Discussion: Ensage Reimagined Part 2

anonymouseanonymouse Posts: 374
edited May 28 in General

***Solutions (Personal Opinion)

Solutions are based on current problems, and other instances.

**Remove payout business model and change to a new paid assembly subscription.

Benefits:

Developers would be encouraged to work on assembly since they would be receiving a monthly salary based on the number of users on the new paid subscription. Since we are working on providing frequently updated core and assembly, there would be higher chance that ensage user base would increase significantly. Thus, increasing income for both ensage team, and developers.

Users would be encouraged to sub since all paid assemblies made by dedicated assembly team is included. And assemblies and request are frequently considered as top priority, no more hanging user that is waiting for a developer to reply.

**Gather a dedicated assembly team. (I would suggest maximum of 4 developers)

Benefits:

Assemblies are frequently updated by the team, all paid assemblies made by them would be included in the new paid subscription. Ex. beminee/yeeeee/jumpering/idcnoob scripts. (depending on chosen developer)

More paid assemblies would be made available, since there is already a motivation to work (being paid monthly).
Developer are less likely to be inactive since they would be afraid to lose the monthly salary. Thus, creating more frequent updates/fixes.

**Old paid assembly remains in the database, and new recoded scripts are in the new paid assembly sub.

Benefits:

Old users who purchased paid assemblies can still use the old paid assemblies, and old developers can still update their old paid assembly if they wish.

**Rules against trolling new users.

Benefits:

Would help new users be comfortable with ensage, the more they are being helped the more chances that they would recommend and subscribe for a long time.

Remember ensage is not the only hack for dota, if users feel bullied, we lose our customers/users.

Key Points:

*Making these changes would hopefully increase more users thus making more income for both ensage and developers.

*Its is better to have a monthly salary for developers since we are aware that a one-time payout tends to have more problems in the end.

*Developers are given more compensation in time, since we would get more users because of frequently updated assemblies. More users>More income>More better and updated assemblies> more new users to come (cycle).

*User base would most likely increase, since all new paid assemblies, in the new paid subscription are being updated and fixed regularly.

*It is better to have monthly salary, rather than developers don’t get anything when they fix their assemblies. At least with monthly salary coming from new paid subscription, developers are paid as long as they follow rules. (fixing assemblies, making new ones, updating etc.)

Math:

New paid assembly subscriptions

What’s included – All paid assemblies that is rewritten, and new paid assemblies.

Ex. 20usd per user/ per month.

Assuming we have gotten 100 subs.

Ex. 20usd x 100 users = 2000usd divided by 4 developers = 500 monthly per developer.

Now we only assume it if we have 100 subscribers for the new paid subscriptions. There is a higher chance to get it to 150-200 users, depending on how development team performs. (This is only my estimate) I believe the more the development team fixes/updates the assemblies, the more users we will have.

Key points:

If ensage are being kept updated, no trolls, assemblies are perfect, request are considered, no user that is kept hanging and waiting. Our user base would increase.

Other options:

To increase user base, I would suggest doing a scheme. Get users to spread ensage by making referrals. Each referral grants them 15 days of free ensage etc. Make ensage private, why private you ask? because once we establish a good community with perfect running management of assemblies, there might be an influx of customers, that would make valve notice ensage more, and might have a problem in the end. Also making it private, gives users a good feeling of being accepted in an underground hacking community. The more likely they would stay, because its “private”.

Last notes:

I know user are on the losing end of this proposal, since users need to pay more for a new paid assembly subscription. But look at it this way, users will no longer be burdened with long assembly update, all of the paid assemblies are free when you sub to the new paid assembly subscription. There is a dedicated team to help in your question, suggestions, and fixes. Ask yourself if you like the current model, where you pay for a one time assembly, but when you request or there is an update, the original developers just ignores you, and assemblies are being more broken everyday. I think what my proposal would do is to reverse everything, and ensage would be at its 100% potential.

Thank you if you read it all, and comment if you think this is a bad idea or what. This is only me trying help ensage.

PS. I am a business management professor, and do a lot of consulting, when companies have problems. Since I love dota, for stress relief, I decided to make this thread, so maybe it could open admins/owners/users/devs eyes.

Thank you. - anonymouse since april 2017

Comments

  • nabl0rdnabl0rd Posts: 3
    edited May 29

    @anonymouse you singlehandedly reworked Ensage's business model, into one that would certainly make sense in a modernised market, particularly one concerned with tech solutions. Props to you for that.

    On that note, you have to ask yourself do the developers' personal lives have the capacity to undertake a further commitment to the Ensage project. Sure, users would be spending marginally more in a subscription model but is that enough to actually make the commitment worth it? By what percentage would the revenue (considering the current price) increase and how would that affect the project's profit margin? Is £500 enough monthly compensation?

    If Ensage turns private you have to note they are capping their revenue. Therefore, is the £20 worth it? Price it at £30? Depends on where the userbase cap is. These are decisions that the owners probably considered already and they know their own 'demand', so to speak, better than we do. There's also conflict between turning private and the idea of a subscription model - how do you organically grow a userbase before you get 'too big' in this business. (I've been here since L# and they got pretty big before Riot wiped it out with lawsuits). The same law applies to Valve, and the case with Riot would set an uncomfortable legal precedent.

    Ensage is already running a subscription model for their base service.
    A one-time payment model for extra scripts (some do cost a fair buck) is likely generating more money than the £2.5 per/dev/per-user would likely generate in terms of additional income (the extra £10 per user). What is the user retention rate?

    How do you privatise the project and give out free referrals? Clash here, too.

    At least with monthly salary coming from new paid subscription, developers are paid as long as they follow rules. (fixing assemblies, making new ones, updating etc.)

    If demand drops dramatically one month for whatever reason, the devs may lose all motivation to work and Ensage could fall through. Fatal flaw.

    I'm only a student myself so I will take my own comments with a pinch of salt but I'm just pointing out that to you that while a subscription model may possibly streamline Ensage's revenue & bring some benefit to the users in terms of what scripts they can access, it probably won't improve quality a considerable amount - there are limits to what you can 'design' in-game.

    Happy 2 take a consulting placement if you're offering.

  • anonymouseanonymouse Posts: 374
    edited May 29

    @nabl0rd said:
    @anonymouse you singlehandedly reworked Ensage's business model, into one that would certainly make sense in a modernised market, particularly one concerned with tech solutions. Props to you for that.

    On that note, you have to ask yourself do the developers' personal lives have the capacity to undertake a further commitment to the Ensage project. Sure, users would be spending marginally more in a subscription model but is that enough to actually make the commitment worth it? By what percentage would the revenue (considering the current price) increase and how would that affect the project's profit margin? Is £500 enough monthly compensation?

    If Ensage turns private you have to note they are capping their revenue. Therefore, is the £20 worth it? Price it at £30? Depends on where the userbase cap is. These are decisions that the owners probably considered already and they know their own 'demand', so to speak, better than we do. There's also conflict between turning private and the idea of a subscription model - how do you organically grow a userbase before you get 'too big' in this business. (I've been here since L# and they got pretty big before Riot wiped it out with lawsuits). The same law applies to Valve, and the case with Riot would set an uncomfortable legal precedent.

    Ensage is already running a subscription model for their base service.
    A one-time payment model for extra scripts (some do cost a fair buck) is likely generating more money than the £2.5 per/dev/per-user would likely generate in terms of additional income (the extra £10 per user). What is the user retention rate?

    How do you privatise the project and give out free referrals? Clash here, too.

    At least with monthly salary coming from new paid subscription, developers are paid as long as they follow rules. (fixing assemblies, making new ones, updating etc.)

    If demand drops dramatically one month for whatever reason, the devs may lose all motivation to work and Ensage could fall through. Fatal flaw.

    I'm only a student myself so I will take my own comments with a pinch of salt but I'm just pointing out that to you that while a subscription model may possibly streamline Ensage's revenue & bring some benefit to the users in terms of what scripts they can access, it probably won't improve quality a considerable amount - there are limits to what you can 'design' in-game.

    Happy 2 take a consulting placement if you're offering.

    Hi thank you for your feedback. Well, I have talked with the admin, and ask some developer about this porposal. Apparently I oversaw that developer/s has no interest in a small buck incentive since they can get paid 5,000usd per month on other projects, and they said 500usd per month is not that motivational for their line of work.

    Personally if it was me as a developer, ill take it since it just an extra income/incentive for me. I can help myself plus i can help ensage as a community. But they said they can make more, with a payout system. But I already told them that a payout is very risky, since dota is updating often. So that is what exactly happen in the past few months, if theres an update or new features added to dota, devs already withdrew all the money and now lost motivation to add new changes from dota. But we must never blame devs, they have their reasons.

    I have only written this thread, since I was looking for ways for admin/owners to find a way for devs to stay. But they are not interested giving a small 500usd pr month to devs.

  • YEEEEEEEYEEEEEEE Posts: 1,382

    :sisi3:

  • nabl0rdnabl0rd Posts: 3

    @YEEEEEEE said:
    :sisi3:

    lets hear your thoughts? i'm quite intrigued

  • owennhtowennht Posts: 118

    This is so perfect. In short, I prefer to pay more per month ($15 to $20 is fine) as long as the developers keep updating their scripts regularly.

    I join Ensage community rather late, like in the mid of 2019, paid a bunch of scripts (for more than $100) but now most of thems are very outdated and the devs are nowhere to be found or response (Moones, Jumpering...) making me feel like I just got robbed.

    I paid for them and been using them for like 3-4 months before the devs decided to quit the community and gave up their scripts...

  • anonymouseanonymouse Posts: 374

    @owennht said:
    This is so perfect. In short, I prefer to pay more per month ($15 to $20 is fine) as long as the developers keep updating their scripts regularly.

    I join Ensage community rather late, like in the mid of 2019, paid a bunch of scripts (for more than $100) but now most of thems are very outdated and the devs are nowhere to be found or response (Moones, Jumpering...) making me feel like I just got robbed.

    I paid for them and been using them for like 3-4 months before the devs decided to quit the community and gave up their scripts...

    That was my initial thought, owner of ensage should atleast just try putting my proposal, there is a potential we could gather more subs, because of frequently updated scripts. The more subs, the more chances of dev getting higher salary in the end. But we never know, devs dont work for ensage, they are freelancers and may want the payout model, but as I said, payout is bad when its a game like dota 2 where it keeps updating, once there is a big update and devs are already gone, no one is there to fix what we paid. Hope they could atleast make a poll, if users are willing to pay for frequently updated scripts.

  • bemineebeminee Posts: 566
    edited June 3

    Few flaws:

    • Salary based compensation did exist in the past and it was without charging users extra (yes, admins were paying developers from subscription money). It wasn't $500 but $300. It didn't work (The Great Assembly Recession as I like to call before paid assembly era, old members would remember). Because let's be honest, anyone that's skilled enough to make complex Ensage assemblies is skilled enough to make more than $300-$500 on other projects or already have a real life job that renders extra $500 irrelevant.
    • How will you decide which dev will get what percent from this complete pool of extra payments?
    • You assume this system will motivate devs to work harder which in my opinion, will do the exact opposite. Putting up few new assemblies won't increase their payroll drastically as their payment is limited by how many people will purchase paid assembly subscription and don't think this subscription's price can increase from let's say $10 to $15 because of new functionality. So most devs will just do bare minimum, get their "salary" and go on with their lives.
    • You assume this will increase Ensage userbase. As a business management professor you should know that business decisions are not made with common sense or assumptions but rather made with data. Even though my common sense and assumptions say that iPhone and iMac doesn't worth it's money, Apple is the most profitable company in the world right now. Do you have any data that indicates users from other platforms will migrate to Ensage in case of this system or more people start cheating?
    • My observation tells me that rather than increasing userbase, making users pay extra $20 every month will in fact decrease ensage user base.
    • $500, $1000 is not enough for devs to go full-time or part-time on Ensage. Because first of all, Ensage is a niche "service" that can go out of market any minute (Valve going Riot way and suing Ensage, Valve changing their ToS to more actively look for cheats on user's computers and constantly updating Dota 2 VAC, which makes it not worth to try and bypass). Second, most devs can go or are already on full time that makes them much more money than that. The best you can hope is that, devs will work hard to get an initial assembly up and then spend few hours of their free time every month to maintain them (to keep them in at least working order).
    • My final thoughts is that, monthly assembly revenue system might work but might also kill Ensage completely as if revenue is too small and devs are expected to work more (earning less than before for more work) can force devs to just say goodbye's and leave.
  • AyushAyush Posts: 356
    edited June 4

    Hey @beminee hope you are doing good and safe, first of all I am really glad that you took out some of your time and glad that you had given out your thoughts.

    I agree on your point that Ensage paid assembly subscription might kill Dev's passion to work because you might be earning too less when compared to the current paid assembly model, but with few tweaks we can make it work for you, as you know that initially when paid assemblies were released into the market it was blast for both the Dev's and for the people who had bought it, but as time went by and after Dev's withdrew their money Dev's eventually lost interest in updating the script for new features anymore, which resulted with disappointment among many of the paid script subscribers.

    So The Alternative I Would Suggest Would Be:

    • Have an initial base price for the assembly which would be about 20% less than the price with which you are selling at the moment (i.e, if an assembly costs 20$ in the present market, it would cost 16$ in the new market), when a user purchases this assembly in the new market, they would be guaranteed that they need not pay an additional subscription price for the assembly for X months (say 4/5 months, because if you look at the current paid store, devs lost interest in developing/updating new features after around 5 months, let the value of X be decided by @Admin (as current withdrawal wait time is also around 1- 6 months, so I don't think 3/4/5 months isn't that bad)

    • After the X month would have ended let the dev's assembly have a subscription model, say 1 or 2 $ per month, since I don't have a data I would assume that on an average you have around 40 copies sold for a particular paid assembly, so that would result in around 80$ per month additional income as a maintenance, which at some times you need not even require additional work so it would kinda be something like a passive income, and for few hectic scripts like an AIO you could cost them 3$ as well which would result in 120$ additional income for the dev, which the dev would withdraw at the end of the Month, and please don't allow refunds for paid subscription to take place if asked after 5 days of subscription, since sometimes we know mistakes happen.

    • Although a subscriber feature is something I only recommend for Hero-Scripts, not for an HUD script, because HUD scripts are something of a basic necessity, and all HUD scripts doesn't require improvement over time because they are already in their perfect state I reckon.

    Why Would Dev Even Wish For Such A Model:

    • With Your initial base price you should be able to make pretty much around the same how much you make right now with the present store, and after the wait period, you would be charging your assembly buyers a maintenance fee of around 2$ or 1$ based on number of copies you have sold, which would at least ensure you an additional income of (80 - 100$) / month, sometimes even passive, so you would intern per making more than how much you are making in the present store. It is as said software companies make more in maintenance part.

    Why Would Ensage Subscribers Choose Such A Model:

    • With disappointment running around the people among the paid assembly subscribers, I guess most of the people wouldn't mind paying an additional 4/5$ for additional 3/4 assemblies per month (3/4 assemblies is a lot more than I am currently using, I barely use only 2 paid assemblies frequently) , for a improved quality script than the Broken / Non maintained Paid assembly right now in the store, because with the current store I feel I have been scammed around 60$ for some paid assemblies (Ex moons invo and rage scripts, I don't blame them Im just sad that Ensage is dying for which I have been supporting from 2014 I guess and I feel most people do so as well)

    • This would also improve the competition among the Dev's tog other more subs for their assembly and would provide us with a updated version of HQ scripts, thereby we are the winners finally since we choose which assembly we pay for.

    • So It would cause users who have paid for an assembly to keep paying only around 15$ per month who have afforded paid scripts after X months, and I don't think spending 5$ extra for people who have already bought a paid script isn't too much.

    Outcome:

    • This would result in a Highly maintained paid script platform, with users being satisfied as well as Dev's which would intern bring more users some day and would @Admin be satisfied as well, Therefore the whole Ensage Scripting Community would be satisfied,
      once Ensage has an appreciable amount of users you could reduce the paid assembly subscription price as well, and future new Paid assemblies can only be Subscription only if it can guarantee a Dev around 1k$/month.

    When Should This Be Implemented From:

    • I would suggest the current Dev's to fix/update their paid assemblies in a 1.5/1 Month (I think 1 Month Is sufficient though) according to users suggestions, after the current paid assemblies have been updated for the current patch, they can move onto the Maintenance type of store that I have suggested.

    What Would This Mean For The @Admin ?:

    • Ensage would resurrect back from the ashes (like a phoenix), as Ensage as a scripting community would be satisfied, thereby you would have more active subscribers, and more users, which would yield you more income. Once you can prove that the paid assembly platform can survive (since its almost dead right now), you can start working on the free assembly platform because the Monthly subscribers who can't afford paid scripts should be taken care as well for a better community, I for one who am ready even for a donation to improve Free platform as well, but only if you can prove that the paid is surviving first.

    Please @IdcNoob , @YEEEEEEE , @beminee , @Jumpering , @Moones , @Admin Provide your suggestions/feedback on such a model, I don't think we can help each other if no one is willing to communicate. Thank you.

  • anonymouseanonymouse Posts: 374
    edited June 4

    @beminee said:
    Few flaws:

    Thank you for replying @beminee, as I said this is just for discussion, to be able to have an insight on what devs and users are thinking about the current model. I understand you 100% completely, and would like to also share my thoughts.

    My thoughts:

    • Since I understand your stand point now being a dev, I understand that having a passive income is not a real motivation since you can get projects for more than $500. My thoughts for this is that, remember that we are only users/consumers and we do not have the capabilities and skills like the devs that we have here in ensage, we only rely on devs updating the assemblies and we are at the point where what we paid for is going to waste, I dont have a problem with your assembly since your still currently active, what i am worried about is the paid assemblies that was left behind, you can argue that while its 100% working, updates and features are not anymore being added, for example new neutral items/ current map changes. As a user we only rely on devs to add those features, as with many I am worried what will happen when dota release a major update that includes map changes or item changes, every update, those abadonned assemblies becomes more and more outdated even though its working 100%. If I am skilled as devs like yourself, I would not mind since I can create my own assembly for myself if I wish, but we the common consumer obviously cannot.

    • While the previous comment by @Ayush is great, and I totally agree on some level. Here is my additional options if in case it might viable to devs that we have.

    Let stay we put the official devs aside first from the proposed model. I have dev friends that is also skilled at some point to update paid and free assemblies, as I notice that there a couple of devs also willing to help when I am at discord. So its not impossible to have third party devs helping in this scenario.

    Here is my proposed second option:

    Since We know there is only a slight chance that the current devs would want the subscription model on paid assemblies, assuming every current dev wants tthe payout model, heres what I think can benefit both the user and current devs.

    • Assuming you made a new paid assembly, let say b.invoker for example, under the proposed model, you get the exact same payout model that you are used to, users buys your b.invoker and ensage team will give the profit to you. But here is the difference, when you as the main developer is inactive and has seemingly abandoned the assembly after let say 7-10 days of inactivity, the paid assembly will be given to the new development team that users pay for subscription. The new model would add a subscriptions for a fail safe program for paid assemblies.

    Now this new paid subscription is given to a development team, not necessarily current devs, unless they wish to be part of the program. But this most likely would go to a dev team that is willing to have a passive income even if its a low income, I know some dev that are more than willing to take a $500 salary just by updating assemblies.

    • Now here is the problem, are devs like yourself willing to provide the code to this new dev team? I know it didnt work as ensage was hoping for before, but if I was to decide ensage admin, I should have made a contract, that devs can only have a paid assembly in the store only when they have provided the code to be used incase everything went down. But as I mentioned this code that you so hardly worked would never be exposed unless you become inactive at a certain point. If incase it indeed happen that you left the project in ensage, it would be probably be easier enough for even a moderate to good dev, to update add new features to your abandoned assembly. But in any case you are always active, the new dev team would not change your paid assemblies and admin would never expose your code, only when you pass the activity time given by ensage admin.

    The current model we have was suppose to be like this, except they failed to follow on rules, devs created their own cores, they just left even the rules states that it would be given to others. But if we do have a dev team only dedicated to the fail safe program, I think this would benefit users and devs, because this new team are paid via subscriptions from the willing users.

    • Users paying for the new fail safe program:

    Under this program, users pay lets say $10 each, but are now guaranteed that when a developer leaves there would be a dedicated team that would handle all the updates and fixes because of the new paid sub.

    • Questions: What if I dont want to sub for a fail safe program for paid assemblies?

    If a user does not wish to pay for a fail safe program, the user can still use what he paid as long as its being updated by the core to make it work. But note that new features or improvements would not be included since the original dev has already abandoned the assembly. It will only be updated, once the original dev would somehow be active again.

    • Question: What is included in the new fail safe program for paid assemblies?

    Paid assemblies that is abandoned or broken with no activity from the original developer, will be updated by the new dev team. It will include improvements/updates/ fixes/ request etc.

    It also includes all the paid assemblies that is abandoned by other developers. Free assemblies can also be included but be minded that all users who subscribes with ensage can benefit from it too.

    • Final thoughts:

    As you can see, I only assume that there would be a few devs in our community who is willing to update for a passive payment from subscriptions. This is encourage-able to new devs since they would only fix what is broken, add new features or fixes given that they are provided with the original code from the main developer. This new team would not and not suppose to be aspiring to receive thousands of dollars but rather just a steady passive income even if its low. This in my opinion would good since they would be paid steadily as long as they do what they are paid for by subscribers, if no paid assemblies needs to be updated/fix/ then they would be receiving passive income even if they do nothing.

    As I said users only rely on you guys to update or add new features to the paid assemblies, yes its working but it could be better improve if main developer is always active, like yourself. If they they are not active or have left the assembly, users would naturally feel robbed, this is problem for new incoming users, who just recently paid, and just found out no one is adding new features, or even just taking request and replying to their inquiries about the paid assembly.

    I want to know your thoughts about this? and would you suggest this in the future?

    Thank you, this is a friendly thread and wish to ask your thoughts, so we can be further educated or given new insights. Thank you.

  • AdminAdmin Posts: 96

    @beminee and @nabl0rd have mentioned a few very good points, which is exactly why we cannot do what is proposed. We had all that in the past. It didn't work and required far more attention from us than now. We had a usage based system where developers with the most used assemblies would be paid best. While certain few developers made several thousands of dollars a month from the revenue sharing, it resulted in far less motivation for the developers to work on their assemblies than now. We constantly had to tell them to do stuff, otherwise there would be nothing done. There is no (near) perfect system, unfortunately.

  • anonymouseanonymouse Posts: 374

    @Admin said:
    @beminee and @nabl0rd have mentioned a few very good points, which is exactly why we cannot do what is proposed. We had all that in the past. It didn't work and required far more attention from us than now. We had a usage based system where developers with the most used assemblies would be paid best. While certain few developers made several thousands of dollars a month from the revenue sharing, it resulted in far less motivation for the developers to work on their assemblies than now. We constantly had to tell them to do stuff, otherwise there would be nothing done. There is no (near) perfect system, unfortunately.

    Hi @Admin thanks for replying, what about other devs that would want to help update the paid and free assemblies? Like even if ensage team would put up a sub for devs to update the broken/unupadated assemblies it would this make a lot of users happy. If you paid up a sub, but guarantees free/paid assemblies that are abandoned i think many would sub. If the current devs are not willing, why not look for others who are willing? Atleast its a passive income for them.

  • bemineebeminee Posts: 566

    @anonymouse said:

    @Admin said:
    @beminee and @nabl0rd have mentioned a few very good points, which is exactly why we cannot do what is proposed. We had all that in the past. It didn't work and required far more attention from us than now. We had a usage based system where developers with the most used assemblies would be paid best. While certain few developers made several thousands of dollars a month from the revenue sharing, it resulted in far less motivation for the developers to work on their assemblies than now. We constantly had to tell them to do stuff, otherwise there would be nothing done. There is no (near) perfect system, unfortunately.

    Hi @Admin thanks for replying, what about other devs that would want to help update the paid and free assemblies? Like even if ensage team would put up a sub for devs to update the broken/unupadated assemblies it would this make a lot of users happy. If you paid up a sub, but guarantees free/paid assemblies that are abandoned i think many would sub. If the current devs are not willing, why not look for others who are willing? Atleast its a passive income for them.

    Because there's no "other devs". When the paid assembly system was introduced, Admins were hoping more devs would like to join, because it made sense to assume that there were people who could code for ensage but either didn't bother so far or bothered but haven't released their assemblies as there was nothing in return. Only SirLimon joined and we all know how it ended up. I doubt that Ensage admins would like to introduce new "paid developers" anymore unless they really prove themselves to be trustworthy.

  • anonymouseanonymouse Posts: 374
    edited June 5

    @beminee said:

    @anonymouse said:

    @Admin said:
    @beminee and @nabl0rd have mentioned a few very good points, which is exactly why we cannot do what is proposed. We had all that in the past. It didn't work and required far more attention from us than now. We had a usage based system where developers with the most used assemblies would be paid best. While certain few developers made several thousands of dollars a month from the revenue sharing, it resulted in far less motivation for the developers to work on their assemblies than now. We constantly had to tell them to do stuff, otherwise there would be nothing done. There is no (near) perfect system, unfortunately.

    Hi @Admin thanks for replying, what about other devs that would want to help update the paid and free assemblies? Like even if ensage team would put up a sub for devs to update the broken/unupadated assemblies it would this make a lot of users happy. If you paid up a sub, but guarantees free/paid assemblies that are abandoned i think many would sub. If the current devs are not willing, why not look for others who are willing? Atleast its a passive income for them.

    Because there's no "other devs". When the paid assembly system was introduced, Admins were hoping more devs would like to join, because it made sense to assume that there were people who could code for ensage but either didn't bother so far or bothered but haven't released their assemblies as there was nothing in return. Only SirLimon joined and we all know how it ended up. I doubt that Ensage admins would like to introduce new "paid developers" anymore unless they really prove themselves to be trustworthy.

    So let say it was not up to new devs, but rather current ensage admin would take over but with a new paid sub for fail safe? Would you as the main dev, give out your code for them? Atleast if main dev agrees, they would have less conscience when they decide to leave since there is a new paid sub system for all fail safe assemblies. Users are happy since it would be taken over by admin with new paid sub, devs can get the money and leave with less conscience , and admin recieves new/additional passive income. You can have your pay, and if you decide to leave, admin takes over your paid asssmblies by updating your code. As i said i think its easier to just update or add new features if the code is there.

    So in effect the main purpose of the developer is creating assemblies, get the money and you can decide to leave after, but devs must agree that admin takes over the code. If devs wish to get more income then just be active, then wait more if someone buys, but if you decide to leave immediately developers can.

    Whats your opinion? Thank You.

    If you agree with such idea, problem now is the code and if admin is willing to update, its increased income so i guess why not right, i mean its their platform its more of their responsibility to update/fix.

  • bemineebeminee Posts: 566

    @anonymouse said:

    @beminee said:

    @anonymouse said:

    @Admin said:
    @beminee and @nabl0rd have mentioned a few very good points, which is exactly why we cannot do what is proposed. We had all that in the past. It didn't work and required far more attention from us than now. We had a usage based system where developers with the most used assemblies would be paid best. While certain few developers made several thousands of dollars a month from the revenue sharing, it resulted in far less motivation for the developers to work on their assemblies than now. We constantly had to tell them to do stuff, otherwise there would be nothing done. There is no (near) perfect system, unfortunately.

    Hi @Admin thanks for replying, what about other devs that would want to help update the paid and free assemblies? Like even if ensage team would put up a sub for devs to update the broken/unupadated assemblies it would this make a lot of users happy. If you paid up a sub, but guarantees free/paid assemblies that are abandoned i think many would sub. If the current devs are not willing, why not look for others who are willing? Atleast its a passive income for them.

    Because there's no "other devs". When the paid assembly system was introduced, Admins were hoping more devs would like to join, because it made sense to assume that there were people who could code for ensage but either didn't bother so far or bothered but haven't released their assemblies as there was nothing in return. Only SirLimon joined and we all know how it ended up. I doubt that Ensage admins would like to introduce new "paid developers" anymore unless they really prove themselves to be trustworthy.

    So let say it was not up to new devs, but rather current ensage admin would take over but with a new paid sub for fail safe? Would you as the main dev, give out your code for them? Atleast if main dev agrees, they would have less conscience when they decide to leave since there is a new paid sub system for all fail safe assemblies. Users are happy since it would be taken over by admin with new paid sub, devs can get the money and leave with less conscience , and admin recieves new/additional passive income. You can have your pay, and if you decide to leave, admin takes over your paid asssmblies by updating your code. As i said i think its easier to just update or add new features if the code is there.

    So in effect the main purpose of the developer is creating assemblies, get the money and you can decide to leave after, but devs must agree that admin takes over the code. If devs wish to get more income then just be active, then wait more if someone buys, but if you decide to leave immediately developers can.

    Whats your opinion? Thank You.

    If you agree with such idea, problem now is the code and if admin is willing to update, its increased income so i guess why not right, i mean its their platform its more of their responsibility to update/fix.

    If a dev decides to leave, code belongs to Admin as written in the paid assembly rules. So it's up to them what they want to do with it. But I know what they won't do with it and it is taking those assemblies over and updating them. There's a lot of reasons for it. 1) Most devs here don't comment their codes because they know their way around it and it requires time for someone else to just look at that code and figure out how to work on it. 2) They don't have time.

  • anonymouseanonymouse Posts: 374

    @beminee said:

    @anonymouse said:

    @beminee said:

    @anonymouse said:

    @Admin said:
    @beminee and @nabl0rd have mentioned a few very good points, which is exactly why we cannot do what is proposed. We had all that in the past. It didn't work and required far more attention from us than now. We had a usage based system where developers with the most used assemblies would be paid best. While certain few developers made several thousands of dollars a month from the revenue sharing, it resulted in far less motivation for the developers to work on their assemblies than now. We constantly had to tell them to do stuff, otherwise there would be nothing done. There is no (near) perfect system, unfortunately.

    Hi @Admin thanks for replying, what about other devs that would want to help update the paid and free assemblies? Like even if ensage team would put up a sub for devs to update the broken/unupadated assemblies it would this make a lot of users happy. If you paid up a sub, but guarantees free/paid assemblies that are abandoned i think many would sub. If the current devs are not willing, why not look for others who are willing? Atleast its a passive income for them.

    Because there's no "other devs". When the paid assembly system was introduced, Admins were hoping more devs would like to join, because it made sense to assume that there were people who could code for ensage but either didn't bother so far or bothered but haven't released their assemblies as there was nothing in return. Only SirLimon joined and we all know how it ended up. I doubt that Ensage admins would like to introduce new "paid developers" anymore unless they really prove themselves to be trustworthy.

    So let say it was not up to new devs, but rather current ensage admin would take over but with a new paid sub for fail safe? Would you as the main dev, give out your code for them? Atleast if main dev agrees, they would have less conscience when they decide to leave since there is a new paid sub system for all fail safe assemblies. Users are happy since it would be taken over by admin with new paid sub, devs can get the money and leave with less conscience , and admin recieves new/additional passive income. You can have your pay, and if you decide to leave, admin takes over your paid asssmblies by updating your code. As i said i think its easier to just update or add new features if the code is there.

    So in effect the main purpose of the developer is creating assemblies, get the money and you can decide to leave after, but devs must agree that admin takes over the code. If devs wish to get more income then just be active, then wait more if someone buys, but if you decide to leave immediately developers can.

    Whats your opinion? Thank You.

    If you agree with such idea, problem now is the code and if admin is willing to update, its increased income so i guess why not right, i mean its their platform its more of their responsibility to update/fix.

    If a dev decides to leave, code belongs to Admin as written in the paid assembly rules. So it's up to them what they want to do with it. But I know what they won't do with it and it is taking those assemblies over and updating them. There's a lot of reasons for it. 1) Most devs here don't comment their codes because they know their way around it and it requires time for someone else to just look at that code and figure out how to work on it. 2) They don't have time.

    I see, well thank you for replying. Our only hope now is that when the new paid sub for assemblies would be introduced, it would encourage admin more to look at the codes and study them. Maybe it would motivate them since after all its their platform, and business, plus now users pay for that purpose to have a fail safe for paid assemblies. Ensage thrives with users and assemblies by devs, so without users ensage will not survive. So i guess maybe they will think about it, but we dont know maybe they are losing interest in maintaining ensage.

Sign In or Register to comment.

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!