First came Patreon ... then I added GitHub Sponsors. Neither has _really_ done that much for me.

Instead I set up my own donation page on my own site:

If you benefit from or enjoy my work, please consider a small monthly contribution.

· · Web · 1 · 2 · 2

@ericmann I have done a similar thing on my website, though it's less of "direct donation" and more like a "you can use these platforms".
Still looking in a "direct donation" thing but it's difficult given the "rules" on my website (one of which is that is shall not use any external scripts form origins that I do not maintain)

@finlaydag33k Yeah, that's a tough one. Given that rule, this is likely the right approach. I generally trust the team at Stripe and will load their stuff. PayPal is a stop-gap as enough folks have funds there and want to use it directly.

But I'll be polishing things further as I continue to evolve the site (primary reason I'm asking for contributions to begin with).

@ericmann Yea, it's the reason why I also have that page.
Because my site is a lot of hand-work by myself (though using some stuff like BS4, jQuery and CakePHP ofc).
but like the design, the CMS, a lot of the features are all written by myself.

@finlaydag33k Curious what drives the no-external-scripts rule for you, tho.

@ericmann privacy really.
Like I could use CDNs n stuff but that means that people visiting *my* website would *have* to download the external scripts from the CDN and that means they get the info on my visitors (they probably won't be able to do too much with it, but you should understand my principle).

An additional benefit of it is that I don't rely on those CDNs, so if a CDN goes down, my website won't be affected (hoozay!)

@finlaydag33k Oh, I totally get that. Just pushed a site _off_ a CDN because the parties running it elected to inject some popups in the script loading on my site. Impacted non-technical users on the front-end and everything.

Using CloudFront as my own CDN now so I fully control the content that's being loaded.

@ericmann yea, though cloudfront still means running it on servers I don't control :\
That's kinda the point, I want to not have to rely on a 3rd party for anything so that I can keep 100% control of what is being loaded and what is and isn't being stored from the user.
It's why I still don't have ads either, because I still am looking into a system for this.

@finlaydag33k CloudFront is just an Amazon wrapper around the source you identify. Drop the scripts in an S3 bucket, CF acts as your CDN to save cost on direct reads. Or put CF in front of a server you control.

It's effectively a hosted Varnish cache, but you still control what it serves and where it gets the content from.

@ericmann but does that mean the user connects to CloudFront (which then connects to my origin) like CloudFlare? If so, it's sadly against my rules D:

@finlaydag33k CloudFront is just the name of the product in AWS. Connecting to CloudFront is the same as connecitng to any other AWS service (EC2, API Gateway, S3, etc). You have full control over what's logged (if anything) and how content/traffic flows between CloudFront and the origin it caches.

@ericmann Ah.
Hm... might look into it for different projects though.
Cus call me a conspiracy pleb but I don't feel comfortable routing the stuff through amazon :p

@finlaydag33k Fair enough. Given that my servers are on Amazon to begin with it's a lower bar for me.

@ericmann yea, I physically own my servers and have it all running at home so that's a difference as well.

Sign in to participate in the conversation

The social network of the future: No ads, no corporate surveillance, ethical design, and decentralization! Own your data with Mastodon!