[jahewson]

Introducing a token payment such as this undermines the altruism of open source contribution. When people are motivated by altruism they don't want money.

e.g. I would help my neighbor move some furniture for free, but I wouldn't do it if he offered to pay me $5.

[GordonS]

I think the parent's point is that for a lot of people, especially those outside of SV, $20/h is more than a token payment.

Sure, it's not going to make a westerner rich, but if we think to happiness instead of just money - it could well enable someone to make a living doing something that makes them happy.

And of course there are several countries in which $20/h is a great wage.

The OSS vs money problem is a hard one to crack, and it's entirely possible that there isn't a solution that suits everyone; there are the originators, currently active maintainers, occasional contributers and end users to keep happy - and each group has their own priorities and goals.

And if that wasn't enough, each project is different. Some are more or less zero-touch, "completed software", while others are under heavy development; some wish to follow copy-left, some wish to follow copy-right; some view their work as merely a hobby, some view it as their job, and some view it as purely altruistic. There are even those who are diametrically opposed to receiving any payment for their OSS work.

There simply isn't a one size fits all solution, so let's not be too negative when ideas are put forward.

[nickpsecurity]

"I think the parent's point is that for a lot of people, especially those outside of SV, $20/h is more than a token payment."

In the Tri-State Area (AK/TN/MS), many people will say $20/hr is a great wage. Companies down here try to pay people minimum wage as much as possible. As close to it as possible anyway. We also have a low-enough cost of living that the ripoff isn't as obvious for skilled labor. They're ahead of most people they encounter even at $15/hr. Especially if it's steady work with benefits.

"but if we think to happiness instead of just money - it could well enable someone to make a living doing something that makes them happy."

Another great point. Some businesses even optimize for this.

[yeahitslikethat]

I think the point is that open soource developers should either do it for love or as a job that pays the bills.

If $20/hr pays the bills that's a good wage where it does. Arguably open source is MORE valuable so to suggest it earn it's creators less than other types of code is contrary to the vision of the open source movement.

Everyone has to eat and pay the bills.

[leapis]

I would help my neighbor move some furniture for free, and I'd still do it if he offered to pay me $5. I wouldn't accept the money (because it's socially unacceptable to do so), but his offer wouldn't get in the way of me helping him. If he offered me a drink after, I wouldn't say no. It's understood that this offer is in direct response to me helping him, but I'm still motivated out of altruism. I'm simply receiving a greater reward for my altruism, and this time it's socially acceptable to take this.

The time of the people eligible for this program is worth more than $20/hr. This amount of money is never going to be a primary source of motivation for them. As the article said, "A side effect of building a company culture around OSS is that the kind of people who gravitate to work at Formidable are passionate about their open source work, and won’t stop contributing when they clock out at 5 pm." I did a bit of volunteer work in high school as part of a program, and upon graduation the program granted everyone a small, $250 "scholarship". I spent ~10 hours per week, for a year, as part of this program, thus making my "wage", if you will, about $2/hr. I can promise you, nobody participated in that program for the "scholarship". It showed that our time was appreciated, but wasn't nearly enough to incentivize the program to anyone who wasn't going to do it anyways.

I see nothing wrong with a token payment like this. It makes contributing to open source a more attractive option, but still only a viable option to those who were already motivated to contribute out of altruism. Obviously 20/hr isn't a token payment for a lot of us, but the concept itself of a token payment isn't something that necessarily invalidates altruistic intentions, in my view. I'll contribute to open source projects irregardless of whether or not they have a Bountysource, but I'll still accept a reward if it's offered. The purpose of this program is to reward people who are already motivated to contribute to open source, which in turn signals to its employees that Formidable appreciates open source contributions.

[yeahitslikethat]

It's about recognition of value. If I earn $150/hr to write software and you suggest paying me $20/hr it means you don't properly value my time.

A thank you and genuine appreciation is better.

[rusticpenn]

Not always. I might prefer working on something I love for $20/hr instead of working unders omeone for $50/hr

[yeahitslikethat]

You could and generally should.

[stone-monkey]

I think the indirectness of the payment makes it acceptable somewhat. In your example, I wouldn't take the 5 dollar job either. But the difference there is in the directness of the relationship - the person receiving the benefit isn't the one paying you. It'd be more akin to your boss seeing you help your neighbor somehow and giving you twenty bucks in recognition of your deed after the fact.