Revise new HUGO website before deployment

Continuing a necessary dialogue/thread elaborated on by @Nick_M in another post…

Last we checked, it seemed there was consensus on these suggested corrections:

@Sam_Martyn and @LLK are also plugging away on some copy improvements and clarifications regarding S2O (EVERYONE SHOULD READ THIS):

Can we please get any suggested changes that have already been approved plugged in or made for the time being somehow (ASAP) and then shift our focus to figuring out the donation/support page? Is this something we’re expecting @jackhajb to do, or are there other devs who can or should manage this right now? How complicated would it be? I seriously think we need to go live with what we have ASAP, and worry about any further updates as we go.

And if we’re just doing the link out to Open Collective for this donation page, then lets finalize necessary copy for that page as well (@Sam_Martyn, @Hakanto, @brndnkng?). I’ve left my comments and suggestions on a lot of that via that Google doc (EDIT: Catching up on missed thread around finalization here, @Sam_Martyn; my apologies).

We really need some initiative right now. We gotta get this new site live ASAP so we can figure out / move onto other stuff as far as even just getting more support is concerned.

To everyone I’ve tagged and beyond:

In my opinion, now is the time to let go of this “not my department” mentality and take a more holistic approach to servicing this project, granted in a way that doesn’t impede on work others are already doing.

Reach out. Respond to emails. Invite people in. Facilitate dialogues beyond the formal meetings being held right now. Go scouting for folks we need via Resonate socials or your networks. We need more OUTWARD-FACING support and initiative at this juncture (as @LLK said). If we sit here obsessing over particulars that might not matter in a month or two because we didn’t give users and those looking to support this the appropriate channels and tools to do so, then we’re doing ourselves a major disservice in my view.

I’m seconding sentiments that were expressed on our call.

As far as I’m concerned, what we’re trying to do is get more resources and fundraise. @Nick_M shares this assessment. An obstacle to this is the fact that we don’t have an updated website (with clearer fundraising goals set in USD, not just Euros), and we also don’t have a mobile app in stores. Aside from the obvious technical and processing issues, this has been one of the main obstacles for a lot of people (mainly artists) for years now, in my view, and I’ve said it a million times at this point, as many go, “No app? They’re not ready and don’t have their priorities in order; not worth my time.” It’s not cool, but it’s reality.

This is why updating and pushing the new (main) site right now is crucial, in addition to starting the discussion around how we get iOS/Android apps made for stores (and please, let’s not limit that discussion with our own assumptions about how this needs to go, but instead gauge what any volunteers are saying is possible first).

For me to even engage around the MEDIA projects I’ve discussed that include big artists who support this platform, I need these things handled. We are shooting ourselves in the foot by… dragging our feet on these relatively simple things. If I need to scout for more dev volunteers, just let me know, and I’ll do that. But I expect that same initiative from others. Especially if they’re being paid to do labor for Resonate (I am not and never have been).

1 Like I understand your frustration

But I’m sure you aren’t suggesting that developers - volunteers and our only current paid developer - have been dragging their feet.

We have made huge steps forward on both the website, the translations and the pipeline - @auggod and @timothee can share the link to the test version so you can see it.

The ID service and user api are fundamental to moving forward and a huge amount has been done. These are prerequisites of an app in the stores, so we did them first and made rapid progress when we added (very cheaply) the funded, pro dev help from @angus and @merefield to move things forward faster than a single paid developer could ever reasonably handle. Remember that @auggod has all maintenance, infrastructure and security tasks on his hands as well. @auggod has less time to spend with us now, so it’s really important that others step up.

At the last dev call I attended, @angus proposed that we put the mobile app development in as the next epic after website / player / id server and payments rather than uploading. That depends on finding mobile app devs who can familiarise with the platform and are willing to step up for free until we can unlock some of that additional funding - it’s a chicken and egg problem again. Great to hear @khadzhimurat is OK with that? - it’s s huge commitment - maybe if funds come forward again we could afford something… again, it’s the dev lead who can best look at this and decide.

On outreach, please be considerate of the burden on the dev lead - he needs a bit of space to get briefed and organised before being swamped with volunteers wanting briefing and direction. It’s really hard to do that while focusing on the core of the work. It’s core volunteers who can put a lot of hours in and stick around that we need. You are right that we’ll only find these treasured people by outreach. Our Github has improved hugely, so the folks we need will show up.

On pay, for those who make the personal and financial sacrifice to help build this thing, I think it’s reasonable to give some reward. There’s a balance between funding vital work to build (dev work) and vital work to run - keep the service afloat (basic ops). Personally I think we should have spent more on development to get dev work done and structured professionally, with at least 2 full time developers working on epics (and steering support volunteers). With the structure that creates in github, and clear product ownership in here, it would be much easier for volunteers to ‘self-serve’ to find ‘good first issue’ tags to help out with, and a core of professional documents to refer to.

As you know I have been paid for the work I put into securing the €200k of EU funding and on meeting the requirements of those bids - intended for development. I was asked to put in an invoice for this, given the scale of effort involved. Other than that specific compensation I have never been paid in my previous role(s) as Secretary / Development Director / Finance stand-in and board member. I have been clear that we needed a funded development lead in place. I can’t do that full time role - I lack the dev skills and I can’t commit to the regular, disciplined focus that is needed to keep delivery running.

I put in a lot of time on last year on product ownership stand-in work and on stats, artist payments, finance forecasts, tax and so on. I have just put in a small invoice for a small part of that, but the coop has very limited funds, so I understand that this is unlikely to be paid for some time. It has taken a bit of a toll, so frankly it’s great to stand back a bit, for personal reasons. Please do not think it’s because I don’t care anymore or think it’s someone else’s job - I just can’t do any more. Resonate looks bigger than it is thanks to the efforts of @auggod @peter @Hakanto @angus and others… we just need to grow up and get better on accountability and delivery culture.


Repo: Yes - check with @auggod and @Timothee
@jackhajb will decide all this in due course but for now…
@auggod remains responsible for PR review I think (but obv needs to bacl that up with clearance from the product ownership for the website… less clear?)
@auggod ditto


I guess it would be more clear / feel safer if the change request came in its own modularized bubble, like a user story with a thumbs up on it from the website product owner (i don’t know who that is).

By looking at the google doc, I can’t tell which parts are approved and which are not, and if “it seems consensus was reached” is the same as approved.

Basically anyone could implement the text changes, but then there’s the fear of getting stuck in review.


Deployment will also obv need care because there are some coexistence / redirection issues with part of the Wordpress site (forms) which will have to remain in place until replaced by the new signup process.


@Timothee @datafruits Are either of y’all available to scope out and critique this proposal? If things need to be clarified before work could begin, please share your thoughts on what is needed.

Thank you so much on the work done so far for this new website.


I’ve been going through feedback on the new website design.

I would like to take things even further. I don’t understand why we have a homepage/landing page at all. We’re a streaming platform - why are we hiding the music?

The homepage of resonate should be the player. Above the player should be the text “Resonate is the only streaming platform we all control” and then JOIN | LEARN | SUPPORT buttons.

All other information about the co-op structure, stream to own etc should then be contained on the learn page - I’m happy to amend that text as needed - and the forum. But I would ask that anyone with strong opinions on the text give feedback before the end of the month - so we don’t drag out the changes that are needed.

What are the feelings of others on “removing the website/homepage” and finally putting music front and centre? @Nick_M @richjensen @sganesh @executive @auggod @Timothee @LLK @boopboop


+1 music focus, diverse. Later more ‘federated’/‘franchised’: MULTIPLE players. MULTIPLE websites… under one strong brand plus a common back end infrastructure for scale and ecosystem value.


+1 +1 +1


a million trillion plus ones


If there’s consensus on this, then I’m good on it. Seems good to me. Just want to make sure people who want to see why they should even be playing something on the player can clearly and directly be routed from this page to the relevant informational pages on the site (in a way that feels streamlined).


Agree 200%. With that mentality there’s also the “we can’t do THIS until we do THAT” paradigm. Totally my fault as its what I was forced to tell people over and over so much that I wonder if its creeped into the culture unintentionally.

We’re so close people! Just imagine how much we’re gonna celebrate when the wordpress site is gone and done and a thing of the past. (Hope I’m the one that gets to blow it up LOL!)


I don’t think, and I hope there’s no such thing as a “Resonate Culture”, the way I see it we’re a bunch of people coming from all horizons and we’re trying to fit in, find our way, find our strength and what we can bring in.

Also none of this is “totally your fault” frankly, doing what we’re doing is tough and complicated, and there’s no way around that.

Finding how to organize people from different social backgrounds, with different stories of being oppressed, decieved, and exploited, is never going to be easy, empowering them is never going to be a matter of just “saying so”.

All this being said, my two cents on the matter of the landing page raised by @melis_tailored :

My idea of that is it’s funny because it’s been an issue for so long I just got used to not thinking about it anymore, but the first few years everytime I landed on that page I was always surprised in a bad way and hated it. So definitely, moving to a player could be benefitial since I was probably not the only one to feel that way.


Like pointed out… if people land on our page and all that appear is music, then we’re just another streaming service like Spotify, Tidal etc.
Worse, since they haven’t heard much about us, we’re just another contender to those big services like Audiomack, Audius etc. (which as we’ve seen recently don’t have good press). It doesn’t help either that “Owned and Run by members” is also Audius’ pitch which is just right now proving to be a glorified scam.

So we can absolutely do the switch, and if we all feel strongly about it sooner rather than later, but also we need to transfer some of the “this is who we are” of the current page on the Player’s landing page, so that it’s clear at a glimpse what makes us stand apart. The infos I want to see :

  • Artists and Listeners Owned Platform (I say this because “community” can be misleading and this separates us from Audius right away)
  • Fair payment (penny per stream)

But also and this might prove more divisive so I’ll separate it :

  • No VC money, no Crypto.

Also, as pointed out multiple times, in " The co-operative music streaming platform." the word “co-operative” should be clickable to give access to a page that quickly explains what a coop is, or even have a pop up on mouse-hover that explains in a streamlined and succint way what a coop is.

The co-op aspect sets us apart, it’s the backbone of our claim to be “community owned”, without people understanding that these are nothing but baseless claims that others have done in the past, and that scammers are doing in the present.

In the end I don’t think it would be that hard to make the switch because frankly there isn’t much on the current Resonate landing page to transfer at all (which says it all about how useful that page curently is frankly).

One last thing, and it’s something I’ve discussed a lot with @Iamupinthecloud and from a few discussions with the various teams in our meetings I think it’s quite clear to everyone :

“BETA” needs to appear SUPER CLEARLY on the player, in my view it needs to be right below or after “RESONATE” in the upper left corner, we can not hide that this is a construction site and not a finished building and if we get rid of the landing page this has to be even clearer that THIS ISN’T THE FINISHED PRODUCT AND PEOPLE ARE HERE TO HELP US GET THERE.

Right now, I think we should market Resonate as an “early access” thing much like videogames do, where enthusiast people can join for the ride and help us build something but shouldn’t expect more than the backbone for yet another 6 months / 1 year. Let’s not be afraid of that, and let’s just write “BETA” somewhere in bold to just make it clear to anyone who shows up on our doorstep.


Tiny note. Could be disingenuous to say that since we actually DID receive crypto/VC money back in 2018 and can easily be discovered, which would make us some hypocritical or trying to cover that up.

(Loved everything else you said @LLK !)

1 Like

Suggest we explain we are a global service. Building an affiliate in america is part of the work people can help with.

  1. Yes. Less is more. We need to get people right to an stream2own experience on the platform. Artists, Labels, Techs, Listeners and Press.

  2. We have an immediate funding crunch and we are straddling 2 (or more) services. While under construction and transition we must maintain a very clear, fast and easy path to user actions:

  • Support with a Listener Membership or Donation
  • Leave a contact to follow our campaign

Do they still own shares / have interest in the company in some way? If so that’s something I’d love to have a breakdown about, to know who they are and what the first round of investment of 2018 still means for us. That’s actually a VERY important point for me (and it I’m sure it would be for others).

To add to it a bit, I think it’s actually important that we sever ties with VC money and with Crypto, and if we can’t find a way to speak loud about how we do so because of the first version of our site which is mainly a hollow shell now, it would be detrimental to the way we can talk about ourselves to others.


Discussion continued in new thread. Resonate's Blockchain History / Ex-Partners


6 posts were split to a new topic: Update website page(s) to clarify stream2own

@melis_tailored has anyone suggested a hybrid, where if you’re not logged on you get a combo of player plus some basic marketing text? I think this could be super easy to implement. Here’s a really really rough example: