What about crowdfunding sponsor this feature.
There are many bubble user that want X feature but can sponsor it on there own what if you could crowdfund X feature from muiltiple users speeding up feature that users really want.
This is a great idea. Iām up for crowd-sponsoring new Bubble features. The crowdfunding app weād use to crowdfund new Bubble features could be built withā¦wait for itā¦Bubble. How meta is that?
The Bubble founders would have to be on board of course.
3 Likes
Shouldn`t be too hard building a feature where stripe can pre-auth for a certain amount. So that people could commit to a certain amount to build up towards the goal. Pay what you want kind-of. And when goal is reached the cards are charged.
What about letting the community creating a public app for this and then let bubble guys eventually pulling it in from the public codebase when we have reached something well functioning. Would be cool to see the community crowd-build something for crowd-funding new features.
5 Likes
If ācrowdbuildingā isnāt wasnāt a thing ā¦ it is now 
Happy to help.
A slight concern over the feature crowdfund model for features ā¦ where one person is requesting the feature, they should be able to articulate their requirements (or maybe iterate until it is complete).
How do you define this upfront with multiple, paying, stakeholders ? Do you need to define it before you get a price ?
We did experiment with this idea in the past, and, in fact, I think 3 features were crowdfunded by a few users last year. One issue we did hit in the past is indeed that people didnāt exactly need the same thing, and having more than on interlocutor was sometime a challenge.
Having said that, this is something Iāve always been very interested in doing, and Iāve been the one pushing for it last year What @gurun is suggesting, to us, is probably the best way to (re)experiment on this. Why donāt we see what the community does with this idea (weāll let to you guys decide whether it should be done through an app - indeed, it can be built on Bubble 
- or if it should be done through this forum, either way works.
If at any point you have some questions about how that would work, weāre here (this thread in particular is a good place for this).
3 Likes
I think for it to be successful we need to be able to see the total amount needed for the project to get started, how much has been donated towards the goal (subsequently how much still needs to be donated) and perhaps a social element so people can campaign and discuss why something should be funded (multiple case uses might not always be clear).
I personally feel that the closer to the goal the funding gets, the faster it gets funded. Seeing that you are so close to getting a much needed function or element makes people that might not have otherwise donated, contribute.
I think the total needed was provided in the previous attempt but not the other features.
I for one am very supportive of the crowdfunding idea.
1 Like
this is truly on the money
for a couple of years iāve been sitting on an idea for a membership-based payments service called āpenny clubā (working title). iāve long-thought the concept might be a great fit for bubble and, more broadly, any creative organisation whose mission could be powered by the interests of its community - or āmembersā, roughly speaking. some aspects may not mesh perfectly right now, but iāll throw the key ideas into the mix for an open discussion as i think this could be a timely opportunity for this community to lay the foundation for something potentially powerful. and doing so here would showcase the might of bubble to the world which ultimately serves the long-term interests of everyone building their dreams here.
- orgs would sign up to the service and choose between open/closed/restricted membership
- bubble would ideally be restricted i.e. open to public to view/follow activity, but only āmembersā could actively contribute
- bubble membership would be controlled by bubble team as āadminsā e.g. anyone on a paid plan could join (manually or automatically via a workflow API) as an added benefit of their paid plan. alternatively bubble admins can recommend this as an opt-in service, but i see a smooth cross-selling opportunity for bubble
- members can submit or subscribe to feature requests at any time
- submitting and subscribing are both a commitment to pay a minimum threshold if a request is scheduled (preset by org admins at a standard nominal value e.g. $5-$50). the idea here is to require that people put money behind their voices while encouraging participation, not make it prohibitive such that only money talks
- org admins, like other members, can also submit requests for the community to back
- every submitted request goes into a (visible) backlog where members can subscribe
- when a request in the backlog reaches the minimum total threshold of subscriptions (=backing), it goes into the āfeaturedā list
- once a request hits the featured list, admin team can then promptly review, articulate the request and estimate cost (onus on admins to perfect this art based on their experience)
- admins can also turn down requests that are not aligned with the org vision, though ideally these should have been sniffed out during discussions in the backlog
- once a price is set on a request, the cost is split equally among subscribed members. if the cost per subscriber is below the preset nominal value, then the request is immediately signed off into the āworklogā. if subscriber cost is greater than nominal value, then the request is highlighted in the feature list as still open for subscription (for a time, ideally 1 month given crowdfunding psychology, until it goes back into the backlog)
- requests that donāt get enough backing within the deadline are sent back to the backlog until they pick up enough momentum
some advanced features:
- experience can be factored into the weighting of each subscription (upvote), so that more knowledgeable members can tip the balance when prioritising the backlog. can be achieved via loyalty scheme
- subscriptions: some requests can be recurring, and therefore have recurring subscriptions e.g. ongoing bug fixes or operations. essentially this allows for anything to be seen as a feature request and accounted for in a standard way
- requests can be merged by admins
- admins can invite experienced members or outside experts to help in any aspect of this process in order to increase āvelocityā
- orgs (i.e. brands) can be invited to sponsor requests, saving members money (as long as they donāt usurp the creative power of members)
- the biggest feature/opp among all: ability for members who fund a request to be rewarded in some way for their early āinvestmentā into something that is used by those who use it later. ideally the mechanics on this should work like app marketplaces where features are the apps, or as some equity investment (without the legal constraints). this is a potentially frictious issue if backers arenāt aligned on mission, but i also see an opportunity to spin the entire idea around this basic starting point as the ākiller featureā
the added bonus in all this is that the request process would be open for anyone to follow with limited admin overhead. even better, this would allow creative participation and leave a valuable trail of insightful nuggets long after the features have been built (or culled).
naturally it would be great to have bubble as a test case but the service itself should be the first to eat its own dog food.
sorry for the long brain-dump. feel free to throw any thoughts/questions/criticisms/etc as a first test of validation for this community. and, of course, iām all ears to any subscribers
wahome
2 Likes
Jive has a concept called āIdeasā in their forum system. A couple of software companies I know use it to allow users to submit ideas, and after it reaches a certain threshold it goes to the Product team to review for inclusion into the software. If something like this is available in the bubble forum, or somewhere else, this could help to prioritize ideas.
See this link for details. https://community.jivesoftware.com/videos/1412
Microsoft and several other s/w companies seem to use UserVoice, but it has an issue in that you have N number of votes and once you use them you canāt add new feedback items (apart from not being able to vote others). This is cause it tries to give 1 vote to the new item automatically. Only workaround is to always keep 1 vote left (remove it from some other item to which you had given 1 or more votes) and after you post a new feedback item to immediately remove your automatically placed vote (so that it has 0 votes and you hope somebody else like and vote it). Not sure how many people find that workaround, so lots of feedback gets lost and never posted