Hate to repeat myself, but despite its success, Substack’s business model is flawed. The minimum monthly subscription cost is $5; the average is about $6-$7, and rising, some creep into double digits I budget about $30 per month, and rotate my paid subscriptions through about a dozen stacks.
UnHerd is a much better value; WSJ is too, if you game their system. Substack HQ (bless their hearts) needs to shelve the $5 min. - would a writer rather get, say, $1.99 a month or $0 - we all know the answer. Maybe do some “value packs”. I can think of 10 different ways to improve their system (aside from computer glitches), why can’t they? Been on S/S over (2) years; big fan . . but.
I agree. I tried to suggest to Substack that they should allow tiny individual payments to any author from a fund. So say you put $20 into your Substack account. Then you should be able to pay ten cents to read an article from that money with a single click, no credit card transaction needed, and no specific subscription needed. At that level I would pay, but right now I don't pay anything. I got no response from Substack.
Substack also pissed of a lot of people with their recent deployment of the latest javascript, breaking the "like" button for tons of people. They never rolled it back or apologized. Cost me a couple of hours because I had to "upgrade" my browser and that in turn forced me to "upgrade" my OS. I put "upgrade" in quotes because all it got me is back to where I was before.
But all that said, it's still the best place for real discussion in the comment sections. Haven't been banned from any Substack except a Kamala one when I mentioned that she does not inspire confidence.
Great idea Patrick. Starbucks has a great refillable scan and pay system. (Not that I love Starbucks, or even go there often, but have to admit how well it works.) Something like that would be a brilliant addition to substack. I sadly don’t have the income to pay for subscriptions … I’m on fumes right now in my own world. But this extra option could allow more flow, when I have the income, to give money as well as thanks. Perhaps a pay-as-you-go option like this would create a reverse incentive to not commit to subscribe, which would negatively impact writers, so that should be considered. But perhaps there’s a way it could enhance flow?
I follow about 70 Substacks; it would be great to be able to pay a dime, or even a quarter, to read a really interesting article when it pops up on one of them.
And Substack should pay more attention to readers - what they need & what they want.
Make the site more user frendly (ie. We used to be able to manage our subscriptions on the App, then suddenly, without explanation, we couldn’t - there’s still vestigial, confusing, links on the App)
Some of the comments sections are great, but some are the pits; all it takes is a few bots or a**holes to ruin things. It would be great readers could just block certain “people” across all of the Substacks we follow.
And all censorship should be transparent to all readers.
I agree, censorship should be transparent. On my own site, if a comment gets flagged for being a deliberately insulting personal attack (which is the real discussion-ender) it's still visible in a "view source" of the page just so everyone can see what it was if they really want to.
09-08-24: I have absolutely no faith in Substack remaining independent of the Deep State FBI-DHS-CIA-IRS-Biden-Harris Lunatic Asylum-ABC-NBC-CBS-NY TIMES-WaPo-NPR et al FASCIST censorship, as is currently the vile state of affairs with Facebook, et al.
NONE. In fact, Substack might already be in the clutches of the Stalinist Communists ("Communism with a Capitalist Tip Jar; care for some NFL Commanders tix?") running the U.S.A. If not, it's only a matter of time because the percentage of corruptible Americans/foreign actors is so high, the task of finding corporate weasels eager to be corrupted/bribed will be or already has been mere child's play.
oh boy at 2 bucks I would never leave the screen. as it is I wade through Racket Yuri and Public. and when i can stomach it The Free press ( where i stated when it was Common Sense) the dog got fatter. so did I.. but I am better educated..
Personally I pay nothing because I follow only a few authors and already I am 'happy' to see articles to available only for subscribers because I'm already not able to catch up with the amount of free writings...
After the IRS disallowed deductions for charitable contributions I changed my giving strategy. Instead of only contributing to registered nonprofits, where the CEOs routinely make $1 million a year or more, I just put a certain percentage of my free cash into non-traditional things like: 1) giving a bit of cash to family members, particularly young people starting out in life; 2) giving a bit of financial help to friends or acquaintances who fall on hard luck; 3) tipping an insane amount of money to food servers who provide over the top service; 4) doing paid subscriptions even for authors I’m not able to read frequently.
Like most people I’m not rich, but those of us who don’t have the immense wealth of a George Soros or Bill Gates need to charitably subvert the establishment.
I’d also like to find a way to help out young people who want to go to trade school, since the middle and working classes are ignored and disdained by government and the professional managerial class. And “non-diverse” people are affirmatively and economically disadvantaged by nearly every institution in society. We need a lot more people in this country (legally) who make things and a lot fewer “studies” majors who sit at desks doing bs jobs.
I would add, (5), if someone wants to support NGOs find small local ones in the West with few or no staff that get their hands dirty (actually doing things). I do this with local environmental groups that clean streams and other water bodies with the goal of re-wilding (streamkeeping), and local wildlife rescue groups.
Also, (6), you can find lots of really good small NGOs around the globe “getting shit done” whereby small dollar amounts go very far.
Stay away from the big NGOs as they are either infected by Woke politics or corrupt managers with big salaries.
Strictly and solely my personal opinion, I mean no disrespect. It's about quality not not quantity. Why must everythng always boil down to the Almighty dollar? Substack is like a five star restaurant hidden away that remains true to it's customers. The second word gets out - there's goes your great restaurant - more overhead etc. What makes Substack so awesome is the quality - some writers are excellent but overall it's the comment section and those who read Substack that makes it so superlative and unique.
That being said, I and many others I've become friends with on and solely because of Substack have noticed the difference these last few months. Many of us are deeply deeply concerned some writers might actually be controlled opposition and therefore Substack has now been infiltrated from precisely what we all had been running away from. Even worse though are some of the comments sections that have now turned into a school yard playground for the totally white trash ignorant imbeciles that have nothing else better to do with their time but play on the Internet - starting and instigating arguments. For the longest time and since it's inception Substack was so far above this level of mentality but the more popular it becomes the more it has begun to attract exactly what we all abhor.
In closing celebrate the fact Substack is like a five star restaurant not everyone knows about therefore enabling it to maintain it's stellar reputation and quality of service. Don't blow a good thing and turn it into Facebook and all that other social media crap that's already out there.
Good point. There is the concept of " too much of a good thing".
Also, for many of us, there are only so many hours in the day which one can devote to reading, and add to that, engaging in the insightful discussions within the comments section.
There are so many great things you learn in the comment section - many people post such informative links further solidifying the caliber of readership you so very desperately want to maintain.
for example. The Free Press. stated out as Common Sense.. a la Thomas Paine.. but has morphed into just another left wing news place.. I keep reading oit just for the comments but even there they now “moderate” and remove people. I was “banned for a day” for using the word faggot and some people have been removed altogether.. keep up your standars Yuri. I know you wont let us down
09/08/24: I absolutely agree with you about "The Free Press." They made suitable noises at the start, but now they're daydreaming about the NY Times coming to its senses so that they can return to the fold, and in doing so, they're just another corrupted media (albeit devoid of malice) to ignore. I hadn't heard about the censorship, which is another nail in their $3 coffin. Watch the NYT make them an offer they can't (lack of spine) refuse.
I love the S/S-ers I subscribe to (3), I whole heartily agree with "... overall it's the comment section and those who read Substack that makes it so superlative and unique." I am heartened by the number of Commenters who see things the way I do. It makes me realize how many ppl are out there with the same thought and feelings. >>>>> I have also been troubled re: "... concerned some writers might actually be controlled opposition and therefore Substack has now been infiltrated from precisely what we all had been running away from." Paranoid? No. Cautious? Absolutely.
I may be atypical but I don't spend anywhere near $1000/year. Zero on MSM, cable, streaming. Some on substack and as much free internet as is available. Substack is building up.
Just wanted to say this. I'm in the process of moving so won't start dropping money anywhere, but will be easily willing to drop in 50$ monthly after things get back in normal. And seemingly there's a slow influx of people from my part of the world(Eastern Europe).
Yes. Substack needs to make getting a paid subscription frictionless. There are likely a lot of potential subscribers who statistically just don’t make it over that hurdle of moving from app to webpage. I think the rationale is that Apple takes something like a 25% cut of revenue for subscriptions done through apps. Substack also seriously needs to add the ability to edit posts through the app.
You have to go to the Substack website, and then either to the specific stack, or hit your icon on the upper right & select “settings” & scroll down to find site. Noodle.
I’ve been an avid Substacker for several years. My knowledge base across the major subject matter has increased exponentially. However there are flaws in the payment system that are preventing me from more paid subscriptions. I use the App, not a computer. It is nearly impossible to remove your credit card from Substack. Subscriptions renew automatically, that I don’t want renew. Asking for a refund or cancellation of a paid subscription does not work. I would absolutely spend more on paid subscriptions but, the payment system must become drastically more subscriber friendly. I want control over who I pay.
You’re right about the payment system. Last year I hit the default “Founders” button by mistake and a few minutes later, $250.00 was sucked out of my credit card, and I know this has happened to others. Luckily I got an alert & froze the card, others have struggled to get refunds.
Also, I used a second email address for one of my paid stacks, and this me caused god-awful problems. Customer service sort of stinks.
Completely agree that "my knowledge base across the major subject matter has increased exponentially." I had not considered that aspect of SS. Thanks for putting it so well.
Not sure about your figures, but the gist is right. Can't we have a Substack Unlimted for say £20 a month that let's you view any publisher. Substack could give £4 to each of the 5 publishers you select or visit most. This would be a bit like Amazon's Kindle Unlimited. Publishers could opt out if it didn't work for them.
It’s interesting that with streaming services the promise was “get the shows, movies, news and entertainment that is tailored to YOUR needs”, yet stream merely destroyed cable and created 8-9 networks on the internet. Add social media for news clips.
With Substack you now have the option to build up the types of information and entertainment that you truly desire, without the overbearing reach of an algorithm,
Good luck Yuri! Great optimistic post and I loved the MSM/Substack meme. I wish Substack had more than three levels to aim for. That would be good for those who are close to reaching even the first checkmark level to have more attainable goals thereafter. It would encourage more support by readers, methinks.
09/08/24: Bravo, Yuri. Somehow, when I read the question, [I knew that*] you wouldn't dodge it and would answer candidly. BTW, isn't it much easier to tell the truth than to engage in all of the haunting contortions necessary to tell and remember one's falsehoods?
The dangerous point is, if Substack reaches a critical mass, governments and other rabid organizations will start to coerce and censor; and they know how, their plethora of tools seemingly being unlimited.
So let's think about DE-centralizing the hardware/software/administration before it is too late !!! If people on this platform, which includes founders, employees, authors and readership want to have lots of fun also in the coming future.
The Nostr Protocol looks like the most viable option for that. But the question always ends up at how to securely get finding to creators without some payment processor getting haughty.
09/08/24: One common mistake is that many commentators do not have a realistic gauge of how much time people have to read their posts. If I see an ocean of ink, I don't care how good it is --- I'm out the door. And when I write these things, that's among the primary considerations. Verbosity is Public Enemy No. 1.
Substack needs to protect the paid subscriber in reasonable ways. Now, authors are also dictators in some cases. That's mostly true when even mild criticism is posted in comments. Then, those that squealed (justifiably mostly) of the censorship that drove them to substack become the new speech overlords.
The problem is this doesn’t take into account some of the non-news related services we pay for with the other subscriptions. We keep a TV streaming subscription NOT for the news but primarily to watch sports, and occasionally a tv show, documentary, or movie. We pay for a couple other streaming services just for movies, TV series, and documentaries. Not news. So it doesn’t leave much left for many other subscriptions. I cannot watch our local NFL/MLB/NBA team on Substack nor can I watch shows or documentaries here.
I don’t think you are comparing apples to apples when you include ALL forms of entertainment in the same financial subscription bucket as news.
You also have podcasts like the above that basically are documentaries of sorts.
So, rather than "cannot" I'd say it's likely that you either simply haven't found what you're looking for, or someone has simply yet to create it. In contrast to it being impossible, I mean.
Hate to repeat myself, but despite its success, Substack’s business model is flawed. The minimum monthly subscription cost is $5; the average is about $6-$7, and rising, some creep into double digits I budget about $30 per month, and rotate my paid subscriptions through about a dozen stacks.
UnHerd is a much better value; WSJ is too, if you game their system. Substack HQ (bless their hearts) needs to shelve the $5 min. - would a writer rather get, say, $1.99 a month or $0 - we all know the answer. Maybe do some “value packs”. I can think of 10 different ways to improve their system (aside from computer glitches), why can’t they? Been on S/S over (2) years; big fan . . but.
I agree. I tried to suggest to Substack that they should allow tiny individual payments to any author from a fund. So say you put $20 into your Substack account. Then you should be able to pay ten cents to read an article from that money with a single click, no credit card transaction needed, and no specific subscription needed. At that level I would pay, but right now I don't pay anything. I got no response from Substack.
Substack also pissed of a lot of people with their recent deployment of the latest javascript, breaking the "like" button for tons of people. They never rolled it back or apologized. Cost me a couple of hours because I had to "upgrade" my browser and that in turn forced me to "upgrade" my OS. I put "upgrade" in quotes because all it got me is back to where I was before.
But all that said, it's still the best place for real discussion in the comment sections. Haven't been banned from any Substack except a Kamala one when I mentioned that she does not inspire confidence.
Great idea Patrick. Starbucks has a great refillable scan and pay system. (Not that I love Starbucks, or even go there often, but have to admit how well it works.) Something like that would be a brilliant addition to substack. I sadly don’t have the income to pay for subscriptions … I’m on fumes right now in my own world. But this extra option could allow more flow, when I have the income, to give money as well as thanks. Perhaps a pay-as-you-go option like this would create a reverse incentive to not commit to subscribe, which would negatively impact writers, so that should be considered. But perhaps there’s a way it could enhance flow?
I follow about 70 Substacks; it would be great to be able to pay a dime, or even a quarter, to read a really interesting article when it pops up on one of them.
Yes. I find people give generously when given the option.
Starbucks?
🎯… because I can’t use the “like” button 🧐😖
Right, it's either technical incompetence or a real desire on someone's part to annoy the users.
And Substack should pay more attention to readers - what they need & what they want.
Make the site more user frendly (ie. We used to be able to manage our subscriptions on the App, then suddenly, without explanation, we couldn’t - there’s still vestigial, confusing, links on the App)
Some of the comments sections are great, but some are the pits; all it takes is a few bots or a**holes to ruin things. It would be great readers could just block certain “people” across all of the Substacks we follow.
And all censorship should be transparent to all readers.
I agree, censorship should be transparent. On my own site, if a comment gets flagged for being a deliberately insulting personal attack (which is the real discussion-ender) it's still visible in a "view source" of the page just so everyone can see what it was if they really want to.
I agree with making the site more user friendly. I’m what might be called a casual user, but I find managing my account to be awkward at best.
09-08-24: I have absolutely no faith in Substack remaining independent of the Deep State FBI-DHS-CIA-IRS-Biden-Harris Lunatic Asylum-ABC-NBC-CBS-NY TIMES-WaPo-NPR et al FASCIST censorship, as is currently the vile state of affairs with Facebook, et al.
NONE. In fact, Substack might already be in the clutches of the Stalinist Communists ("Communism with a Capitalist Tip Jar; care for some NFL Commanders tix?") running the U.S.A. If not, it's only a matter of time because the percentage of corruptible Americans/foreign actors is so high, the task of finding corporate weasels eager to be corrupted/bribed will be or already has been mere child's play.
oh boy at 2 bucks I would never leave the screen. as it is I wade through Racket Yuri and Public. and when i can stomach it The Free press ( where i stated when it was Common Sense) the dog got fatter. so did I.. but I am better educated..
I think they should let people pay per article as well as through monthly subscription. Writers would reach a wider audience with that option IMHO.
They won't do it because that's a horrible idea. Pay $2 if you don't want good content and just want substack to be a clickbait AI farm.
Personally I pay nothing because I follow only a few authors and already I am 'happy' to see articles to available only for subscribers because I'm already not able to catch up with the amount of free writings...
After the IRS disallowed deductions for charitable contributions I changed my giving strategy. Instead of only contributing to registered nonprofits, where the CEOs routinely make $1 million a year or more, I just put a certain percentage of my free cash into non-traditional things like: 1) giving a bit of cash to family members, particularly young people starting out in life; 2) giving a bit of financial help to friends or acquaintances who fall on hard luck; 3) tipping an insane amount of money to food servers who provide over the top service; 4) doing paid subscriptions even for authors I’m not able to read frequently.
Like most people I’m not rich, but those of us who don’t have the immense wealth of a George Soros or Bill Gates need to charitably subvert the establishment.
I’d also like to find a way to help out young people who want to go to trade school, since the middle and working classes are ignored and disdained by government and the professional managerial class. And “non-diverse” people are affirmatively and economically disadvantaged by nearly every institution in society. We need a lot more people in this country (legally) who make things and a lot fewer “studies” majors who sit at desks doing bs jobs.
Excellent advice.
I would add, (5), if someone wants to support NGOs find small local ones in the West with few or no staff that get their hands dirty (actually doing things). I do this with local environmental groups that clean streams and other water bodies with the goal of re-wilding (streamkeeping), and local wildlife rescue groups.
Also, (6), you can find lots of really good small NGOs around the globe “getting shit done” whereby small dollar amounts go very far.
Stay away from the big NGOs as they are either infected by Woke politics or corrupt managers with big salaries.
Great approach!
Art…you sound a lot like Mike Rowe. I appreciate what he does, the man has a lot of common sense.
🎯🎯🎯 Terrific ideas!
Strictly and solely my personal opinion, I mean no disrespect. It's about quality not not quantity. Why must everythng always boil down to the Almighty dollar? Substack is like a five star restaurant hidden away that remains true to it's customers. The second word gets out - there's goes your great restaurant - more overhead etc. What makes Substack so awesome is the quality - some writers are excellent but overall it's the comment section and those who read Substack that makes it so superlative and unique.
That being said, I and many others I've become friends with on and solely because of Substack have noticed the difference these last few months. Many of us are deeply deeply concerned some writers might actually be controlled opposition and therefore Substack has now been infiltrated from precisely what we all had been running away from. Even worse though are some of the comments sections that have now turned into a school yard playground for the totally white trash ignorant imbeciles that have nothing else better to do with their time but play on the Internet - starting and instigating arguments. For the longest time and since it's inception Substack was so far above this level of mentality but the more popular it becomes the more it has begun to attract exactly what we all abhor.
In closing celebrate the fact Substack is like a five star restaurant not everyone knows about therefore enabling it to maintain it's stellar reputation and quality of service. Don't blow a good thing and turn it into Facebook and all that other social media crap that's already out there.
Good point. There is the concept of " too much of a good thing".
Also, for many of us, there are only so many hours in the day which one can devote to reading, and add to that, engaging in the insightful discussions within the comments section.
There are so many great things you learn in the comment section - many people post such informative links further solidifying the caliber of readership you so very desperately want to maintain.
Totally agree! I just started reading "Mao's America: A Survivor's Warning" Xi Van Fleet on the recommendation of a fellow Commenter.
I sometimes find the Comments section more thought provoking than the original post.
Soooooooooooooooooooooooooo TRUE! I have met some of the most intelligent well informed and educated people IN the comment section!!
Quite true.
for example. The Free Press. stated out as Common Sense.. a la Thomas Paine.. but has morphed into just another left wing news place.. I keep reading oit just for the comments but even there they now “moderate” and remove people. I was “banned for a day” for using the word faggot and some people have been removed altogether.. keep up your standars Yuri. I know you wont let us down
09/08/24: I absolutely agree with you about "The Free Press." They made suitable noises at the start, but now they're daydreaming about the NY Times coming to its senses so that they can return to the fold, and in doing so, they're just another corrupted media (albeit devoid of malice) to ignore. I hadn't heard about the censorship, which is another nail in their $3 coffin. Watch the NYT make them an offer they can't (lack of spine) refuse.
I love the S/S-ers I subscribe to (3), I whole heartily agree with "... overall it's the comment section and those who read Substack that makes it so superlative and unique." I am heartened by the number of Commenters who see things the way I do. It makes me realize how many ppl are out there with the same thought and feelings. >>>>> I have also been troubled re: "... concerned some writers might actually be controlled opposition and therefore Substack has now been infiltrated from precisely what we all had been running away from." Paranoid? No. Cautious? Absolutely.
I agree. The focus to go after more of the potential money ruins everything and destroys what was good.
Be careful what you wish for.
I may be atypical but I don't spend anywhere near $1000/year. Zero on MSM, cable, streaming. Some on substack and as much free internet as is available. Substack is building up.
1000 is crazy high. I must be max at 300...
First, one must admire the mind that thinks in broad terms of markets and products.
We can expand that to entirely new horizons. To be the Columbus of economics so to speak.
Steve Jobs created Apple as a computer maker, in competition with machines from Gates.
He had no idea the biggest offering would be a phone, much less services a solid second.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/382260/segments-share-revenue-of-apple/
I wonder what comes next in a society increasingly connected, while individuals are, paradoxically, ever more isolated…
Gulags and gruel?
...and I thought it was the gulag-gruel ... 🤣🤣🤣🤣
Not entirely implausible, sad to say.
Could get ugly...but I think we'll beat the Globalist in the end.
Ride deep and dig your spurs in...cuz it could take a piece.
I agree with you, Ryan.
Better hide with your horse .... underground !!! There will be NO place to go.
somehow I think he knew. ..
He stumbled on to phones from updating the iPod.
Non-Americans can also do a lot to move their $$ to substackers over subscription to American MSM rags.
Just wanted to say this. I'm in the process of moving so won't start dropping money anywhere, but will be easily willing to drop in 50$ monthly after things get back in normal. And seemingly there's a slow influx of people from my part of the world(Eastern Europe).
Good luck with the moving!
Yuri, how does one become a paid subscriber? When I go to manage subscription it tells me I can’t do it in the app.
Is this a CIA operation of subversion?…or is it me as my father used to say;
“Son life is tough, but it’s tougher when your stupid.”
Hilarious quote from your dad. You can’t upgrade in the app. Hit upgrade or manage subscription on desktop browser.
Yes. Substack needs to make getting a paid subscription frictionless. There are likely a lot of potential subscribers who statistically just don’t make it over that hurdle of moving from app to webpage. I think the rationale is that Apple takes something like a 25% cut of revenue for subscriptions done through apps. Substack also seriously needs to add the ability to edit posts through the app.
You have to go to the Substack website, and then either to the specific stack, or hit your icon on the upper right & select “settings” & scroll down to find site. Noodle.
I’ve been an avid Substacker for several years. My knowledge base across the major subject matter has increased exponentially. However there are flaws in the payment system that are preventing me from more paid subscriptions. I use the App, not a computer. It is nearly impossible to remove your credit card from Substack. Subscriptions renew automatically, that I don’t want renew. Asking for a refund or cancellation of a paid subscription does not work. I would absolutely spend more on paid subscriptions but, the payment system must become drastically more subscriber friendly. I want control over who I pay.
You’re right about the payment system. Last year I hit the default “Founders” button by mistake and a few minutes later, $250.00 was sucked out of my credit card, and I know this has happened to others. Luckily I got an alert & froze the card, others have struggled to get refunds.
Also, I used a second email address for one of my paid stacks, and this me caused god-awful problems. Customer service sort of stinks.
Completely agree that "my knowledge base across the major subject matter has increased exponentially." I had not considered that aspect of SS. Thanks for putting it so well.
Not sure about your figures, but the gist is right. Can't we have a Substack Unlimted for say £20 a month that let's you view any publisher. Substack could give £4 to each of the 5 publishers you select or visit most. This would be a bit like Amazon's Kindle Unlimited. Publishers could opt out if it didn't work for them.
It’s interesting that with streaming services the promise was “get the shows, movies, news and entertainment that is tailored to YOUR needs”, yet stream merely destroyed cable and created 8-9 networks on the internet. Add social media for news clips.
With Substack you now have the option to build up the types of information and entertainment that you truly desire, without the overbearing reach of an algorithm,
Impertinent question how many paying subscribers do you have? What percentage pay?
Somewhere between 100 and 1,000, closer to 1,000 paid. 23,000 total. Hoping to reach orange check by end of year.
Good luck Yuri! Great optimistic post and I loved the MSM/Substack meme. I wish Substack had more than three levels to aim for. That would be good for those who are close to reaching even the first checkmark level to have more attainable goals thereafter. It would encourage more support by readers, methinks.
Proud to be a supporter!
Godspeed.
09/08/24: Bravo, Yuri. Somehow, when I read the question, [I knew that*] you wouldn't dodge it and would answer candidly. BTW, isn't it much easier to tell the truth than to engage in all of the haunting contortions necessary to tell and remember one's falsehoods?
*Added 09/27/24.
09/27/24: What is an "orange check"? And if you haven't received one yet, why is there one next to your name above? Thanks.
Good idea indeed !!!
Share with friends and family, job, etc.
The dangerous point is, if Substack reaches a critical mass, governments and other rabid organizations will start to coerce and censor; and they know how, their plethora of tools seemingly being unlimited.
So let's think about DE-centralizing the hardware/software/administration before it is too late !!! If people on this platform, which includes founders, employees, authors and readership want to have lots of fun also in the coming future.
The Nostr Protocol looks like the most viable option for that. But the question always ends up at how to securely get finding to creators without some payment processor getting haughty.
Sure wish I had all the time I need to read all of the Comments in all my SS subs.
09/08/24: One common mistake is that many commentators do not have a realistic gauge of how much time people have to read their posts. If I see an ocean of ink, I don't care how good it is --- I'm out the door. And when I write these things, that's among the primary considerations. Verbosity is Public Enemy No. 1.
Exactly
Substack needs to protect the paid subscriber in reasonable ways. Now, authors are also dictators in some cases. That's mostly true when even mild criticism is posted in comments. Then, those that squealed (justifiably mostly) of the censorship that drove them to substack become the new speech overlords.
Interesting. It's almost like government is a reflection of the people.
Wait a minute....
The problem is this doesn’t take into account some of the non-news related services we pay for with the other subscriptions. We keep a TV streaming subscription NOT for the news but primarily to watch sports, and occasionally a tv show, documentary, or movie. We pay for a couple other streaming services just for movies, TV series, and documentaries. Not news. So it doesn’t leave much left for many other subscriptions. I cannot watch our local NFL/MLB/NBA team on Substack nor can I watch shows or documentaries here.
I don’t think you are comparing apples to apples when you include ALL forms of entertainment in the same financial subscription bucket as news.
"nor can I watch shows or documentaries here."
https://mytochmystik.substack.com/
It's in Swedish, but there's an example of a documentary series on Asatro and other old Northern culture.
https://josepheverettwil.substack.com/p/podcast-problems-with-therapy-with
You also have podcasts like the above that basically are documentaries of sorts.
So, rather than "cannot" I'd say it's likely that you either simply haven't found what you're looking for, or someone has simply yet to create it. In contrast to it being impossible, I mean.
I pay so why would i “upgrade to founding”? meanwhile I love you Yuri.. dont tell your wife