If their position is that private ownership makes Itch a doomed venture, or at least not a fulsome way forward, then I can follow that (even if I don't agree). This gets to exactly the sorts of stuff SE seems to be wrestling with: Building democracy and equanimity into existing business structures.

Maybe it doesn't bear mentioning that Epic Games takes 12%, since they're no less fiefly. But Itch.io, while not collectively owned, is definitely both gamer- and developer-friendly in ways Steam and its ilk aren't, and they let the seller set the revenue share. Is that insufficient? If so, why?

This one part struck me as odd, though. The 30% number is a reference to the large and fairly uniform cut that Steam takes on PC games, that Apple and Google take on mobile games, and that Microsoft and Sony take on console games. (Nintendo is slightly more complicated, but no less a fiefdom).

Joe DiMaggio: Secretly Jewish? No, but what if? But actually, no.

This one from earlier in the night might be my favorite.

Small if true!

For me it's got to be:

Jurisprudence Fetishist Gets Off On Technicality

Mazel tov, @msminotaur.bsky.social!

1. Supporting artists helps artists live and thrive and make more art. We're all in this together, so solidarity would be a priority even if it somehow *weren't* the case that: 2. The art itself is invariably way, way better and more interesting when humans make it.

YESSSSSS!!