mou makes its funding goal for a 1.0 release

[bowerbird]

mou, as you may know, is a markdown editor.

with its second $5,000 company sponsorship,
mou has reached it's $20,000 indigogo goal...

albeit, the effort engendered some resistance:
>   
http://weblog.masukomi.org/2014/10/09/why-i-wont-be-backing-mous-crowdfunding-campaign

the big thorn is that, because mou's developer
has lost interest in the project, trying to sell it,
a mou user stepped up to code an equivalent.

that led the mou developer to resume his effort,
issuing proclamations about "the crappy clones"
in his campaign to raise $20,000 to release 1.0.
(in all the time it's been out, mou's been "beta";
the goal to open-source the code is $100,000.)

i take no side in this dog-fight.

i have no argument with developers getting paid.

and i am not religious on the open-source sauce.

i even think open-source/proprietary tension can
-- in some cases -- create benefits for both sides.

i also believe in supporting developers who have
built a tool that i use constantly, like my text-editor.

i've paid the mere $15 asked by the tex-edit guy
several times, because i appreciate it that much.
i just paid it again, because i appreciate the app.
>   http://www.tex-edit.com

i'm curious, however, if anyone cares to voice any
opinion about how such tension should shake out.

because it's certainly possible to release code that
lets people have a light-markup editing environment.
i'm about to do that, on the way to doing other stuff,
just because it is nearly an inevitable consequence.

i'm sure you've all realized that there are a ton of
free web-based markdown editors out there today.

it's gonna be harder and harder, it seems to me, for
any app developers to "add value" to what's coming,
in a sufficient way so many users will end up paying.

but maybe i'm wrong?

-bowerbird