[IC] IBM Model-m black keycap set

[Seclusion]

Would anyone be interested in a group buy for IBM model m black keycap sets.

[Alessio]

ne info avail

[Pontus]

Cool idea but yeah, we need more info

[IO Sam]

If one can get it made in double-shot ABS or reverse dye-sub PBT, I'd be definitely interested.

[Seclusion]

Sorry about that. I talked to someone at Fentek and asked if they made any model m black keycap sets. They said they would but only if it was a large order around 50 to 100 sets. They said it would be around 5 dollars a cap they told me they would be more specific with the price once I was able to buy so that’s subject to change. I’m not sure if they can be made in double shot ABS or reverse dye sublimated PBT, but I can find out.

[Havattack]

No.

[Fraaaan]

I know it's called an "interest check" but please open up other ICs on the website and compare yours to others. You're giving us no information AT ALL and it looks like you have no idea what you're doing either considering the fact you don't even know if the caps would be ABS or PBT.

Also $5 per keycap is going to cost $505 to cover a 101-key Model M. Do you seriously think anyone's going to buy this?

[Seclusion]

This is my first time making a post. I just assumed that an interest check was just a way to gauge interest for a particular product. I didn’t know I’d have to figure out what kind of plastic the caps were made or that there was a price limit on interest checks.

[DukeEsquire]

This is my first time making a post. I just assumed that an interest check was just a way to gauge interest for a particular product. I didn’t know I’d have to figure out what kind of plastic the caps were made or that there was a price limit on interest checks.

Look at how other people do a IC to see how to run a proper IC:

https://geekhack.org/index.php?topic=104718.0

https://geekhack.org/index.php?topic=113200.0

https://geekhack.org/index.php?topic=112409.0

[Seclusion]

Alright I’ll come back to this once I get more info on how to run an IC.

[Visionaire]

Alright I’ll come back to this once I get more info on how to run an IC.

Don't sweat it. Still fair to ask around for some interest... but yes, there's not much to react to in the current format. Would recommend getting more information together, generating a feedback form, etc. Will follow along in this thread in case you have more questions.

[eskimojo]

I'm not interested in the keycaps, but I just wanted to give my two cents on the IC policing.

I don't think it's reasonable to expect a fully laid out, well structured IC similar to the ones linked above for something like this. Sure, it'd be nice, but the downright hostility to someone who's essentially asking "hey, I wanted to buy this but the manu is only interested in bigger batches - anyone else interested in making it happen?" is bizarre to me.

It's a worrying trend I've seen for a while now, but this thread is probably one of the most obvious examples of it. People seem to have in their heads a minimum requirement of what "really" constitutes an IC, and I think that bar's been raised too high. GH itself doesn't seem to have any specific rules about it.

Don't get me wrong, I think in most cases it's good for an IC to be well structured, and containing enough information for any viewer to make an informed decision on whether they're interested. As a project grows closer to GB (and thus an exchange of money), it's absolutely reasonable to expect more solid information. You want to trust that the money you're spending is going to be well spent, and you'll get the product you want without issue.

At the same time, I just think people should be more understanding that some projects are in earlier stages than others, and there's no minimum requirement on how developed a project is before asking other people's opinions.

[DukeEsquire]

I'm not interested in the keycaps, but I just wanted to give my two cents on the IC policing.

I don't think it's reasonable to expect a fully laid out, well structured IC similar to the ones linked above for something like this. Sure, it'd be nice, but the downright hostility to someone who's essentially asking "hey, I wanted to buy this but the manu is only interested in bigger batches - anyone else interested in making it happen?" is bizarre to me.

It's a worrying trend I've seen for a while now, but this thread is probably one of the most obvious examples of it. People seem to have in their heads a minimum requirement of what "really" constitutes an IC, and I think that bar's been raised too high. GH itself doesn't seem to have any specific rules about it.

Don't get me wrong, I think in most cases it's good for an IC to be well structured, and containing enough information for any viewer to make an informed decision on whether they're interested. As a project grows closer to GB (and thus an exchange of money), it's absolutely reasonable to expect more solid information. You want to trust that the money you're spending is going to be well spent, and you'll get the product you want without issue.

At the same time, I just think people should be more understanding that some projects are in earlier stages than others, and there's no minimum requirement on how developed a project is before asking other people's opinions.

I'm all for more open ended/unformed ICs, but I think OP needs a lot more information before hitting the gathering interest stage.

[switchnollie]

I'd want one of these since I can only find blank sets for my kish

[FishyKeebs]

I'm not interested in the keycaps, but I just wanted to give my two cents on the IC policing.

I don't think it's reasonable to expect a fully laid out, well structured IC similar to the ones linked above for something like this. Sure, it'd be nice, but the downright hostility to someone who's essentially asking "hey, I wanted to buy this but the manu is only interested in bigger batches - anyone else interested in making it happen?" is bizarre to me.

It's a worrying trend I've seen for a while now, but this thread is probably one of the most obvious examples of it. People seem to have in their heads a minimum requirement of what "really" constitutes an IC, and I think that bar's been raised too high. GH itself doesn't seem to have any specific rules about it.

Don't get me wrong, I think in most cases it's good for an IC to be well structured, and containing enough information for any viewer to make an informed decision on whether they're interested. As a project grows closer to GB (and thus an exchange of money), it's absolutely reasonable to expect more solid information. You want to trust that the money you're spending is going to be well spent, and you'll get the product you want without issue.

At the same time, I just think people should be more understanding that some projects are in earlier stages than others, and there's no minimum requirement on how developed a project is before asking other people's opinions.

this ic is literally a picture and one sentence...

[SwitchKeys]

It also sounds like whoever is quoting you doesn't seem to have a lot of interest in actually selling you the product.

Basic questions like material and printing method should be pretty straight forward - If they are telling you they will only share if you are ready to buy, and indeed at the prices they are quoting you - it doesn't sound like they really want to do business anyway.

Just my 2c

[Neely_12]

A little more info please.

[Smoaf]

yes more info I want please yes

[VXQN]

I'm not interested in the keycaps, but I just wanted to give my two cents on the IC policing.

I don't think it's reasonable to expect a fully laid out, well structured IC similar to the ones linked above for something like this. Sure, it'd be nice, but the downright hostility to someone who's essentially asking "hey, I wanted to buy this but the manu is only interested in bigger batches - anyone else interested in making it happen?" is bizarre to me.

It's a worrying trend I've seen for a while now, but this thread is probably one of the most obvious examples of it. People seem to have in their heads a minimum requirement of what "really" constitutes an IC, and I think that bar's been raised too high. GH itself doesn't seem to have any specific rules about it.

Don't get me wrong, I think in most cases it's good for an IC to be well structured, and containing enough information for any viewer to make an informed decision on whether they're interested. As a project grows closer to GB (and thus an exchange of money), it's absolutely reasonable to expect more solid information. You want to trust that the money you're spending is going to be well spent, and you'll get the product you want without issue.

At the same time, I just think people should be more understanding that some projects are in earlier stages than others, and there's no minimum requirement on how developed a project is before asking other people's opinions.

Kinda with you on this. IC doesn't always have to mean "extravagantly illustrated document". It should be okay for people to literally just ask "is it worth me doing more work on this?"

[Full]

I'm not interested in the keycaps, but I just wanted to give my two cents on the IC policing.

I don't think it's reasonable to expect a fully laid out, well structured IC similar to the ones linked above for something like this. Sure, it'd be nice, but the downright hostility to someone who's essentially asking "hey, I wanted to buy this but the manu is only interested in bigger batches - anyone else interested in making it happen?" is bizarre to me.

It's a worrying trend I've seen for a while now, but this thread is probably one of the most obvious examples of it. People seem to have in their heads a minimum requirement of what "really" constitutes an IC, and I think that bar's been raised too high. GH itself doesn't seem to have any specific rules about it.

Don't get me wrong, I think in most cases it's good for an IC to be well structured, and containing enough information for any viewer to make an informed decision on whether they're interested. As a project grows closer to GB (and thus an exchange of money), it's absolutely reasonable to expect more solid information. You want to trust that the money you're spending is going to be well spent, and you'll get the product you want without issue.

At the same time, I just think people should be more understanding that some projects are in earlier stages than others, and there's no minimum requirement on how developed a project is before asking other people's opinions.

Amen.