[Otternonsenz]

Because a person might be willing:

-to directly support artists with buying the albums or songs at full price, rather than letting Spotify barely pay artists anything for their music (especially independent ones without industry connections)

-knowing you own your library and that once you’ve purchased media, there is nothing to take it away other than the sands of time taking back its silicate

-one does not need unlimited access to songs they will never hear, especially when natural discoverability on Spotify is so so versus trawling through sites like Bandcamp, Earmilk, RCRDLBL (I know it doesn’t exist anymore), or other places where new artists show their work in a way that Spotify doesn’t provide

[Capricorn2481]

> to directly support artists with buying the albums or songs at full price, rather than letting Spotify barely pay artists anything for their music (especially independent ones without industry connections)

You can't post an open source project on this site without half the thread speculating that you're a grifting sociopath. <1% are going to pay for music on here.

[iAMkenough]

90% of statistics are made up

[Otternonsenz]

I am curious, with the way you are using “<1% are going to pay for music on here”, is that to be read as “no more than 1% are going to pay for music on here” or that “less than 1% are going to pay for music on here”?

Is your point that people aren’t willing to pay for things if they have a choice not to?

Or is it that independent artists should be grateful that people see their work at all and that “most” people will just think they are a grifting sociopath?

Not sure what your issue with my comment is, but I’m interested in what you meant, as I feel I’m missing context that only you have at the moment.