It hasn’t happened yet, but it very easily could, and probably will at some point.
What do we do in a situation where a lot of people disagree with a particular piece of functionality (or a feature request, or whatever) and one person puts the mother of all Bountysource donations on it?
For example, let’s say the styling of Diaspora is very black and white in its looks. What if someone posted a feature request to github saying they prefer a blue and yellow colour scheme. What then if the same person puts a $1000 bounty on that feature request?
Someones gonna want to cash that bad boy in…
Do we have a plan / set of rules for this?
Note: This discussion was imported from Loomio. Click here to view the original discussion.
The code is overseen and managed by few designated people, right? If so, I think they will respect community decisions and won’t accept any change that was decided against into upstream.
diaspora* is free software, so if people want it to be different, they’re free to modify their own version, or even fork the project. Ultimately, if proper code management was to fail, we can do the same.
No more to say than tirifto: if someone really wants something that the community doesn’t want and if he has a lot of money available, he can pay to maintain a fork of diaspora*. But honestly, I don’t think this will happen.
Isn’t this community vs single donatee -question? If someone opens an issue on github and places a large bounty on it, but that issue is voted down by the community, the issue will be closed and bountysource will refund (on request) the placed bounty (from their faq).
