :)

jms