In that sense, I’m part of the people who are interested in tiddlywiki ‘stackholders’ - but I’m not a member of the tiddlywiki community and neither am I the company.
… Meanwhile I listen to a Gandalf mix …
@TiddlyTweeter @boris @Tiddlybob @Mark_S So… an idea
- What makes a person a member of tiddlywiki is the donation they submit, tech support they do or the specializations they do. This is the value(representation) of a tiddly - person who works on tiddlywiki.
- So… I’m a non-tiddly, person interested in tiddlywiki(the tool and not the community)
- People interested in the community and the tool would be members or tiddly. People only interested in the tool or only in the community - are they companies or are they non-tiddlys like me.
concept
Here is the definition I created
- tiddly:
- non-tiddly
- partial-tiddly:
Why?
- We can offer a rewards program for each type of person, for example if they are a member of tiddlywiki they can get discounts on courses, training programs etc.
- This increases the value (perception) and price of tiddlywiki.
- BugBounty - Get rewarded for finding technical bugs on tiddlywiki.(non-tiddly)
- Members of tiddly and partial-tiddly can vote on resources, we can participate in technical discussions, we will ask for resources.
- my concept follows this line of thought:
- What I am clearly proposing here is to generate a need for consumption of tiddlywiki as software and also to generate a need for scarcity so that people think they are members of tiddly and those who really want to be.
- Concept 1
- Whoever finances it is a partial-tiddly. plan tiddly-commercial
- Anyone who promotes is a non-tiddly. plan tiddly-business
- Who supports, is tiddly. plan tiddly-community
- Concept 2: volunteers (you can call these people tiddly members, tiddly), non-volunteers (you can call these people non-tiddly or non-volunteers or stakeholders), interested in tiddlywiki (you can call these people companies, business partners or partially-tiddly)
I spoke here ironically, that is, to emphasize that we should look for ways to have money for tiddlywiki
I understand that it’s open source, but from what I’ve read, the developers are planning to hold back some local-only features as well (https://docs.logseq.com/#/page/62f130a6-30cc-4606-a588-2c85ad48ede3). I know that could happen to TW as well, but I have pretty good faith that it won’t.
I agree, I would definitely pay for a mobile app with sync options (if I had an iOS device). I feel like that is a proper way to monetize. The thing that makes me uneasy with LogSeq is that it seems like they are impeding development of the core product to generate revenue.
No problem!
1 Like
This is a known open source model called “open core” – where some features are under a different license or access, which then funds the further development and maintenance of the whole thing.
Interesting to hear your perception of “proper” way to monetize. I actually wish Quine was $5/month, since that I would make me feel secure that the app can continue to be maintained! I really should talk to Chris Hunt, I don’t think he’s on here in TW Talk yet?
2 Likes
I talked about it here too
“Another way would be if tiddlwiki adopted a business model like open-core, part of the code was community and part of the code was closed. Closing here would just be themes, customizations, plugins and specialized technical support like GitHub, Bitwarden etc.”
So…
- Key-values:
- ‘open-source’,
- ‘ease’,
- ‘tool integration’
- ‘technical support’
- ‘open-data’
- ‘open-knowledge’
- ‘security’
- ‘privacy’ … etc (we have to focus on one of these pillars)
vision
1 Like
“Proper” may not have been the best word choice haha. I’m not saying that it’s right or wrong, I just meant that the model is not as attractive to me.
There’s a fine line, at least in my view, between providing an extra service (e.g. synching) and placing restrictions. I could create a TW file that my grandkids could read one day and not worry about any restrictions on features.
1 Like
great point of view and everything I said has this doubt.
1 Like
@Tiddlybob So… If the file format is open, there is no problem for you to open and read the file. tiddlywiki has the open format, this shouldn’t be a problem.
This is just an example, we can craft a canva business model for tiddly.
- If tiddlywiki adopts a crowdfunding-investment every person who donates money can get money back on top of the profit.
- “It’s similar to the idea of blockchain, those who work earn bitcoins… although what I’m talking about is a little different conceptually, but it follows a similar logic”
What Is Investment Crowdfunding?
Investment crowdfunding is a way to source money for a company by asking a large number of backers to each invest a relatively small amount in it. In return, backers receive equity shares of the company. - copyright by investopedia
Sounds good. I just have no idea what you mean! 
1 Like
Yeah TW itself isn’t a business so “it” won’t adopt a model.
I’m personally most interested in exploring how people who use open source software can support it directly. Especially if they aren’t developers / don’t consider themselves technical.
But I very much encourage others to explore commercial models. Including how they would give back to the core open source community.
I think there are some interesting options around memberships — eg only people who donate can “vote” on something. But it is a very tricky model that is only now emerging in open source communities. EG early access to the next release.
3 Likes
- Imagine that you like tiddlywiki and you send 100 dollars monthly to tiddlywiki, suddenly you know that 100 dollars you sent equals 110.00 dollars. ie you won 10 dollars, that 10 dollars is the appreciation of the tiddlywiki tool. That is, if the tool devalues you can lose that extra 10 dollars. That is, if it depreciates in the sense of the 10 dollars you received, roughly speaking, it is like the stock market, the difference is that in the stock market you have a supervisory body like brokers and in this case you don’t have a supervisory body - just the company that makes these types of transactions or in the contract established between the company you want to send the money to and the contract clause in case that company does not pay.
- What I’m talking about here would be an open-core business model with crowdfunding-investment, usually open-core you adopt the subscription model you talked about like GitHub etc.
- But there are open-core business models where you receive donations from social projects - this happens in startups etc.It is a moderate/high investment. That is, you invest knowing that you can make a lot of money or you can make little money or nothing. Before investing, find out more about this business model. I’m not defending anything, just showing what is possible as an idea.
- The idea of adopting an opencore business model with crowdfunding-investment is to attract investors, people who are companies or who are going to make money without necessarily having to create plugins. It’s what we call “social capitalism”, where software has a social role but has lucrative returns for people, community, investors, etc.This does not deviate from the original idea of capitalism, but has a strong social value in people’s lives, especially in the era of information technology capitalism we live in, where information is like gold or money.
1 Like
I am still to read this whole thread.
- Perhaps this is so but my feeling is a collaboration of peers with the same goals to develop the tools, processes and practices for commercialisation.
There are two commercial paths;
- To and inside the tiddlywiki world, supporting, developing, training
- Producing public solutions to non-tiddlywik users/designers, just produce apps/websites/smart documents for them.
I would but it would be with a view to earning income not eventually, but next week 
I have done a lot of thinking about this and as a result have a lot to add, I have a dozen different approaches to seeking funding, delivering results and returning to the community.
- I would start sharing my existing work but is is more time I would be spending, without an income, so I need more assurances it will be considered before I invest more time without a likely return.
Background
- I have being building my tiddlywiki skills and rapid development environment now for years with a view to the two commercial paths above.
- However I may need to abandon this in favor of a day job unless something happens soon.
1 Like
@TW_Tones You spoke my exact idea with incredible brevity.
You spoke my exact idea with incredible brevity.
So… I would include the third group which are investors, sponsors, companies etc. As: partial-tiddlywiki as 'crowdfunding-investment ’
My arguments here would be for tiddlywiki to be like Red Hat, Mozilla, GitHub etc. In this case, despite my goal being big, if we can make a great commercial support of tiddlywiki I would be happy to help
What are you talking about conceptually?
- design thinking: ‘empathy map’, ‘persona’
- “interaction design” and/or “design ux/ui”: ‘design quiz for users’ - reference: What are UX Tools? | Interaction Design Foundation (IxDF)
- design as project/business: ‘Function point analysis’, ‘canvas business model’
- That’s what’s happening to me, I recently saw that you guys opened tiddlywiki redesign. In my opinion it would be nice to have the redesign of the tiddlywiki tool and the tiddlywiki site. For my specific case, I advocate that the tiddlywiki site should be like a landing page, the landing page is more commercial and easier to understand. Bitwarden the site is a landing page, joplin, github the same.
- But just solving the website interface problem is not just something that will work. In addition, you have to redesign the tool as well to place more beautiful, eye-catching buttons.
- There is no free lunch. This is always true, open source tools are paid - but paid because they need donations and volunteers.
- Or I pay because some company maintains it, there will hardly be a project that does not receive any donation and everything is done voluntarily. Here I’m talking about something like an anarchist project…
- For example, blockchain/bitcoin is anarchist, anarcho-capitalist - it doesn’t depend on any company to function and it works.
- It’s a centralized, decentralized open ledger - I mean there are no changes to the database, but you have a full copy of this ledger for different people (this is centralized, but decentralized at the same time)
- That’s why some say blockchain/bitcoin is not something “social capitalism” it’s something more like ‘free market’, something more liberal or libertarian or anarcho-capitalist for some.
To Boris (I love you contributions especially) but everyone else. Here is my response’s and ideas about what has been said in this topic so far. I come late from the UTC+10 time zone.
- To be clear this subject is almost of existential importance to me right now.
@boris I really appreciate what you did here and I am contributing even although I do not have an income. I looked both at the tiddlywiki open collective and the platform itself as a place to seek funding but I feel I need something more flexible to develop a model that is more inviting for investors so I don’t need to work too hard to find such investors. But something would be better than nothing.
- If we all get our act together I can contribute substantial ideas to this endeavor.
- I respond to related issues further down.
- I understand this, in fact I think all businesses should be upfront with their business model so customers “can vote with their feet”, supporting the models they are comfortable with and avoid those who hide the fact “you are the product”.
- I am sure I can add to your and @anon5541130 lists of monetization methods. Well that was before I read the whole thread, perhaps not.
In summary;
- Freemium
- Hosting
- Support Services
- Product or service Tied support
- Training
- Bespoke solutions
- White label solutions
- Branded Solutions
- I am not at all in favor of this, there are already examples of 100% Open source commercial activities.
- In part because we all need, use and depend on community support.
- This does not mean we can’t publish solutions that have licencing limitations, if there is still a fair use policy
- An advantage of open source is anyone now and in the future can take control of their own software without being the hostage of proprietary solutions. I actively discourage the use of Apple products for this reason, their opaqueness.
- I agree with this but is is separate from “open monetisation”, the core developers need more support but we must be carful here if we want the core development to contain and remain open. As with any open source projects the collaboration and contributions need to ideally remain cost less, but developers do benefit in many non-monetary ways.
- For example I contribute to the community and the core primarily for what it means to the community and the future utility of tiddlywiki, not for direct or immediate personal gain, although a healthy core benefits us all.
- If some core developers we funded and not others (again except for @jeremyruston), I am not so sure how happy I would be as a result,
- If there were more “open monetisation” that would be helpful to core contributor’s to earn outside the core, based on what they learn contributing to the core. perhaps with @jeremyruston the exception.
Start contributing to the core now as Boris suggested
- I am not sure anyone can be this philosophically and ethically. Even if someone is funding an open source project, but especially if they are not, they are in my mind obliged, to add value to the community, otherwise they may be, or are a “freeloader”.
- I even expect users to contribute to the community where possible.
- One way open source is similar to Marx is “From each as to there ability, to each as to their need”. Then we personally all try and give as much as we can so we are in a position of surplus. I feel I am “in Credit” with my contributions non-monetarily at least.
- For you and everyone else “Irony does not work in open communities” except perhaps in a group of authors. “Just don’t do it”
- Irony has being the cause of a few “almost flame wars” in talk.tiddlywiki
- Be aware these methods can fall foul of local securities and investment laws and typically need to be registered, or incorporated businesses or associations, there is a large overhead. I hope this stays this way to stop rip-offs.
- me too, users can/should be supporters and monetarily where possible. I think they naturally underestimate the possibilities and effective contributions they can make. Another Topic could be started on this.
- me too and there are many ways this can be done. If I succeed in monetising tiddlywiki, I would/will.
- Continue with my current high level on non financial contributions
- Return methods and plugins if not solutions from the commercial and proprietary solutions I develop.
- Actively sponsor as many people as possible in the community.
- This is where I felt opencollective.com fell short.
- I would like to list a number of projects that funders get votes on and that sets my priorities.
- Thanks, I appreciate your comment, but may I suggest you work on brevity yourself, I have made suggestions on this elsewhere as have others. Not withstanding that I appreciate your enthusiasm and effort.
- I agree. In particular, I would like to see such funding in relation to the democratisation of software/Internet and computing. A separate subject on its own.
- Like money, blockchain is about how you use it.
- I am appalled by 90% of its current uses.
- At best gambling and at worst fraud.
- That’s a Café subject for another day.
This is clearly a subject in need of attention. Thanks all for your contributions, and if you read this far, considering my thoughtful feedback.
1 Like
Right.
I know you are deeply committed to TW. I hope not to the detriment of your health?
1 Like