Thank you so much for the kind words and taking the time and effort to engage. Just to clarify, Amar and I aren’t colleagues, but rather two writers who, like many of us, have noticed the implications of Substack’s business model (long tail) and its architecture (centralization), care about the future of long-tail authors (and read…
Thank you so much for the kind words and taking the time and effort to engage. Just to clarify, Amar and I aren’t colleagues, but rather two writers who, like many of us, have noticed the implications of Substack’s business model (long tail) and its architecture (centralization), care about the future of long-tail authors (and readers) here, many of whom have voiced similar concerns about Substack's direction, and want sustainable flourishing for all of us.
ICYMI. The fundamental long tail dilemma means there’s no direct financial incentive for Substack to solve issues like decentralization or the limitations of its tech architecture. We both appear to understand the signals around Substack's current trajectory—particularly as it enters its 7th year, grappling with monetization efforts, the potential for new ownership, and features that don’t always benefit the writers who came here for engagement and meaningful discourse.
I love your lecture hall and classroom analogies. It captures the kind of open exchange we all hope to find and this kind of thoughtful dialogue is still happening on some writers' Substacks (I mean through the long-form posts). However, the way Substack’s Notes algorithm works, with its emphasis on social media-style engagement, isn’t serving smaller, new writers as we hoped. It’s a burden, and worse, a distraction. All this just reinforces the tension between what Substack aims to do and the realities of its current model. (I'm working on a longer essay, have posted comments, and Notes -e.g. 'Substack Games: How Fair is a 'Sovereign Creator' Model?' where paid writers end up subsidizing free writers and readers. https://substack.com/@anitacoleman/note/c-80871620?)
Still, I remain supportive of Substack and hopeful that their spaces like this can preserve what’s most valuable—real engagement and meaningful discourse for building a global knowledge culture, and inspiring a curiosity culture for human well-being. I appreciate your belief in those of us trying to bring thoughtful writing and dialogue to the forefront. Thank you again for your support—your words mean a lot. All the best!
PS. I look forward to continuing the conversation!
David,
Thank you so much for the kind words and taking the time and effort to engage. Just to clarify, Amar and I aren’t colleagues, but rather two writers who, like many of us, have noticed the implications of Substack’s business model (long tail) and its architecture (centralization), care about the future of long-tail authors (and readers) here, many of whom have voiced similar concerns about Substack's direction, and want sustainable flourishing for all of us.
ICYMI. The fundamental long tail dilemma means there’s no direct financial incentive for Substack to solve issues like decentralization or the limitations of its tech architecture. We both appear to understand the signals around Substack's current trajectory—particularly as it enters its 7th year, grappling with monetization efforts, the potential for new ownership, and features that don’t always benefit the writers who came here for engagement and meaningful discourse.
I love your lecture hall and classroom analogies. It captures the kind of open exchange we all hope to find and this kind of thoughtful dialogue is still happening on some writers' Substacks (I mean through the long-form posts). However, the way Substack’s Notes algorithm works, with its emphasis on social media-style engagement, isn’t serving smaller, new writers as we hoped. It’s a burden, and worse, a distraction. All this just reinforces the tension between what Substack aims to do and the realities of its current model. (I'm working on a longer essay, have posted comments, and Notes -e.g. 'Substack Games: How Fair is a 'Sovereign Creator' Model?' where paid writers end up subsidizing free writers and readers. https://substack.com/@anitacoleman/note/c-80871620?)
Still, I remain supportive of Substack and hopeful that their spaces like this can preserve what’s most valuable—real engagement and meaningful discourse for building a global knowledge culture, and inspiring a curiosity culture for human well-being. I appreciate your belief in those of us trying to bring thoughtful writing and dialogue to the forefront. Thank you again for your support—your words mean a lot. All the best!
PS. I look forward to continuing the conversation!