271–280 of 373 posts
Most people will defer to Substack because (A) the brand, and (B) it can be monetised which is probably the biggest draw.
Maybe I need to bring monetisation to Pagecord? :)
Counterpoint from someone who's been publishing on the internet for decades: no one will visit your website. It's as simple as that. You need a push mechanism to reach readers. RSS could be it, but it's too niche. Social media is kinda it, but algorithmic feeds reward political clickbait and just because someone clicks "follow" or "subscribe" is not a guarantee that they will ever see your posts. Substack gives you a…
Agreed. I have a blog, I don't really promote it, and no one reads it. Now, there is an argument that there's nothing on my blog worth reading, and yeah there might be truth to that, but regardless my traffic is on the order like 100 unique views per month, and I don't know what percentage of that is just scraping bots. I'm fine with this, I had no delusions of becoming a famous writer or making any money from it or…
Counterpoint from someone who's been publishing on the internet for decades: no one will visit your website. It's as simple as that. You need a push mechanism to reach readers. RSS could be it, but it's too niche. Social media is kinda it, but algorithmic feeds reward political clickbait and just because someone clicks "follow" or "subscribe" is not a guarantee that they will ever see your posts. Substack gives you a…
I'm outside the loop so please forgive me, but what is different between substack and a self managed mailing list? I've been subscribed to a few website/blogs newsletters for years and they appear to work fine, and I think the owners are not particularly technical, there's WordPress plugins.
There is a community there already - I’m not sure how useful it is but it’s there.
You can charge for newsletters - this is particularly popular for finance type things.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm pretty sure all of them. Because they'll never shut it without advance warning, due to the backlash.
Of course, if they were given warning they would export their subscribers. I am talking about if it was cut off without warning. I do not think the majority would have a list within the last year.
1) That's on them (those not exporting their lists as backup).
2) Almost zero chance happening without warning anyway.
Counterpoint from someone who's been publishing on the internet for decades: no one will visit your website. It's as simple as that. You need a push mechanism to reach readers. RSS could be it, but it's too niche. Social media is kinda it, but algorithmic feeds reward political clickbait and just because someone clicks "follow" or "subscribe" is not a guarantee that they will ever see your posts. Substack gives you a…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Hackers always use this argument against everything because you can in fact know some things about what one person, yourself, will do in the future. Thus they argue that you should not trust your things to other people but do it yourself, because, barring major illness, you can reasonably assume that you will try to do what is best for yourself in the future.
> because you can in fact know some things about what one person, yourself, will do in the future. Nope. At best you merely know what your current self intends to do in the future. Whether you'll do them then, or whether you'll even still want to do them then, or be able to do them then, or have regretted ever wanting to do them, and many other such things, we don't know.
But obviously the key principle is about retaining control over your business, income stream, relationship with your readers, or whatever it is you value. Sure, I change my mind and make mistakes. But I don't think that's a good argument for handing over control to some other entity which is equally changeable and fallible, but not primarily incentivised by my well-being.
Counterpoint from someone who's been publishing on the internet for decades: no one will visit your website. It's as simple as that. You need a push mechanism to reach readers. RSS could be it, but it's too niche. Social media is kinda it, but algorithmic feeds reward political clickbait and just because someone clicks "follow" or "subscribe" is not a guarantee that they will ever see your posts. Substack gives you a…
I'm outside the loop so please forgive me, but what is different between substack and a self managed mailing list? I've been subscribed to a few website/blogs newsletters for years and they appear to work fine, and I think the owners are not particularly technical, there's WordPress plugins.
It also means that if you comment on a substack, other people can find all the comments you made on every substack, by default.
Counterpoint from someone who's been publishing on the internet for decades: no one will visit your website. It's as simple as that. You need a push mechanism to reach readers. RSS could be it, but it's too niche. Social media is kinda it, but algorithmic feeds reward political clickbait and just because someone clicks "follow" or "subscribe" is not a guarantee that they will ever see your posts. Substack gives you a…
you said: "...from someone who's been publishing on the internet for decades: no one will visit your website" This is false. It's more accurate to say that "no one will visit your website if you do not properly setup a distribution ecosystem". It's hard work. But it works. All of my companies have been built by writing online --> distribution --> people finding my/our stuff. Your experience of 'doing it for decades'…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Substack gives you a way to push content to your subscribers without an intermediary deciding what they get to read. How do we know they won't start limiting your reach in the future? That's the path basically every other platform has gone down.
> How do we know they won't start limiting your reach in the future? You can never know anything about what anybody will do in the future? You can't. Why do hackers always use this argument against everything?