> However, if the concrete implementation of trying to get money is unwanted and unexpected ads, then the correct focus of discussion is the criticism of that ad delivery method
But he'd already said, prior to that
> I'm not arguing that npm install logs should be packed full of ads (it shouldn't).
He'd already said no to them; you're both in agreement. There's nothing to argue about.
Having agreed that nobody wants ads, the next step is to determine how to not have them (and their nastier big sibling, telemetry and malware, which will follow) by providing funding.
(edited for brevity)
This comment is not aimed at you specifically, but everyone in this comment thread who engages in this pointless arguing.
It doesn’t matter if they both agree that text ads are bad. It’s basically a “think of the children” derailment except it’s “think of the poor foss dev”.
Here everyone says they don't like ads; and then are shocked that people want to talk about why ads are showing up and what to do about that.
Please reread my reply to OP carefully and notice I did not say he endorsed NPM ads. Instead, I specifically disagreed with his suggestion to redirect the discussion away from the NPM ads to the general topic of open-source funding.
>He's asking the same question I am, how do we get sufficient funding for these projects.
To be clear, that's a different question and I wasn't even attempting to answer it. I mentioned funding like Patreon as examples of social acceptability and not as examples of income sustainability.
>Kind of defeats your point.
My point was a narrow one : others are criticizing the unwelcome ad solicitation and that's a correct area of focus.
The other question of how to get sustainable open-source funding is also an important topic -- but that doesn't mean it forbids discussion of unacceptable spam/ads. They can be 2 parallel discussions.