1 comments
Experts Exchange NEVER paid cash for answers. People answered questions to earn t-shirts or free memberships but never money.
It's an idea that has been discussed for as long as I've been involved with EE and prior but never implemented. It's too complicated given taxes and the international user base to be at all feasible.
It's an idea that has been discussed for as long as I've been involved with EE and prior but never implemented. It's too complicated given taxes and the international user base to be at all feasible.
I said that EE paid people for answers, I never mentioned cash. SO has only every used earned reputation (as a form of gamification) to entice users to answer questions.
SO has swag for top rep earners so it's a distinction without a difference. The original article talked about getting paid for answering and I thought you were reacting to that with your post.
The point of my argument is that SO was built to create a better source of reliable information 1st and make money 2nd, while it always appeared (at least to me) that EE was built to make money 1st and it's usefulness always seemed like a secondary priority (again this is just my opinion).
Once VC money gets involved there has to be a path to monetization somewhere. I don't want to argue the virtue level of the founders because there's no point in it. EE started off as a community and still is a community. The paywall is what it is because EE will not take any more VC money.
The fact of the matter is that at any time, any site that we know and love can change or go away forever. Jeff and Joel have built something that is great. They have put everything in place to try and prevent their gift from being twisted into evil. These preventative measures are the largest difference between EE and SO, and they should be applauded for their efforts and contributions not maliciously attacked by some guy who is paranoid about the actions of a community that he plainly states he is not a contributing member of.