Kickstarter hides failure

(TL;DR: Kickstarter does not want you to see failed projects. Failed Kickstarter campaign pages include robot meta tags to keep search engines from indexing them. Plus, Kickstarter’s front page and “Discover” interface never show failed projects. Ever.)

Update @ 17:30 CET: In response to some great feedback over at Hacker News, I’ve made a few edits below to clarify a few points. First, to emphasise that failed results do show up in Kickstarter’s own search results. Second, to clarify that I don’t think there’s anything nefarious or ill-intentioned going on here. Just that Kickstarter has made an interesting design decision when it comes to how it displays (or doesn’t display) “failed” projects.

Only show success

Here’s a fun crowdfunding experiment: visit Kickstarter’s main page, click around, and without using the search box, try to find a project that isn’t either:

a) Successful
b) In progress

You can’t.

Spend more than a few minutes poking around, and you’ll realize that Kickstarter’s front page and Discover pages are clearly built to highlight projects that are currently seeking funding, or have already been successfully funded.

From a business perspective, this makes total sense. Kickstarter’s business model is built on taking a 5% cut of successful campaigns. Showing failures isn’t in their interest.

First, failed projects aren’t actionable. No one can back a project that’s already missed its funding goal.

Second, failed projects look bad. If you’re trying to convince the world that anyone can crowdfund anything, it doesn’t help to remind people that 56% of Kickstarter projects fail to meet their funding goal.

When I first noticed that Kickstarter’s web interface wasn’t showing me any failures, I wanted to be sure. To confirm my suspicions, I wrote a scraper (using the excellent Scrapy framework) designed to browse through Kickstarter’s Discover pages, extracting project details from every single campaign page it could find.

The result: 27,399 projects1. Every single project my scraper could find was either successful or in progress.

This means that if you’re a human being (instead of a scraper) you could browse Kickstarter’s Discovery section for days, weeks, or months. You could look at more than 27,000 projects. And you’d never come across a failure.

Hide failed projects from Google

To be clear, Kickstarter doesn’t pull failed projects off their site.

Links to failed Kickstarter projects still work. For example, I can still link to Instaprint, a project that failed to meet its funding goal on April 29. Or, if you know the name of a failed project, you can search for it using Kickstarter’s search engine. Here’s a search for Instaprint. The project also shows up in the search results for “instagram” and “photo booth“.

But here’s the thing: search for Instaprint on Google, or Bing, or DuckDuckGo, and the Kickstarter project page is nowhere in the results.


In the header section of every single failed Kickstarter project I could find, I found this robots meta tag:

<meta name="robots" content="noindex"/>

This tag, which shows up on failed Kickstarter projects, but not on successful or in progress projects, tells search engines to ignore the page.

Kickstarter doesn’t pull failures off their site. They just make it difficult to find them through third-party search engines.

So what?

I don’t think Kickstarter is doing anything nefarious or ill-intentioned here. It makes perfect business sense for them to keep their main page and discovery mechanism free of failed projects.

I point this out because Kickstarter has made an interesting design decision.

Mostly, I find Kickstarter’s approach an interesting counterpoint to other types of online transaction platforms. eBay, for example, displays auctions that weren’t successful (you can even search for them). When an item is out of stock on Amazon, you can still search for it.

Kickstarter’s “hide failures” tactic is also interesting when compared to other crowdfunding sites. For example, Indiegogo seems to list unsuccessful projects2 alongside successful ones.

But mostly, I think this matters for entrepreneurs who are planning to use Kickstarter as a funding platform. Recently, I talked to Scott Steinberg, who wrote The Crowdfunding Bible, and he talked about why research is so important for entrepreneurs.

He told me that if you’re going to use a crowdfunding service like Kickstarter, it’s important to figure out what’s worked for others in the past, but also to figure out what hasn’t worked for others in the past.

If you hide failure, it’s hard to learn from others’ mistakes.

  1. Of the 27,399 projects I scraped, 23,059 were successful, and 4,340 were in progress. Given that the New York Times recently reported that there are about 50,000 projects on Kickstarter, and given Kickstarter’s widely cited 44% overall success rate, 23,059 successful projects suggests that my scraper got all the successful projects.
  2. Yes, I understand that the definition of “successful” is different on Indiegogo than Kickstarter. Some projects that don’t meet their their funding goals still receive money.

Filed under: internet

Tags: , , , ,


  1. Jum says:


    Who is interested in failed projects? You can't back them so of what use is it to you, them or Kickstarter?

    If I owned Kickstarter I would just take the failed project pages down completely.

    • Dan Misener says:

      When it comes to crowdfunding campaigns, I think it’s worth looking at what works, and what *doesn’t* work.

      If I was planning a KS campaign, I’d want to avoid making some of the same mistakes previously failed campaigns have.

      • Slightly offtopic, but your commenting system shouldn't be inserting slashes around quote characters like that… whatever you've done either to your php setup or with comment plugins, one of them clearly is buggy.

        WordPress and PHP both have best practices for handling escaping that any trustworthy PHP hacker should know (prepared statements..) so whatever plugin is causing this is suspect. Additionally, the OpenID login didn't work w/ gmail. :(

        • Dan Misener says:

          Thanks, Michael. Looks like IntenseDebate was being a bit janky. Re-enabled basic WP comments.

          • jaime says:

            Third-party comment systems are always janky!

            Not sure why bloggers still use them, instead of using plugins to enhance the built-in comment system.

      • Keilaron says:

        Except that as you’ve pointed out yourself, KS’ search DOES bring up failed projects… so as part of your research to find out if your idea would swim or sink, doing a few more searches (particularly where/what you’re planning on using as a platform) into some keywords and similar ideas would be kind of a good idea, no?
        They’re otherwise not really necessary to be around. Heck, I was kind of surprised they didn’t just delete them: after a while nobody’s going to be interested aside the point you mentioned and the one I’m about to.

        See, I think it’s also to prevent those with failed projects from being harassed too much. Last thing you’d want is some random twits sending you comments saying “LOL YOU THOUGHT THAT WOULD WORK?!”. It’s another to have someone who bothered to search for a similar idea come up and say “Hey, I was thinking of doing x/y/z, I was wondering why you think your project didn’t make it.”.

      • David Darna says:

        Dan is right on. We all learn at least as much from failure as from success

    • officeguy says:

      I think that’s a ridiculous question. I would love to see what failed, and determine for myself why it failed. Perhaps I could do better, perhaps I could learn that my idea sucked. Hiding information is never good, it actually kinda evil and dark-sideish.

      I’ve backed 3 projects on kickstarter, and not gotten the shaft yet, but we need to learn more about the people that have gotten screwed on kickstarter deals, how it happened, and why the project was successfully funded even though it failed to deliver.

    • VMK says:

      I cant seem to find any information about what happens to the funds from donations people make when a kickstarter project does not meet its full funding goal.

      What happens to the money that was collected?

      • When you back a Kickstarter project, there is a hold on your account but no money is charged until its funding goal is met. If a project fails to achieve its funding goal, no money is taken from your account and the hold is released. You are only charged when the project reaches its funding goal.

  2. I have a hard time believing that people who want to create projects are going to spend hours combing through unsuccessful projects to see why those projects were unsuccessful. Those projects were asking for too much, the creators didn't have enough reach in their networks, the project did not have a good enough value proposition, etc.. Instead they'll be spending their time reading countless blogs that tell you how to make a successful Kickstarter project, video, and get the word out. And I think that's fine.

    You have to be motivated to start a project and see it through to fruition — clouding that with results for failed projects is unnecessary in my opinion. No scandal here.

  3. Fastidius says:

    I really love the escaping of '.

  4. I'm assuming he meant that not being able to gauge success rates or easily find people who didn't succeed makes for a much less informed decision. Getting overly excited that it looks like everyone gets funded when that's very unlikely (Though 44% is pretty damn good)

    • Morg. says:

      Does it really matter ?
      If you have a project in mind you should try it, the teaching’s invaluable, even if it fails.

      • Dani says:

        “the teaching’s invaluable, even if it fails.”

        Not really. Especially if you don’t know why you failed, and you have nothing to compare it to. So actually, it’s not a teaching moment at all. You’ve basically wasted your time and everyone’s time who funded the project.

  5. Adam says:

    Sounds pretty normal to me, I don’t really understand why this matters so much.

  6. Obelix says:

    I can understand not showing the unsuccessful ones – even YouTube does not show videos with 1 or 0 views, but using the “noindex” tag is not justifiable in any way. Looks like when people google search for Kickstarter projects, they only want you to find the successful ones – because that’s the only way you will start your own :) If you see too many unsuccessful ones, you would not put in your project there.

    Shame …

    • Joshua Drake says:

      Playing Devil’s advocate:

      Why direct traffic to projects that no one can participate in. I’d personally hate to find something I love while googling, click through and read about some awesome project, only to find out that it will likely never be.

      If I were the sponsor of a failed kick starter project I may also not want that stigmata to follow me all the days of the internet.

      • Tom says:

        Hey JD,

        Take the glass 1/2 full approach. Just because they didn’t get funded 1 time on KS doesn’t neccessarily mean the project will never happen.

        Also, you can track em down, email em, and maybe learn something or develop a new collaboration . . .

        • Keilaron says:


          In that case they’re free to try again. Making the failed project available doesn’t help here, and in fact can hurt by making it seem like the kickstarter is already over when in fact it has been restarted.
          I suppose technically, they could just delete all the comments, updates, etc. and re-use the same entry, but it’s easier to move forward (plus the project owners may want to keep the history so they can avoid past mistakes, etc.).

          The “glass half full approach” doesn’t apply here; there’s nothing wrong. The projects are just not visible *on search engines*, that’s all. If you already knew about the project there’s nothing stopping you from locating the project and talking things over with the owner.

  7. Tom Sullivan says:

    When Kickstarter launched, they showed every project on the site. They only started hiding projects at the request of project creators. (I know because my old coworker was one who complained.)

    Think about it: If I ran a project that failed, I wouldn’t want it haunting me forever. Especially for the people that learn from their mistakes and succeed at their second attempt, hiding failed projects is the most creator-friendly approach and least confusing for future backers.

    • Joshua Drake says:

      Having just used your argument to counter an earlier comment let me again play Devil’s Advocate:

      One criteria that could prove very helpful to those considering investing in a project would be the number of previous failed attempts. If the sponsor has failed over the previous 9 out 10 projects showing only the success certainly skews the statistics in the sponsor’s favor.

      • Ralph Little says:

        It’s actually not a very good indicator of future success. In some ways, the reverse is true.

        Most successful entrepreneurs have a number of failed businesses behind them before they find the right idea.

  8. Joe says:

    Kickstarter also does not expand to international markets, I’d think that’s a big failure, but they won’t talk about it, despite having “worked on” the problem for the last 3 years.


    • Kate D. says:

      A little late, but …
      That’s because they’ve partnered with Amazon as their payment vendor.
      I asked Kickstarter about this and from the answers I got it looks like Amazon demanded to be the exclusive payment vendor and has a say on Kickstarter’s other partnerships.
      And since Kickstarter became so popular, it’s understandable (from a business point of view) that Amazon wouldn’t let anyone else get a piece of the pie.

      And with backers coming from all over the world and international project creators teaming up with USA based individuals/ legal entities in order to fulfil Amazon’s requirements Kickstarter and Amazon have no reason or incentive to expand outside the USA.
      So, there is no “problem” for Kickstarter or Amazon to work on, simple!

      And sorry for the off topic reply.

  9. Richard says:

    Yeah, I’m with Scott on this. And I don’t buy this argument that showing failed campaigns puts people off.

    Firstly, Kickstarter has now reached a level of success that the question “is it really plausible that I could run a successful campaign on Kickstarter?” has been pretty solidly answered – people aren’t going to have doubts about Kickstarter as a concept from seeing that some projects fail.

    But secondly, who’s this person who would run a successful campaign and deliver product to their backers, but is going to be put off by seeing that other people fail? What kind of entrepreneur is that?

    And it’s not really about allowing every potential campaign starter to comb through failed projects, either. It’s about making it easy for the people who write the “How to succeed on Kickstarter” blog posts to write “Top 10 Kickstarter mistakes” blog posts.

    • Keilaron says:

      But secondly, who’s this person who would run a successful campaign and deliver product to their backers, but is going to be put off by seeing that other people fail? What kind of entrepreneur is that?

      No, no, they’d be put off from using Kickstarter, not from running their campaign. It’s not that unlikely, actually — anyone doing research for a platform could easily mistake a (let’s say, I don’t know what the actual stat is) 10% success ratio as a problem with the platform rather than a problem with the campaigns that just so happened to use that platform.

      Besides, why advertise someone’s failure?
      As for the top ten mistakes — really, that’s why you want them showing? Just do a few searches, won’t be hard to find some.

  10. elai says:

    You should be saying unfunded instead of failed projects. A failed project is a funded project that fails to deliver. An unfunded project hasn’t even gotten started in a sense.

  11. Vonskippy says:

    I can’t believe all the morons that are commenting that research in what failed isn’t important.

    There isn’t a single engineering accomplishment that wasn’t built ontop of a long line of failures. Having that data is a huge step of not repeating the failures but in taking baby steps to turn a failure into success.

    Must be the younger, publicly educated fops, that don’t get it.

  12. bex says:

    Not including projects that failed to meet their funding goals in the default searches and presentations isn’t a problem. Hiding them completely is. For a research project we simply ran a scraper periodically every day to find the projects that didn’t fund when they timed out. This shouldn’t be the only way to collect this kind of data.

    Additionally, I believe KS takes a very active role in most projects. My understanding is that they will provide specific advice on videos, etc. in order to help projects reach their funding goals. If this advice is as detailed as I am led to believe, this means that failures also reflect on KS. Perhaps this is the other reason they don’t want them easily found.

    • Keilaron says:

      Collecting data should never be about taking a single snapshot anyway — good research only comes from a large quantity of data points, usually over time.

  13. ahilal says:

    I once contributed to a project that produced no results. I went looking into Kickstarter’s support pages for information on what I should do. They do not have a FAQ for this. They do not have any official channel for communicating that failure has occurred. I am not surprised to hear that they sweep failed projects out of the lists whenever possible.

    I find it neither “nefarious” nor “interesting.” It’s just plain stupid. If you want people to contribute money, they need to feel some sense of trust. If you don’t manage those who abuse that trust, you’re going to lose it. Kickstarter is one high-profile failure away from vanishing off the planet. It would do them a lot more good to offer some transparency and have good policies in place for managing this. The little piddly failures they see now SHOULD be great training ground for them. Instead they are ignoring and avoiding the problem. This will bite them in the ass eventually.

  14. Akky Akimoto says:

    Interesting research and thoughts. I introduced this to my readers but one pointed out that there are paths from top page to the failed projects.

    [Top page]->(pick any cool project on the top)->[Backers]->(pick one (who is actively backing many projects))->[User page]->[Backed Projects]->(you may see few “Funding Unsuccessful” projects)

    Though it is still hard to reach them and I agree your opinion.

  15. Jijesh says:

    Hey Dan – I found the post and topic interesting and informative. I think your post and the secondary question it raises – why are failed project not easily visible is relevant to me.
    As my wife is getting a KS project going I have been thinking about the levels of rewards and length of funding time that would be most relevant to get cross the funding goal.
    I think this is infographic ripe !

  16. Dan, interesting article, if only to have a place and means to talk about the downsides and motivation to take the risks anyway. I am in the middle of a KS fundraising campaign that appears to be headed behind the unsearchable wall. You may quickly form your own opinions as to why (link attached), but I’d be willing to talk to you about the decisions I made, why I made them and what KS did or didn’t do to help me form my strategy.

  17. Neil Carr says:

    Interesting post and discussion!

    I’ve been preparing my own Kickstarter project and in the early stages when I began laying out my plans I got feedback from friends that the structure of my project would likely lead to it not being successful. Taking that feedback I decided I needed to do some research and what to do and what not to do in the specific market I was targeting, that being roleplaying games.

    So I started collecting data. I wish I had scrapper, as I ended up spending dozens of hours collecting data by hand, entering it into spreadsheets, and then crunching it with the spreadsheet.

    I got access to successful and unsuccessful projects outside of Kickstarter because the roleplaying game community is rather focused and tight-nit, and so projects had been posted on gaming forums. In the end I collected 150 RPG projects and learned a lot of great lessons on what to do and definitely what not to do. I put together a series of reports on what I learned which you can see here:

    All of that analysis has been incredibly helpful and decerning a kind of “best practices” when it comes to targeting crowdfunding towards the RPG market.

    I’m still in the process of getting my own project prepared for launch, so I haven’t yet tested it with my own project execution, but I’m far far more confident that I’ll do well then before all of this.

    I can see the perspective on hiding failed Kickstarters, I’d wondered in looking over some of the ones I was analyzing how people felt after their projects entered into this graveyard. It’s good to know that this information isn’t easily accessible. If I ever want to do a followup on this analysis I’m going to have to use software to extract the information or rely on older forum posts to get direct links to everything that flows through.

  18. mark johnston says:

    try the following search on google


  19. Yancey says:

    Hi Dan —

    Yancey from Kickstarter here. I wanted to take a minute to comment on why Kickstarter works the way it does.

    Your post is correct in noting that we don’t have a browse area for projects whose funding was unsuccessful. This isn’t to “hide failure,” it’s because it would be a poor user experience (there’s no action that anyone could take) and it would expose the creators of unsuccessfully funded projects to unnecessary criticism from the web (those projects would be prime for trolling).

    We get that some people might want to look at projects that didn’t reach their goals to learn what not to do, but there’s really not much to learn. Most unsuccessfully funded projects come up short because of a lack of interest in the project or because their creators didn’t promote it enough, not because of the Kickstarter page itself. Success on Kickstarter comes down to making a video, pricing things reasonably, and telling people about the project. Other successfully funded projects and Kickstarter School ( are great resources.

    Another observation was that unsuccessfully funded projects are de-indexed from outside search results. This was implemented about a year into Kickstarter’s life after tons of requests from former project creators. Because Kickstarter projects index very highly in search, creators were seeing their unsuccessfully funded projects ranking extremely high — in some cases as the #1 result — for their name. That obviously sucked, so we made the decision to de-index them.

    Aside from those two things, unsuccessfully funded projects function exactly the same as successfully funded projects on Kickstarter. Both are freely available in Kickstarter search. Creators of both successfully funded and unsuccessfully funded projects can post project updates and backers can post comments. Both types of projects are listed on the profiles of the project’s backers and creators as well. When users click on a creator’s profile they can see all of the creator’s past projects — successfully and unsuccessfully funded.

    We’ve added an entry to our FAQ addressing this question here:

    Thanks for taking the time to write about Kickstarter, and I hope this clears things up.


    • Dan Misener says:

      Hi, Yancey. Thanks for taking the time to respond and to clarify some of the thinking behind these design decisions. As I initially wrote, the business reasons behind them seem pretty clear, but it’s interesting to learn that the de-indexing was the result of user feedback.

      Re: browsing/discovery:

      I think it’s worth noting that for many successfully funded projects displayed in the Discover pages, there also seems to be no action that anyone could take. Many successfully funded, completed (time-wise) campaigns seem equally inactionable as unsuccessful ones.

      In life and business, I do believe there’s value in analyzing both success and failure. And as someone who’s fascinated by crowdfunding and interested in crunching numbers, I’d clearly prefer if unsuccessfully funded Kickstarter projects were easier to find. That said, I understand why they’re not, and appreciate the clarification and FAQ entry. Thanks again.

  20. Dave says:

    As the founder of a brand investigating the use of Kickstarter this is extremely important. If my project fails do I really want my brand coming up in Google as a failed project? No, I do not.

  21. Justin says:

    For all the failed kickstarter programs out there (and everyone else!) I want to introduce my website Here you can sign up your causes, fundraisers and ideas knowing that we A) Will not delete you if you have “ANY” activity B) We do not require any credit cards or cash donations and C) are always working up upgrades.

    My site uses “Crowdfunding” ideas like Kickstarter but instead of pledging cash out of pocket, we have incentive offers (Surveys, Polls and Questionnaires) that pay a Micro-Donation by the advertiser.

    A few things to keep in mind:

    We are a start-up. Although we have spent tens of thousands of dollars developing the software behind the site and six months in coding/development, we are still new and we do not have the best offers yet.

    As participation increases we will be able to secure higher paying offers and make your goals come quicker. Right now we are negotiating with the companies who feed the offers to get to $1 per offer minimum. My system allows for an “Incentive Payout” which means you can raise $55,000 and select $5,000 as your payout. My system will automatically select anyone who signed up and completed an offer on your project as a winner. The more times they do an offer for you, the more they have a chance to win.

    I don’t think its fair that Kickstarter gives you such a short period of time and pays you NONE of the money if your project ends before you reach your amount. What you can do on my site is request an “early payout” where if you have $90,000 and you asked for $100,000 unlike kickstarter we will just issue your money to you and pay out the incentive, sending you along your way with the hopes that what you earned is enough to get you going.

    The truth is, this business will not be going anywhere anytime soon. We will continue to get higher quality and higher payout incentives and we will feed them directly to our tool as our relationship with the advertisers increases.

    So if you want to create a project for your Games, Art, Movies, Gadgets, Inventions or what have you, all we ask is that you have:

    Desired Goal:
    Contact Information:

    The more projects we have and the more participation we receive will enable us to get higher paying offers.

    When I started this idea, my business partner and I were focused only on churches (hence the name) and we didn’t even know of Kickstarter until one of our advertisers mentioned it to us. Once we saw the potential of what all they were offering (and what they refused!) we both decided it would be a great idea for us to offer this project to anyone who had an idea.

    It may take some time and a great deal of participation for each project to raise enough money at the moment, but if we all contribute a little bit a day, we can reach these goals and raise more at a time.

    The website is

    So inform as many people as you know who had a kickstarter project fail or just wants to raise enough money to try to start something up.

    See you out there!

    Best regards,

    Justin Kincaid
    Program Coordinator
    Follow us on twitter!

  22. Kurt Arnlund says:

    The focus here seems to be about projects that failed and don’t get enough money to start. That’s really too bad for project starters but no one is hurt by that at all.

    I’d love to hear, as a topic of discussion, projects on Kickstarter that succeeded, but failed for all or most of the people who gave money. There are people out there being hurt by Kickstarter because they gave money to successful project that have never returned them a single one of the promised pledge rewards and they show no signs of ever intending to do so. As far as I’m concerned, that’s fraud and Kickstarter plays a key part in it as the host and benefiting party of the transactions.

    • Keilaron says:

      I hear this a lot, but I haven’t heard ANY specific projects on the subject. Many of the projects I’ve backed had delivered, and those that haven’t are showing their progress clearly.

  23. Ben says:

    I just noticed that Indiegogo does the same thing and gives you the “noindex” in your source code if you’re not doing amazingly well in their mind. Like my campaign has $90 in funds right now.

    To me I think it hurts the people looking for funds because I can’t get any organic traffic until they say I’ve earned enough to be allowed to show up in search engines.

    I’d love to get some organic traffic from all the promoting I’ve been doing.

  24. Pak says:

    There’s a subreddit about that. Some of the projects are really…interesting.

  25. Why would kickstarter really care about the failed projects? Its common sense, to hide your report card if you’ve got less marks (for even a student)

    It doesnt matter much, since Kickstarter has already made a lot of projects get what they wanted to achieve.

  1. […] Dan Misener, in a fit of inspired data mining, scraped half of Kickstarter to find failed projects. He could not, it seems, find a single one. Why? Because Kickstarter hides them behind a non-searchable wall. They exist, sure, but you won’t find them with Google and they never, ever show them in their “Discover” browsing system. […]

  2. […] | Read the full Article […]

  3. […] projects, but not on successful or in progress projects, tells search engines to ignore the page.   Add AnswerBIU     @    UpdateLink to […]

  4. […] more than half of the projects on Kickstarter fail, and when they do it can be hard to find them as was reported earlier this week. But understanding those failures can help others avoid the same fate and may indicate areas where […]

  5. […] concludes that Facebook executives share a lot of the blame for the snafu. – Damon DarlinKickstarter Hides Failure |  A smart analysis of why you can’t find failed Kickstarter projects. […]

  6. […] to whatever Kickstarter claims to be is its ability to teach business neophytes the ropes. As Dan Misener shows, though, that’s undermined by suppressing the visibility of failed projects.Kickstarter does not want you to see failed […]

  7. […] Misener, a public radio producer and tech journalist, recently made a stir when he wrote a post about Kickstarter, saying the crowdfunding platform made it hard to find failed projects. He wrote that projects are […]

  8. […] week, I wrote a bit about a design decision I’d noticed on the crowdfunding site Kickstarter. Basically, […]

  9. […] recently came across Dan Misener’s article ”Kickstarter hides failure,” where he talked about how crowdfunding site Kickstarter makes it difficult for you to […]

  10. […] un serie de artículos, de Dan Miserer, y de Jeanne de Appsblogger, solamente un 43% de las campañas de kickstarter tienen éxito, y la […]

  11. […] projects don’t make the cut. Jeanne Pi of AppsBlogger, inspired by Dan Misener’s post, Kickstarter hides failure, “had a scraper script written that was able to scrape all the projects as of June 2, 2012, […]

  12. […] ha habido bastante critica sobre Kickstarter, sobre quien se presume, esconde sus proyectos fallidos. Es decir, nosotros solo nos damos cuenta de los que han sido un éxito. Y es que de acuerdo a […]

  13. […] you hide failure, it’s hard to learn from others’ mistakes,” wrote Dan Misener in a blog post that prompted discussion about the practice everywhere from the New York Times to […]

  14. […] there was Dan Misener’s Kickstarter hides failure post from May 24th which showed what most people already knew: KickStarter doesn’t exactly […]

  15. […] which they hope to launch.Back in May, Misener caused an uproar surrounding Kickstarter after he revealed that the site was “hiding” projects that failed to achieve their funding goals. Not […]

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *