Every year, multiple times a year, they convince ppl to fork out thousands of dollars and….literally nothing changes. There’s no doubt in my mind they’re pocketing most of this money lol
Yep
That’s what’s so wild to me. They’ve made exactly 0 changes other than adding the ‘Exclude’ tags and that def doesn’t take 130k.
You know if any of you actually bothered to click the link it’ll take you to their budget update and break down exactly what the spend the money on, over 70% of which is spent on server expenses, monitoring tools and system licences.
They also spent a good amount of the rest of the 30% budget on significant server overhaul costs.
AO3 is literally a service you get for free and the audacity you’d have to not bother reading the very open budget plan they have, but to then bitch and whine about people donating to keep the site running is wild.
I think the problem is that people can’t accept that a bad movie can be enjoyable. I like and enjoy plenty of movies that are bad on a technical (screenwriting, directing, acting/casting, ect), but it doesn’t make them good movies.
This post gets something right, movie reviewers are looking for different things (technical quality, innovation, artistry) than movie goers (just a good way to spend a few hours having fun), and both can be right a movie can be well made and unenjoyable another can be poorly made and incredibly enjoyable.
well i guess this is it 