I've often dreamed of a system where normal users, give money as a promotion for a certain issue to be fixed or even created, if the user wants feature X then he should be able to give an incentive towards that feature to be added into the software that they use, developers do bounties instead, the user doesn't have to give much only a dollar, but if many users want feature X, then the money/donations pool creating higher incentives until the task itself matches the level of work to be performed to achieve it until merged.

The project managers also get a cut of all merges, testers also must approve of the merge and that feature X is the one they want. So the project manager gets to work and improve/reject features, the user gets control over the features of the project they want and developers get to pick specific features they would like to work on (sort of). everybody gets what they want (sort of). All via attaching $ to the issues of the software, not the people.

▲

1-more an hour ago | parent | next [-]

All we need to do is create Kalshi contracts! Users bet that a fix won't be created for Issue 123 by date XYZ, developers take the other side of the contract and then do the best kind of insider trading: changing the facts on the ground. We did it!

	▲	munk-a 2 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		And a few weeks into that arbitrage traders will catch wind and start betting on the more likely bug closures and then the devs that fix the bug will end up owing money!

▲

carlosjobim 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Those normal users are better off instead purchasing software. Then they will be listened to by developers if they report a bug or suggest a feature. Because they represent an incredibly valuable user segment: paying customers.

▲

nmz an hour ago | parent [-]

One of the most used paid and proprietary software is windows, and its users do not matter at all to how it implements its features.

▲

chowells an hour ago | parent | next [-]

Users matter a ton to windows. Specifically, the users with a hundred thousand or more licenses. Their unhappiness threatens Windows' profits in a meaningful way. Why do you think all the new secure boot and TPM features were added to Windows 11? All that work wasn't free to implement. But big businesses really want that degree of secure fleet management, and they're the customers who matter.

So going back to the GP - pay for software where you're in the largest organized user class. That's how you get power. Paying alone doesn't suffice.

	▲	munk-a a minute ago \| parent \| next [-]
		I genuinely doubt the users with a hundred thousand or more licenses asked for Copilot 365 Suite.
	▲	Rooster61 20 minutes ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		I think it's clear the source comment was referencing end users. It's patently obvious at this point that a large number of people who directly use Windows are frustrated with it, and perceive it to be degrading rather than improving over time.

▲

llbbdd an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

Most users of Windows get it for somewhere between free and $150, the fact that there is still a home edition of Windows is practically a loss leader to keep the business side ingrained. Enterprise licensees are the ones with the money and Microsoft will dedicate full-time engineers to their features if they can afford it.