Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Hello! minor changes to README.md #1111

Open
wants to merge 2 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from
Open
Show file tree
Hide file tree
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension

Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
2 changes: 1 addition & 1 deletion README.md
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -8,7 +8,7 @@ So in order to work on it full time, my brother and I tried to turn it into a co

For awhile, Quirk was going quite well. Lots of people subscribed, we got backed by [Y Combinator](https://www.ycombinator.com/), and we were growing _very_ quickly.

Unfortunately, in order for the business to work and for us to pay ourselves, we needed folks to be subscribed for a fair amount of time. But in general, most people fell into three camps: didn't use the app at all (and weren't getting value for what they paid), felt better and then unsubscribed, or didn't feel better but persisted anyway. That meant the business model treated successes as failures and failures as successes. So a future Quirk would need to make people feel worse for longer or otherwise not help people we signed up to help. If the incentives of the business weren't aligned with the people, it would have been naive to assume that we could easily fix it as the organization grew and we held less control. We didn't want to go down that path, so we pivoted the company.
Unfortunately, in order for the business to work and for us to pay ourselves, we needed folks to be subscribed for a fair amount of time. But in general, most people fell into three camps: didn't use the app at all (and weren't getting value for what they paid), felt better and then unsubscribed, or didn't feel better but persisted anyway. That meant the business model treated successes as failures and failures as successes. A future Quirk would need to make people feel worse for longer or otherwise not help people we signed up to help. If the incentives of the business weren't aligned with the people, it would have been naive to assume that we could easily fix it as the organization grew and we held less control. We didn't want to go down that path, so we pivoted the company into a different direction.

Anyone who's followed this project will know that we explored multiple paths towards sustainability. Much of it was discussed in the PRs and issues of this repo. We've investigated a completely free model, an indie open source model, a community open source model, a donation model, a pay-up-front model, an ad model, a tele-therapy model, and a subscription model.

Expand Down
4 changes: 4 additions & 0 deletions TRANSLATIONS.md
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -66,3 +66,7 @@ If you can, in your PR, please include a translation of the description of the a
If possible, please translate the following keywords too (required by iOS localization):

> Anxiety, Depression, Cognitive Behavioral Therapy, CBT, Panic


Spanish translations:
ansiedad, depresión, terapia cognitiva conductual, TCC, pánico