People from our community are not stupid, they’ll know what to do, leave this app and use a fork
1 Like
Definitely. Devs think we are but we are NOT.
This intrusive ideas can work in Play Market or other crappy markets where privacy is the worst enemy. In open source community it will not work. Users decided to be private, checked some (at least one) manuals how to do it instead of just clicking “download” on google resources.
I understand needs of funds, but I will never understand or accept integration with closed source and privacy intrusive third parties that specialise on advertising business.
1 Like
Frankly, I think you’re exaggerating a lot, these are just sponsorship links, nothing is compulsory, if it bothers you, don’t click, I won’t click, that’s all.
OM continues not to track users and to respect privacy.
7 Likes
adds an optional link to Kayak
community explodes
Sounds about like open source. I could see if tracking or telemetry was introduced to see a mass exodus, but a referral link is hardly anything. Communication is important, but I doubt the devs even expected this reaction. Missing the forest for the trees.
Also, they aren’t a non profit or anything, so no grants come their way. But developers aren’t necessarily the best marketers.
2 Likes
All this “drama” creates whole different “picture”…
So either:
- Fork an app
- Maintain and continue to develop that App
- Setup and host the backend infrastructure necessary to make the app useful
- Have no clear sustainable revenue model
Or just:
- Simply don’t click a referral link if you don’t want to click referral links…
One of these two options seems a lot easier and more rational & proportional than the other.
7 Likes
- Abandon forked app after a few weeks once you noticed how much work it is.
6 Likes
If you think the problem is limited to “Click/Don’t click on an affiliate link”, then I suggest you ask yourself what you’re doing here, because most people here understand that it goes far beyond the caricature you’re trying to give of our discussions.
In principle, this new implementation is a regression in terms of confidentiality, whether you like it or not, and leaves the door open to other dishonest ways of generating money, which is the case here as it has been recently with other applications like Simple Mobiles Tools, and you know what? People in our community have already reacted by creating a fork of SMT, so I have no doubt that it will end the same way with Organic Maps, especially given the way the developers despise and censor criticism of them.
Edit : No fork at the moment ? It’s okay, people will just stop using OM and look for alternatives
How are the links in OM a dishonest form of generating money? The community has been against the implementation, yes, but they’ve been clear what it is they’re adding and how it works. You might not like them, but these sponsored links aren’t dishonest.
I think the whole problem here is being greatly exaggerated. If OM goes against the community and adds more anti-features in the future, maybe this discussion can be revisited, but as it is now, I don’t think there’s any valid complaints you can make about the app itself when all you have to do is avoid clicking the sponsored links.
5 Likes
- Please don’t gatekeep (it is not constructive, nor fair)
- Please don’t conflate your opinion (shared by a few others in this thread) with what “most people here understand”
it goes far beyond the caricature you’re trying to give
In what specific ways? (without relying on an argument based on “they might do bad things in the future”)
If I’ve misstated anything I’m open to being corrected, but I don’t believe that I have.
7 Likes
In is an ad. To one commercial booking provider. That tracks users and doesn’t have any open source code. Period.
Before all this crap they were asked in more polite way. Just check original PR. Even one of devs were against this.
If so it is the most simple way - patch apk or just downgrade. But we are about developers behaviour, their censorship and arguments with privacy community (especially OM argued with F-Droid developers not to put AF)
That’s it. We are hating not the link (it is bad, no doubt) as much as we hate developers behaviour to their community.
That just proves that they don’t care about privacy community and we should not surprise if they will make this app closed source soon (or not soon)
Definitely. Even FTC counts it as ad.
I agree with him. MOST people will understand
Welcome to the forum, it looks like you joined today, spent a total of 15 minutes reading here (at the time of writing), I’d suggest it is a little too early for you to feel confident speaking on behalf of the majority of the forum members… particularly considering that at least half of the people commenting in this thread are expressing different points of view than yours or the person you are agreeing with.
You can make your case without making claims to speak for the majority. Being in the minority or majority doesn’t make your point of view any more or less valid. But falsely claiming to speak for the majority can undermine the credibility of what you say.
This is forum for constructive technical discussion and discourse. Differences of opinion are natural and common, but debate should be respectful and centered on technical, factual, and ethical/philosophical factors.
3 Likes
It seems that everything that needed to be said has been said and we’ve now descended to quarrelling about which side is more right than the other.
Thread closed, sadly.
2 Likes