601–610 of 1001 posts
If you don't pay for it, it's not your community. Again and again people think they get something for free, which they don't. If it's free you're a volunteer for the company, if you pay you're a customer.
Wikipedia is free, Linux is free, walking by the river is free. Why do people insist we must pay for nice things?
Smelled this one coming miles away. Next, they'll hand over fan-built communities to the entities that own the IPs they're dedicated to. Eg. r/starwars to Disney, r/startrek to Viacom/Paramount, etc. Then, old.reddit.com will stop working spontaneously, just like how they toyed with killing mobile browser access to force users to download the app, which they probably will eventually. That's going to be the final push…
Facebook and Twitter are not bot ridden ghost towns... but anyways, I'll make the opposite prediction: Reddit is going to turn out just fine and this episode will quickly become a memory from the past.
Smelled this one coming miles away. Next, they'll hand over fan-built communities to the entities that own the IPs they're dedicated to. Eg. r/starwars to Disney, r/startrek to Viacom/Paramount, etc. Then, old.reddit.com will stop working spontaneously, just like how they toyed with killing mobile browser access to force users to download the app, which they probably will eventually. That's going to be the final push…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Many people reviewing the Reddit app will be reviewing Reddit the platform, not the app as a means of accessing the platform.
Im curious about your source on that one, but let's suppose that that statement is true. Couldn't you say the same for Apollo? So, the large amount of positive reviews for the mobile clients also speak positively for the platform. Is that what you are theorizing?
I think it's less likely to happen with Apollo if at all, because those users are clearly aware of, and even have front of mind in the moment, the distinction between Reddit the platform and Apollo the client. The number of people who discovered Reddit via Apollo must surely be extremely small?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Twitter absolutely is. If it’s not bots, article spam, or ads, it’s the crazy MAGA-crowd jerking themselves off over their fake-outrage of the moment. It’s an absolute ghost town in terms of engaging, original, content. Their user numbers are obviously buoyed by absolute junk accounts and it’s been obviously so since Musk fired most of the company. FB is a boomer & genX meme-pocalypse that’s absolutely slathered with…
This is not true in developing countries. From my experience, the poorer a country, the more likely you are to see extensive, serious use of Facebook. And the revenue growth opportunity is huge for FB in these places. It is already flat or slightly negative in highly advanced countries.
Sheer quantity of users doesn't replace higher GDP cohorts.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> There are Reddit users waiting in the wings, wringing their hands ready to jump at the 'oppurtunity' to moderate established subreddits and will happily devote their time to custodial duties. (...) There are people who thrive on having power over others even though in this case, subreddit moderation, it is perceived power. Yes. Those are the very people who should be never ever allowed to become mods, or to be anyw…
> Yes. Those are the very people who should be never ever allowed to become mods, or to be anywhere near any position of power. Who do you think the existing mods are?
People are always stepping up to be mods. Most shouldn't be.
The existing mods of successful subreddits are the ones who stepped up, should have been mods, and who demonstrated it by creating a successful community. If you replace those by random wannabe mods, on average the result will be bad.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The visual design of the interface selects different segments humanity for the user base. That's why HN looks like this. A more 'friendly' UI attracts people who don't have much of note to say, will consume what they're given, and respond to ads more.
> A more 'friendly' UI attracts people who don't have much of note to say, will consume what they're given, and respond to ads more. That's a weird sort of elitism. Friendly UIs attract everyone, isn't that what a friendly UI means?
I'd characterize it as "text-dense" vs "spacy and image/video oriented".
The second is more immediate, it takes less concentration, so it attracts more people and more information that's not very meaningful.
By keeping things text-only, you keep the information more meaningful.