The lack of transparency sure is my main issue.
After all, I have no idea what is done with the income Tapas get from these fees; it could potentially be used wisely, and thus be entirely justified. (Or not. Like any business).
But lack of transparency has no possible good justification.
Seriously. Not being up front about these things is never a good look.
They need to not only acknowledge that a portion is being taken off the top dependent on what is purchased, but they need to have that documented. Somewhere. In a way that we accept those terms upon sign up or purchase.
Okay... then what now. Scraming about it will not help?
Shall we leave it or fight it?
You talk about a blog? Is that the next step?
Shall we collect the ink we can at this inksgiving and then run for it.
Shall we share the frustration with the officials?
Me?
I will wait for an answer and continue my series.
But I will not pay for ink and I will not be giving much out.
I will entertain the ones that wish to be a happy giver and keep asking until we get an answer.
And incorporate Ko-Fi as an alternative
Not sure if this was already mentioned since I skimmed most of the conversation, but have y'all thought about sending off an email with your questions regarding the hidden deductions, and the info you've gathered?
I know you can contact feedback@tapas.io for questions, and hello@tapas.io regarding the ad revenue program. The higher ups might take this issue more seriously if their staff is contacted directly. I also know when shit was going down on other sites, and when Tapas made skeevy changes to their ToS some people made template complaint emails that the masses could send out. It might be beneficial to rock the boat a little bit since Michael might not even get an answer.
Edit!: FFF god, I forgot to add content@tapasmedia.co. You all probably know this email as the way to opt into the tipping program, but they might be able to also help.
I contacted them at this address over a week ago and have not heard back. I have also attempted to contact them on twitter with my questions. Still nothing.
When I say they're not responding, I mean it. It's why I'm so frustrated with not getting a response and the reaction to it. I have tried multiple avenues to get an answer to this with little more than silence in return.
Yeah, I figured as much. When it comes to money corporations are pretty much all the same no matter what size, there will probably have to be a large portion of their users making a stink for them to do anything. Sorry about that.
The question is likely currently being pushed up the chain. A week isn't a long time in a corporate setting if multiple people have to look into a potentially complicated issue. (Especially if somebody managed to mess up some numbers). Depending on the problem, they may also be working on a solution for the issue and won't comment until they have a clear solution or answer to the issues at hand.
That's at least how I would deal with this.
As for no response, the team is often traveling and not available at all times. (Small teams have down sides, slow response times are one of them.)
They are very well aware that they can't go silent on an issue that is brought up, we all have been on the internet long enough to know that that never goes well. On your guys' end you will sadly continue to be patient, while not allowing the question to be dropped or forgotten.
Apologies for the delay. I am still waiting on approvals for the amount of information I can publicly disclose about the Ink system. Since the system and technology is proprietary to Tapas and includes some sensitive information, the pending request has taken longer than expected. Again, I apologize for the inconvenience. I have investigated the matter and filed an internal report.
This is, quite possibly, one of the most frightening statements I have ever seen. Especially since it is a system that starts and ends with real world currency. And a "system" that no real documentation in any public facing fashion outside of a few, disconnected and vague statements in the TOS.
We have an answer, we are not in the dark.
I will as said, continue my work and give what I have promised to my reader and continue with the Inksgiving event, but I will not put my real money into the system yet.
Is that an answer?
I get that because we're not employees, or even partners in this, Tapas can not "publicly disclose" a variety things from algorithms to details of the Apple purge...and hardly get challenged on it.
But this is a real world currency transaction that affects a lot of REAL people...and we're heading into a big "event" where we're supposed to be encouraging people to take part in something that is hidden in bad math and "proprietary technology".
Even if they can explain WHY it's happening...it's a good bet they'll not be in a hurry to change it.
It is an answer to the question of no reply from Tapas.
And for now, it is good enough for me.
I have invested in this event and promised content.
I will do this for "The Show Must Go ON"
People will be able to support with free ad ink and I will encourage supporter to support with cash over Ko-Fi
My event is a running event where supporter will support a character driving a race where the future outcome of my main comic depends on the winner. (Most ink supported driver)
But I will start to incorporate Ko-Fi support where I will set my own ink value.
So if you want a specific character to win you can support with free ink, but If you support with Ko-Fi the driver will be given an unfair boost.
You are all welcome to rebel against paid ink and boost a driver with Ko-Fi
Just as others are doing by removing Ink goal with Ko-Fi right here
My plan before and after Michael answer is:
I continue the Inksgiving for the Community
I go to a theme park and pay something to cast ink around, it will be fun and I don't care where my money goes to, i just have a fun time.
After I come home from the theme park i care and maybe take another theme park next year. But for now:
I cast with Ink and have fun, is that not the community way
But i have made the combos with Ko-fi because not all do like me this time. And a don't care if i get 10-15-20% back, because i will give all that ink I get back, back to the community in my Christmas event.
That’s my plan. I will wait at least until after the holiday for whatever PR approved answer we get. If it is the vague non-answer style we’ve been getting and does not result in clear, documented details of what we’re all paying and losing, that’s my next step.
If you mean the "one time offer" that's not a special thing. It's there for everyone to entice them to buy Ink. And that one is the same base value as the $50 level (ie 1200 ink = $1.) But you can see it in the screenshots I took during my experiments, too.
Apologies for the delay in response time, this issue brought up in the forum topic became a company wide discussion and talking point in identifying how this issue came about in the first place and what we can do to better remedy the situation.
First off, I want to apologize for misspeaking about the functionality of the Ink system in my previous response. When I spoke about each individual Ink being meta tagged with a source and origin, I was unaware that this functionality was not implemented and was a long term plan for the Ink system. I was made aware of this mischaracterization of our current system. I apologize for the confusion that this has caused.
The Tapas Ink system (previously Coins) was originally designed for the Premium Program which creators can utilize to place episodes under a paywall and debuted in 2016. We designed various different tiers of Ink packs and implemented what we internally refer to as an exchange rate. This operates independently of the fees associated with the Tapas app and Tapas web.
When a person buys Ink they are exchanging a cash amount for a digital currency. This is the first instance of the exchange rate taking effect. At $1.99 for 1,600 Ink, the exchange rate is roughly (rounding) $1:800 Ink, all the way to the highest tier, $49.99 for 60,000 Ink which is roughly (rounding) is $1:1200 Ink. When that person decides to spend the Ink, a second exchange rate is applied when in transit to the creator, however the second exchange rate is not dynamic and is fixed at the highest tier of $1:1200, which explains the discrepancy outlined in this topic.
Because the aforementioned full functionality of Ink wasn’t implemented we are unable to apply a dynamic second exchange rate to match the first exchange rate.
To clarify this process, we’ll be adding additional language on the creator dashboard and help center to outline what the exchange rates are (this is due to ship soon).
I apologize for the delay in response, I was filing the issue while exploring the root cause and trying to propose a variety of solutions to help.
While this does answer the discrepancy between the price of the ink and the amount received by the creator, it also raises a small question, at least for me.
Specifically these parts:
This posits that the reason that the price of the ink packages can't be accounted for is because there is not meta-tagging system.
However, in Post #91, you say, regarding app fees:
and you explain it in Post #121 as:
But, as mentioned, since the meta-tagging system is not yet in place, this can't be how source and origin of ink is checked.
Yet, fees are still taken out, presumably using some other method.
So, my question is, why can't the way fees are accounted for be used to account for the different price packages? And if fees and price packages can be account in the same way, why aren't they already?
EDIT 12:00AM CST: PS. I do understand that the exchange rate and fees are independent of each other, I did read the entire answer.
I believe this is the answer to the fundament of the main question.
Thank you @michaelson 
️
We might agree or disagree with the fairness of fees and rates, but now we know what to expect and where the money goes.
