[Arm-netbook] Status update

[Paul Boddie]

On Thursday, 24 November 2022 01:55:28 CET Christopher Havel wrote:
> 
> Luke has the talking-stick at this point, and when he's done, I'll have it
> back. I will be entirely ignoring the rest of you lot. It's a sad day when
> I'm just about the only adult in the room,

I find this insulting and condescending. I only initiated this thread to ask 
for some kind of indication of progress, given that there has been no news for 
almost two years. I know that some people have given up on this project 
entirely and are resigned to the idea that they put up non-trivial amounts of 
money and will have nothing to show for it. Few people contributing to this 
effort will be so "loaded" that they will not miss that money.

I also find Luke's assertions that I have not read his updates insulting and 
condescending. While I do not have the details of all of them at the front of 
my mind for instant analysis, I have read every last one of them, right up to 
the point where they ceased and left everyone wondering what was going on. I 
have always tried to encourage further progress in this project, even during 
the period when nothing was evidently happening.

And here, the point I made about a lack of communication is entirely 
pertinent. If you want to see what happens when a crowdfunding campaign 
"succeeds" and then the updates stop coming, take a look at this one:

https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/roundcube-next--2#/

Some of you may even recognise a name or two amongst those involved. While the 
money in that campaign may have effectively evaporated for all we know, which 
is not the case here, just look at the updates to see what the effect is when 
the campaign initiators cease to engage. Are those people not being adults 
either?

I understand the sentiment that having no news to report would make any 
campaign update rather lacking in substance, but then I have to ask what was 
stopping anyone issuing updates saying that Luke was still waiting to hear 
from Chris? There is a middle ground between saying nothing and screaming 
allegations of criminality at someone: a periodic reminder that no 
communication has been received would have been enough to communicate the 
state of the effort.

But had such updates been issued, I understand that it would have given a 
negative impression of the project status. And such negative impressions would 
tarnish the crowdfunding platform, suggesting that not all is well, that maybe 
there are widespread problems with project completion on the platform. So, 
everyone was left with the impression that one of the creators was merely busy 
doing what the other had asked him to do.

People might expect to read angry messages on platforms such as Kickstarter 
and Indiegogo about a failed campaign, as new projects are promoted underneath 
with their funding levels ticking upwards: the unhappy customers ejected via 
the back door as new punters are welcomed in via the front door. But Crowd 
Supply is supposed to be better than that. Certainly, the emergence of 
corporate-sponsored campaigns from the likes of AMD and Microchip seems to 
indicate a level of confidence in the platform.

Then again, those corporations might actually be the ones providing the 
guarantee that the people involved are able to complete their projects, that 
one of them won't be advocating vigilante justice (but not too severe, of 
course) against the other, or anything similarly absurd. I presume that Crowd 
Supply's vision is that when people click on "Back This Project", they expect 
it to be rather more like "Place Your Order" than a ticket into some kind of 
unhinged participative theatre performance.

Paul