an opinion cannot be wrong. but it also cannot be right. you make a fair point with what you’re saying. the dev is already planning on a single time purchase, but a sub option is definitely not “morally wrong.”
It can be morally wrong depending on the person’s visions. It’s not that this vision is wrong or right. It’s a personal one. Nobody did this vision mandatory.
Although I do not agree with your opinion above, but I think your opinion is valid and you don’t deserve the downvotes.
My opinion is that Sync and Lemmy are two different things with two different philosophies. Yes they are interconnected, but they are both separate entities, and it’s not like Sync is built off of Lemmy’s source code. The dev should get compensated for the time and resources he put into the source code of Sync, and if ads is a way to contribute to that, then so be it.
an opinion cannot be wrong. but it also cannot be right. you make a fair point with what you’re saying. the dev is already planning on a single time purchase, but a sub option is definitely not “morally wrong.”
It can be morally wrong depending on the person’s visions. It’s not that this vision is wrong or right. It’s a personal one. Nobody did this vision mandatory.
Although I do not agree with your opinion above, but I think your opinion is valid and you don’t deserve the downvotes.
My opinion is that Sync and Lemmy are two different things with two different philosophies. Yes they are interconnected, but they are both separate entities, and it’s not like Sync is built off of Lemmy’s source code. The dev should get compensated for the time and resources he put into the source code of Sync, and if ads is a way to contribute to that, then so be it.