[jijosunny]

>Also, are there any geographic restrictions? Can creators outside the US use your service (in countries which are NOT on the US OFAC sanction list)?

Yes, Buy Me A Coffee is available to creators in almost all countries. Here is a breakdown of all accepted countries: https://help.buymeacoffee.com/en/articles/3314992-countries-...

>How do you define "adult" content? Does this include creators working on LGBTQIA activism? Does this include creators who create instructional content while showing non-nipple cleavage? Does this include creators involved in sex-ed/harm reduction campaigns?

None of these are against the terms AFAIK. We unpublish creators who promote explicit pornography or nudity. Broadly speaking, we abide by the content restrictions of the vendors and payment processors we work with. More on that can be found here: https://stripe.com/restricted-businesses

[danShumway]

> None of these are against the terms AFAIK

How can this be AFAIK? Aren't you one of the founders? If you don't know what your site allows, who does?

At the end of the day, someone has to make the final decision over whether to ban an LGBTQ+ activist. Who is the person who will make that decision on BMaC?

I get that you're beholden to your vendors, and to a certain extent there's nothing you can do about that. But I also assume you're not planning to just forward literally every content decision you have to make to Stripe's legal team for their input. So if a vulnerable person starts using your service, they need a better guarantee than "dunno, we'll have to flip a coin and see." You're still one of the people who are going to be enforcing this, you're still one of the people who have the power to decide how this will work.

[jijosunny]

To be clear, there are no circumstances under which we'll unpublish an LGBTQ creator. Here's a fantastic writer that I've been following for years who recently joined Buy Me A Coffee - https://www.buymeacoffee.com/pSzjB85

Our community manager deals with account reviews, and she is more knowledgeable to answer the initial question. I shouldn't have said 'AFAIK' either way, my apologies.

[wizzwizz4]

> there are no circumstances under which we'll unpublish an LGBTQ creator.

Does that grant them immunity from rules violations, then? I think you said the wrong thing here; what did you intend to say?

[aryamaan]

IMO the intent is to say that they wouldn't unpublish anyone just because they create content around LGBTQ. However, if they violate any other rules, then they will go through the same consequences as a not-LGBTQ content creater would go through.

[jijosunny]

You're right. Thank you.

[cwkoss]

Thanks for the response.

I'd strongly recommend trying to clarify "chemicals" and "plants and seeds" as those are incredibly broad categories that encompass many use cases that stripe does not find objectionable as per the restricted-businesses list you linked. "Pharmacologically active, explosive or poisonous chemicals, plants, or seeds" may be suitably restrictive for your needs.

The "weapons" restriction would also be great to get some clarity on: a large proportion of makers do projects related to cutting tools, replica weapons for cosplay, etc. I think showing how they make blades/saws (that can be used as weapons, but often intended as tools or decoration) or replicas or sporting equipment are not necessarily something that Stripe would find objectionable.

I suspect that stripe does not restrict content related to the discussion of these items, but rather the use of these funds towards the purchase of these items. "build journals" may be permissible, but perhaps more of a grey area. I think their chief concern is the sale of these items. Ex. showing how you built an archery bow and tested it on a sport target seems quite distinct from selling the bow itself. Explaining and demonstrating the chemistry of exothermic reactions is very different than selling firecrackers.

Some clarity would make me more interested in using your service, but I currently am not inclined to sign up as a contributor or recommend your platform as it seems you could somewhat-arbitrarily decide to exclude ~90% of my favorite creators without warning after they have cultivated contributors on your platform.

Lack of clarity can be really disruptive for creators: as getting kicked off of a platform and disrupting an income stream they've come to rely on can be very disheartening - and I've seen this happen to a half-dozen creators on various platforms. Vague terms can lead to many makers to exist in a grey area with the threat of removal at any time, which I think is somewhat harmful.

[jijosunny]

Noted. We're working on a Community Guidelines page, and I'll make it a point to address these concerns. Thanks for taking the time to share this!

[gatherhunterer]

If I provide a service that uses Buy Me a Coffee but outside of that I make a personal donation to cannabis legalization, you reserve the right to restrict my usage of Buy Me a Coffee? In that case I would be a creator that supports cannabis. The phrasing suggests that these terms are dependent upon the creator and not the specifically associated content.

[131012]

What is wrong with plants?

[magic_beans]

Natural drugs, maybe? Seems bizarre.