Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

I think Kickstarter would be very well served by creating higher expectations in terms of project updates.

Set a standard. Say once a month for a minimum. If you don't have something to say to your backers once a month I have to wonder if you are placing the proper priority on the project.

If projects don't meet that standard, turn their page amber or something similar. A big visual sign that the project is not meeting the standard. If it goes 3 months with no update turn it red. Make it stand out. Make people feel some pressure to communicate.

In the end, it's best for Kickstarter to push projects to better relationships with the backers.



Perhaps Kickstarter needs a project liaison for projects over a certain dollar threshold; people who ask "How is it going? What are you doing?". Kiva does this for the people I lend money to (even though I lend without the expectation of the money ever coming back, I want to know how the borrow is doing regardless of the outcome).

This can be built into the cost of the Kickstarter project, and for projects $100K and above, believe it to be completely reasonable.


Kickstarter doesn't want this because it can bring possible liability. They want as little to do as possible with the actual projects success or failure while still seeming to be wanting them to win :)


This isn't copyright law, and turning their head isn't going to remove liability (a la Craigslist sex workers debacle). Good luck arguing financial safe harbor provisions ("we're just a marketplace! It's not our place to regulate!").


Craigslist was never actually found liable that i remember, they settled.

But yes, they are basically trying to present it as a marketplace they have no control over, to avoid liability and getting themselves regulated by the SEC/others.

Whether this is going to be effective, I actually tend to agree with you and think it won't, but it's almost certainly why they are doing it.


Totally agree. They state multiple times in the Accountability section of their FAQ that they understand that there are roadblocks and things that come up. Also that if the project can't be completed that it's in the owner's best interest to detail how the money was spent.


I think Kickstarter should require projects to "level up", proving themselves with smaller milestones with smaller funding levels. For example, a project might need to fund a $10K project before a $100K or $500K project.


That wouldn't work well for manufacturing projects where the prototype is done and they need a certain threshold amount to start building.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: