I'm reading this piece in The Federalist from last December: "Dave Rubin Launches Creator Hub ‘Locals’ To Counter Big Tech: ‘Small Is The New Big’/Nearly a year after leaving Patreon, Rubin says his new tech company Locals is the solution, taking power from online behemoths and placing it into the hands of individual creators."
I've heard of this place because Scott Adams talks about it on his podcast. He's moving his work onto it, and I'd like to take a look. I'd probably subscribe, but I need to look at it first! I get this far:
I'm not going to join something I can't see at all.
I started looking at that yesterday as I was contemplating moving my own work onto this site or something like it. I'm not considering closing this blog, just ending the comments here and having a parallel blog with commenting on the same posts. I'd work on various extras (podcasting, etc.). Anyway, I think the commenting community could flourish without the need for burdensome and annoying moderation.
But with Locals, I cannot even get to the point where I can see what I would be using. I created an account over there but it didn't get me to a place where I could get a feel for writing in that format! It's just not user-friendly enough for me to get started.
And even as I'm contemplating moving my own work into a membership format, I'm feeling my own unwillingness to join anything. I couldn't bring myself to click to "join" the Scott Adams "community," even though I really wanted to see what it looks like, and I'm willing to speak openly about it here. It's not as though I'm a secret consumer of Scott Adams material. I just resist joining. And I'm not drawn in by the idea of being in a "community."
ADDED: I see that I wrote "I think the commenting community could flourish" and then "And I'm not drawn in by the idea of being in a 'community.'" Is that inconsistent? Not really, I don't comment on other blogs, and I don't look for in-person opportunities to comment on various issues. This blog exists and has persisted as a daily activity for 16 years because I'm not the community type.
Posts
50 comments:
I don't like being the product these sites sell either .... they are making money somewhere, and if it's not off content creators it is off me.
Blogger likely does the same, but is clearly undercapitalized that way. This new venture is meant to make the owners money ... and likely will be mined far more than this place.
You can go through the join scott adams community and fill in the minimal information easily enough and then you get to $7 a month minimum, and then drop the whole thing.
It's his new subscription model for when the local newspapers fail and his cartoon business ends.
There's lots of free content elsewhere so I doubt it will work. The free content guys always take over the market.
I get the aversion to being a 'joiner'. I have the same issue and always have. It's made for an interesting life in sales. That said, you have so many creative impulses, and if you could get more information on how to use this format to work in a way that is best for you, it might give you another creative outlet. Let's face it- you have multiple creative drives. And you're not about to 'retire'.
My suggestion is that you contact Dave Rubin directly. You're famous in these circles. The name Ann Althouse might be an attractive 'get' for his platform. It's possible that he could talk with you, work with you to see how this can be best used to fit your creative needs.
Just a suggestion.
I agree with Temujin. Contact Rubin. He's just starting this up and would probably welcome the feedback.
I know I would much rather have someone tell me their concerns (then I can fix them if I agree) rather than just not join or come (then I can't fix anything!).
I joined. I listen to Scott's podcasts and figure I could afford to send him a little each month. I'm willing to pay for content, either this way or using your Amazon portal. If you'd like I can email screen shots of you what it looks like for Scott's screen.
"My suggestion is that you contact Dave Rubin directly. You're famous in these circles. The name Ann Althouse might be an attractive 'get' for his platform. It's possible that he could talk with you, work with you to see how this can be best used to fit your creative needs."
That sounds like a lot of trouble. I remember when I talked to Roger Simon about joining... er, participating in... Pajamas Media. So incredibly annoying!
"You can go through the join scott adams community and fill in the minimal information easily enough and then you get to $7 a month minimum, and then drop the whole thing."
You say that as though my resistance was about needing to pay money, but I didn't even get to the point where money was requested. I was unwilling to press a button marked "join" — especially for something I couldn't see.
"I just resist joining. And I'm not drawn in by the idea of being in a "community.""
It's interesting how this blog has become a "community", one in which you participate and one that, without you, is obviously unsustainable.
Turning off comments gives it much less of
a community feel. And makes it much less work for you to maintain the integrity of the work you wish to produce.
I am curious why you don't turn off comments permanently on this forum. Thankful that you don't because I gain additional insight and information from comments. It's like having a research team scattered all about the 'net working for me because I can't possibly delve into all the nooks and crannies myself. I also enjoy your insights, viewpoints, and the unique perspective you bring to a topic. And I like, and appreciate, that you have to spend quite a bit of time searching around, reading, and then blogging about a wide variety of topics.
I'm not a joiner either. And yet - here I am. Perhaps because reading and commenting doesn't require an actual "join" type commitment? I feel no obligation - either because I spent money or because I acknowledged some time of commit by join agreement - to not just disappear or reappear at will.
Agree.
Yeah, that's interesting. I'm always leery of being roped into these "online communities". The plan always seems to be to lure people in, and then once they get comfortable, start exerting control and jacking up the prices. That you're supposed to sign up before seeing what they got, just would make me even more suspicious.
As for going to a paying membership for commenting, it would depend on who who was commenting. I'm not going to pay money to read Howard/Inga/Chuck fight with people.
I noticed PJ media was mentioned. Where is that today? It was just another attempt by a bunch of middle men to profit off others work, while controlling the product. This seems to be a constant in the art world. You always have "record" companies, promoters, and book publishers, placing themselves between the artist and the public and making $$ off them, while gate-keeping and controlling everyone.
If Althouse is so big, and Rubin is starting up, why doesn't he contact her?
Don’t close the blog! Don’t change the format!
"This blog exists and has persisted as a daily activity for 16 years because I'm not the community type'
And yet . . .
Non-community-types make the best community.
I wouldn't want to join a community of community types.
"I am curious why you don't turn off comments permanently on this forum."
I really do like to see what people have to say. I have a rhythm of writing and then reading some comments, and I like to participate in the comments here. It feels more alive with comments.
It's just unfortunate that I can't leave the place open and let comments flow in. It's either before the fact or after the fact moderation. There's no possibility of just letting whatever comes in be displayed. Take my word for it. You are not seeing the horrendous stuff people try to publish here.
note: Althouse - not a joiner.
Respect this. I'm with Groucho, myself.
The Blogger Community
"I wouldn't want to be a member of any club that would have me as a member,"
- Groucho Marx
Thank you for all the work you put into making comments work despite enormous headwinds. I’m just one person but this project of yours genuinely makes my life better, and I am very very grateful for it. Even though I’m a sassmouth sometimes.
Hmmm. I think I'd pay for Althouse.
I already pay for Althouse through PayPal; would do so to follow the conversation if it moved to Locals. I hope commenting there isn’t a Disqus plug-in though. Don’t care for that format.
I heard a good podcast interview with Dave Rubin at Red Pilled America the other day and would like to support his work.
I've felt the same way about Patreon. You have to have an account to even look at other accounts. For lurkers, this doesn't work. I want to see and study before I "join". Joining isn't a simple thing, because it requires me to enter first, when I don't even know what I'm entering. Marketeers, understand the value of guests!
"If Althouse is so big, and Rubin is starting up, why doesn't he contact her?"
Please, don't encourage that. I don't like talking to people with something to sell. I want the website to be a good interface, not to have to have someone do it for me and with me. Who is this stranger who gets access to me? I don't want to have to trust someone who's offering me special treatment. I want something that is open and committed to working for an ordinary person, not to deal with some real-life person who is patching things on the fly for me. I only want to work on a service that is substantial and in good order and that will last a long time. I don't want to have to deal with anything technical. It should just work -- isn't that an old Apple slogan... "it just works." Yeah, do that.
Well professor you are an iconoclastic voice like rogan or adams but a more academic mien, a valuable platform in a narrowing digital landscape.
"If Althouse is so big..."
That's a funny "if."
My favorite tag on this blog is "big and small."
Is this the Dave Rubin, the Rubin Report guy mentioned a few nights ago, or just a Dave Rubin?
This reminded me of the once-renowned best-selling "sexologist," and I wanted to find out what happened to him, but couldn't find him among the legions of "Dr. David Rubin's." He is still alive and he spells his last name "Reuben."
I’m with Pants. Althouse has been here for me for a long time.
Perhaps there will be ways to get your asks: Creaming through to higher value comments with less moderation work on your guys’ side, podcasting and video capabilities but very little ‘join’ requirements etc.
I have paid for a few writers and bloggers, because I felt myself growing from the exchange and because they were clear in their plans for the money at a certain point in time. It was more like helping a friend. One element of micropayments I like is that it can grant freedom without too much incentive and behavior interference, but i’d like it somehow paid more in a lump sum like donations. I don’t want to think of every word with a dollar value as I scan the page.
Perhaps like Althouse, I feel the non-join impulse deep in my bones when it comes to something more creative like writing.
"Digital homes for creators" sounds like GeoCities (and a little bit like the "homes for heroes" promised after the war). Geocities let people create websites that they grouped into neighborhoods and gave addresses. You could visit SiliconValley for tech, CapeCanaveral for space, CapitolHill for politics and other groups and go from website "house" to "house" learning and discussing more and more.
Needless to say, they're not around anymore. Web searching killed GeoCities. Both in the general sense (you don't need virtual streets and neighborhoods when a web search will take you anywhere you want to go) and in the specific sense (Yoohoo bought them out and spiked the project (I mean Yahoo, but I don't feel like changing what I wrote)). Somebody who wrote a book about lost cities and destroyed buildings was kind enough to include an obituary for the virtual GeoCities in the book.
Madame Communitarian Contrarian.
Why not outsource the comment moderation to someone else, a trusted volunteer? Other message boards do that. 4chan has "janitors" and you could do the same.
I understand wanting off of Youtube because they unfairly demonetize, but Scott Adams doesn't need anyone's money. Is he really trying to charge people now?
I don't fully understand why Blogger is inadequate and you are looking at other formats. Not that you have to explain yourself. I wonder if you want to do more than work with words - pictures, drawings. Or is the format so short that you can't lay out your ideas? Or is it that you can't jump in and argue since everyone cowers when you disagree? Whereas on those podcasts you used to do there'd be long back and forths. Or is this part of the impulse to create a real conservative alternative media? Or a real digital media? Newspapers as we know them came out of the coffee-houses and clubs in London where merchants, financial men and visiting gentry gathered and exchanged news and rumors. The best ones had the most celebrated "wits" there, talking every day. Then Addison and others began writing the Spectator which was a lot like a modern blog - came out every day, had a variety of topics, sometimes serious, sometimes amusing. It was intended to be read by people who couldn't go to coffee-houses such as women or people not in London; it was like a visit there. And from that came newspapers somehow. Now newspapers are fading but the original newspaper format, is emerging again as blog. So entrepreneurs are trying to open a "coffee house" and gather some "wits."
Always the historian.
Why not have a reddit like Slate Star Codex?
You can have comments on your main site, or not, or for some posts. Then the "community" can do whatever on the reddit. IDK if the Althouse comments section is big enough to sustain that, but it's an idea.
"I don't fully understand why Blogger is inadequate and you are looking at other formats."
1. To exclude abusive commenters, 2. To earn income for my work, 3. To host podcasting.
"Or is the format so short that you can't lay out your ideas?"
There's no limit on the length of posts. I'm making them exactly as long as I want.
"Whereas on those podcasts you used to do there'd be long back and forths."
No one else spoke in my podcasts, but I did often read comments and respond to them. I can do that on the blog here though to. It was just an approach to the podcast I took back then.
"Or is this part of the impulse to create a real conservative alternative media?"
Conservative! Absolutely not. And that's another reason to stay out of Locals. It seems right wing. I don't want to be in some right-wing enclave. Totally the wrong message for me. It's a fluke that commenters here tend to be right wing, but I attribute that to the tendency of left-wingers to expect to be agreed with about everything and to try to use intimidation and shunning, while right-wingers are happy enough to be tolerated and not shunned and keep making their arguments as if they're going to convince people some day. It's not what I want but what I've observed.
"... So entrepreneurs are trying to open a "coffee house" and gather some "wits.""
I already have that here.
Another reason to stay out of the subscription format is that even if I had a pretty large number of subscribers, it would be a lot less than the number of readers here, and I would have a new sense of obligation and readers would have a new sense of entitlement. I don't want to be thinking about that all the time, which I probably would. The key thing about this 16-year experience for me is the flow. It's a mysterious energy. I could ruin it!
Could you make reading free, but have people pay to comment? I would pay extra if commenters were forced to show their real name and address.
Prof, don't change that dial!
As crummy as moderation can be for everyone--I don't like it either--this place is an oasis. (With exceptions, the worst of the complainers about moderation tend to be the most in need of moderation.)
And don't you make enough from the Amazon button? Or do I misunderstand the arrangement?
I'm the original non-joiner, and when I run into a situation like yours with Local I stop too--no free sample, fuhgeddaboudit.
Narr
OTOH, when I DO join something I put in a real effort
If you're already exploring having two platforms, perhaps move the blog to a hosted Wordpress going forward? You could have ads and ban commenters. Leave the blogger blog up for historical links.
"You are not seeing the horrendous stuff people try to publish here."
Thanks for keeping us safe, like Governor Whitmer. ; )
“I f you're already exploring having two platforms, perhaps move the blog to a hosted Wordpress going forward? You could have ads and ban commenters.”
That isn’t enough to be worth changing. I was interested in limiting the commenters to people who paid to subscribe and to give them new things. Ads are not anything I don’t have here.
I am not able to export the archive, so starting over somewhere else is a real negative that needs to be offset by benefits.
Could you make reading free, but have people pay to comment? I would pay extra if commenters were forced to show their real name and address.
So hard to tell when people are being ironic and when they aren't ...
Yeah, Some people can't get it out of their head two major mistakes:
1) Althouse is a conservative
2) Althouse owes them something.
BTW, there's probably some way to transfer all your old posts, but it would probably need some computer expert to do it.
Ann Althouse going Hollywood is intriguing.
Maybe you could do an extra subscription based program based on your personal commentary rather than changing or getting rid of something that works. I know of some millenials who do a daily youtube show, have follower facebook groups which is all free stuff and brings in new viewers. They also have a lucrative subscription membership platform where they reveal more private thoughts and personal information. They are experts in marketing and branding. Perhaps you need more marketing expertise?Create something new and see how you like that and if it works. Like for example you might consider doing a subscription based pod cast with Meade, or a commentary on products you enjoy, or more depth engagement with people on books you like, etc.
As you said though, when people are paying for a product or service that obligates you to perform in a way that "garners" approval. It's a job like your job was at the university. There were constraints which is probably why you took to blogging in the first place. Unless you can adopt a FU attitude that might be counterproductive to your flow.
I enjoy some of the commenters here very much but I think the idea of people paying to add their comments and then you getting the profits is unsustainable. I'm also not egotistical enough to pay to share my thoughts although some might.
I am not able to export the archive, so starting over somewhere else is a real negative that needs to be offset by benefits.
It may be too big a blog to export easily with the blogger tools, but it's not actually difficult to pull in the blog posts themselves just by scraping. You can also scrape the comments if necessary. You could start a gofundme or a Patreon to pay a kid a few bucks to scrape it and then convert it into whatever the target format of your new platform is on Local, but you'd have to join at least two things.
You don't pay to express your thoughts. You pay to avoid having to read the "thoughts" of certain others.
"I enjoy some of the commenters here very much but I think the idea of people paying to add their comments and then you getting the profits is unsustainable."
That's like saying a newspaper publishes your letter to the editor and keeps the profits. Or you comment on Youtube and they keep the profits. You're paying for the blog AND to see your comments in print and read by others. Why would you expect a "cut of the profits"? Would you expect the NYT to send you a check if they printed your letter to the editor?
Althouse, if she ever set up a pay-to-read blog could have 3 pricing plans:
1) Just read Althouse posts = $X.
2) Read ALthouse and the Comments = $X+$Y
3) Read comments, Althouse, AND *write* comments = $X+$Y+$Z
It'd be interesting to see how many people would pay extra to read the comments. Paint me skeptical.
Blogger rcocean said.. Why would you expect a "cut of the profits"? Would you expect the NYT to send you a check if they printed your letter to the editor?
If you sent in a letter once or twice you would not expect to be compensated. You would appreciate the opportunity to have a public forum where you express yourself. The Wall Street Journal would be an example of a newspaper where only subscribers have the privilege of commenting. However if you consistently contributed unique and creative content which others came to look forward to and greatly added to their experience and were therefore increasing the value of the newspaper you would probably be called a columnist and expect to compensated. That's what I am talking about.
"“I f you're already exploring having two platforms, perhaps move the blog to a hosted Wordpress going forward? You could have ads and ban commenters.” That isn’t enough to be worth changing. I was interested in limiting the commenters to people who paid to subscribe and to give them new things. Ads are not anything I don’t have here. I am not able to export the archive, so starting over somewhere else is a real negative that needs to be offset by benefits."
Thanks for this prod, Churchy. I have been giving it more thought. And I see at Wordpress that I can set up a blog with a paying subscription. What I could do is continue this blog here, but mirror it there, with all the same posts, including extras on the post, and with comments only at the paid-subscription Wordpress site!
I get 2 million page views a month here, and I don't really know how many individuals that represents. It's quite a mystery. How many of you would go for the paid-subscription site, I don't know. Actually, I could experiment with it, see how well it works and decide if I like it.
During the experiment, there would be no commenting on posts here, but everyone can continue to read here for free. I could see how many people come over to the subscription blog, how many of them comment, how vibrant the new comments section is, how unburdened from moderating I feel, what I am inspired to do for extras — such as a podcast, more video, including video with me, more interaction with you, and extra addenda to posts. It might feel great — partly because of the income, but also because of a feeling of liberation. It needs to be intrinsically rewarding, and if it isn't, I can just end it, and this blog will always be here.
The comments are a big part of the Althouse blog's attraction. Changing the format in which they've thrived is obviously a risky proposition. Having to "join" the blog, much less pay, to see them or to write one is going to remove a lot of the spontaneity that animates the commenting now. I've only started to comment this year, but I doubt I would carry it over into a more restricted environment. In fact, it is not impossible that you will find you are heading back to the days of 10- to 15 polite comments per post, as I see in the archives. "This blog will always be here," but not necessarily in the same way. $0.02.
Post a Comment