As a former Flattr developer my impression is that Flattr's lack of focus on hard numbers is due to one of its core values when it was founded - that all flattrs are equal and should be treated as such - that a flattr doesn't just represent the number of euros given but more so represents the act of giving in itself and that that's what important about it and that the actual size of the donation is secondary as that is dependent on so many factors like the givers personal economical status and such.
As long as people feel comfortable with what they are giving away and recievers feel comfortable with what they are recieving then how much each individual is giving is pretty irrelevant.
Flattr would never reveal any numbers about their users' economy as Flattr very much values, respects and sees the importance in their users' privacy. It's of course always lovely to see users share stories about how they are using Flattr in different ways, but the telling of such stories should be up to the users – Flattr should stay out of that business and instead focus solely on just making such stories possible.
Regarding fees, I think the Pinboard blog makes a great case for why they should exist: http://blog.pinboard.in/2011/12/don_t_be_a_free_user/ Apart from that I also think that micropayment services are a bit like what Steve Jobs described Dropbox as: "a feature, not a product" Features are embedded into products and are not something you pay for separately. Flattr isn't the goal – it's the means to realize the goals – it's the goals, the "products", that people want and it's they that will be flattred and it's they that should be flattred.
As long as people feel comfortable with what they are giving away and recievers feel comfortable with what they are recieving then how much each individual is giving is pretty irrelevant.
Flattr would never reveal any numbers about their users' economy as Flattr very much values, respects and sees the importance in their users' privacy. It's of course always lovely to see users share stories about how they are using Flattr in different ways, but the telling of such stories should be up to the users – Flattr should stay out of that business and instead focus solely on just making such stories possible.
Regarding fees, I think the Pinboard blog makes a great case for why they should exist: http://blog.pinboard.in/2011/12/don_t_be_a_free_user/ Apart from that I also think that micropayment services are a bit like what Steve Jobs described Dropbox as: "a feature, not a product" Features are embedded into products and are not something you pay for separately. Flattr isn't the goal – it's the means to realize the goals – it's the goals, the "products", that people want and it's they that will be flattred and it's they that should be flattred.