No matter what they did, you'd have a new excuse for why you won't pay.

Ah, the old ad hominem attack. How refreshing.

But anyway, no, I wouldn't keep finding reasons. I donate to them every year already. Somebody asked if I would be willing to pay and my answer was "yes, but".

It would need to be improved because certain aspects of it suck right now, not only the error this post is about. They only need go as far as their forums and github repos to see the community feedback.

▲

carlosjobim an hour ago | parent | next [-]

If you're donating, then you are evidently willing to pay without any "buts". So aren't you arguing against your own actions?

	▲	msephton an hour ago \| parent [-]
		Not at all. I donate to Internet Archive, but we're talking here about paying for unobstructed access to but one part of their service: Wayback Machine. Two different things.

▲

jakderrida 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Is it really an ad hom if he doesn't know the hom?

Their reply is 100% based on the content of your post.

	▲	Dylan16807 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		If you make up a person to insult then yeah it's still ad hominem.