This is a business model suggestion that substack may want to consider. Substack platform has without a doubt become the X Public Square of the free, longer written expression. However the 10% financial model mainly benefits substack and not publishers and subscribers. Very few publishers can reach the number of paid subscribers that TheFreePress has. I would like to subscribe to at least 20 publishers but avg. of $8 each per month becomes financially not viable for some or maybe many of us. There has to be a way for substack to charge 1 fee and subscribers to choose a number of paid publishers and substack to share this revenue with the selected publishers. If it makes sense to you, please pass it on to substack.
Yes! That is exactly what I have wanted Substack to do since the day I joined. Have different tiered plans: $20 for 4 authors, $30 for 7, etc. Something like that…
I have a friend who’s running for a seat in the Vermont State House. He is very smart, he’s a Buddhist, but also a Harris supporter. I’d love to hear him debate you.
See Matt Taibbis article this week on the DNC's Sinister Rebranding of Freedom. A debate on the subject of freedom is urgently needed when 'freedom from misinformation' is being used to justify censorship. Orwellian.
Certain debates between opposing viewpoints would be worth watching--those would be the ones where both sides have reasonably rational positions. However, many that are suggested above would be a waste of time, since only one of the participants has anything interesting to say.
Just to offer one egregious example, Taylor Lorenz has to be one of the most over-exposed individuals in the journalist-blogger lineup. She has tried to make a career out of her schoolgirl tattling and crying on-line, offering nothing that would be worth debating. I learned a long time ago to simply move on whenever her name pops up as either the author or the subject of a post.
$10 would be cheap. I'd pay more. Make it happen.
Yuri,
This is a business model suggestion that substack may want to consider. Substack platform has without a doubt become the X Public Square of the free, longer written expression. However the 10% financial model mainly benefits substack and not publishers and subscribers. Very few publishers can reach the number of paid subscribers that TheFreePress has. I would like to subscribe to at least 20 publishers but avg. of $8 each per month becomes financially not viable for some or maybe many of us. There has to be a way for substack to charge 1 fee and subscribers to choose a number of paid publishers and substack to share this revenue with the selected publishers. If it makes sense to you, please pass it on to substack.
Yes! That is exactly what I have wanted Substack to do since the day I joined. Have different tiered plans: $20 for 4 authors, $30 for 7, etc. Something like that…
Other thoughts:
—Del Bigtree vs Neil deGrasse Tyson, the Rematch
—Dr. Peter McCullough vs Peter Hotez OR Paul Offit
Tucker Carlson vs Rachel Maddow
Great idea , if we did't live in clown world, Th left never argues in good faith.
Michael Shellenberger vs Heather Cox Richardson
I'd add
- John Robson from the Climate Discussion Nexus against any climate apocalypse propagandist
- James Lindsay against any peddler of woke idology
- Michael Shellenberger against any "renewable energy" utopist
I have a friend who’s running for a seat in the Vermont State House. He is very smart, he’s a Buddhist, but also a Harris supporter. I’d love to hear him debate you.
Happy to do it. Smart and Harris supporter is a contradiction. All hail Bernie’s people’s republic of Vermont!
Comrade Yuri: A debate of interest would be real Yuri (you) vs. AI Yuri.
Budda. life is suffering. so yeah I get it..
..would be much more entertaining than the Paris Olympics. i'll go grab my popcorn..
Yup! Cleaning the sheep barn beats the Paris media show. The athletes deserve better.
A foreign policy debate with John Mearsheimer and Jeffery Sachs on one side. Not sure who would be good for the other side. Some well known Neocons.
See Matt Taibbis article this week on the DNC's Sinister Rebranding of Freedom. A debate on the subject of freedom is urgently needed when 'freedom from misinformation' is being used to justify censorship. Orwellian.
Certain debates between opposing viewpoints would be worth watching--those would be the ones where both sides have reasonably rational positions. However, many that are suggested above would be a waste of time, since only one of the participants has anything interesting to say.
Just to offer one egregious example, Taylor Lorenz has to be one of the most over-exposed individuals in the journalist-blogger lineup. She has tried to make a career out of her schoolgirl tattling and crying on-line, offering nothing that would be worth debating. I learned a long time ago to simply move on whenever her name pops up as either the author or the subject of a post.
isnt she some famous singer with a footballer boyfriend?
Great pairings! Offer them to Bari Weiss and her managed debates.
Weird that your link to ‘skewering’ Heather Cox Richardson didn’t work…
Lol, side bet on the cowards, (leftist), not debating Every time.
If they we interested in debate, they would not be the turds that they are.
I had a similar idea a while back that went exactly nowhere. Hopefully you can convince people to get onboard!