5 ms·

the following is a quote from the article. the article is a bait and switch. in the title, it tries to get you to believe that, hey, something you thought you h

by rStar 6y ago

the following is a quote from the article. the article is a bait and switch. in the title, it tries to get you to believe that, hey, something you thought you had almost no chance of achieving is actually within your reach, but then with this definition of “true fan” define it in terms of a 1 in 50/500/1000 of a population of fans in general, which are worse numbers than i would’ve guessed before reading the article. As I said, bait and switch. “ A true fan is defined as a fan that will buy anything you produce. These diehard fans will drive 200 miles to see you sing; they will buy the hardback and paperback and audible versions of your book; they will purchase your next figurine sight unseen; they will pay for the “best-of” DVD version of your free youtube channel; they will come to your chef’s table once a month. If you have roughly a thousand of true fans like this (also known as super fans), you can make a living — if you are content to make a living but not a fortune.”

coldtea 6y ago
I don't see anything "bait and switch" about it. It explicitly states you need "1000 true fans" not merely "1000 fans", and the wording already makes it evident that having a "true fan" is harder than merely having a fan or follower. The title already was clear, and the quote you posted doesn't change anything. So, to talk in paradigms, it's not so much that the article is "bait and switch" but that maybe you were expecting a "silver bullet".
- rStar 6y ago
  an article whos title translates to, in the mind if most readers, you can be successful with 1000 fans, and then suggests with the definition of the specific type of fan that you may need 100000 to have a thousand of the kind described, is disingenuous, literally, on its face. Therefore, bait and switch seems to me to be an accurate description. Also, the article makes that jump, but doesn’t actually state it straight out, because that would be admitting the title is just clickbait. Enjoy it, benefit from it, be inspired by it if you are so moved, you do you; but in my opinion, it’s trash garbage writing. it reminds me of the way people talk when they are trying to talk you into their cult or pyramid scheme.
  - coldtea 6y ago
    You had to use the qualifier "essentially" and avoid mentioning the actual title of the article, to make your point though... >but in my opinion, it’s trash garbage writing. Whatever. It's an article that makes a simple observation: that in this day and age, there are ways to make a viable living with small-scale patronage, facilitated by the internet, direct payments, and so on. It's not about being it easy to make it without putting the work.
    - rStar 6y ago
      i changed my last post to remove the word essentially, since at the time there wasn’t a reply button below your reply and I thought you had blocked me from replying or something. not trying to make you look bad and change specifically what you alluded to.
      - rStar 6y ago
        “ It's an article that makes a simple observation” - it’s an article that plays games with language to mislead its audience. to reiterate read the definition of true fan. are you that big of a fan of literally anyone? the true fan bar is so high, the article ceases to have meaning based on its own words. feel free to extrapolate your own meaning, which is what i believe you are doing.
        coldtea 6y ago
        >to reiterate read the definition of true fan. are you that big of a fan of literally anyone? Well, I do have a few Patreon accounts I support, so there's that. As for $100+, I have given such amounts to several causes (devs working on something like Asahi Linux etc). And there are indeed lots of people who are $100+ Patreon / Substack, etc supporters as you can see directly there. Not to mention OnlyFans, where the amounts can get crazy...
        rStar 6y ago
        that's reasonable. patreon is the closest we've come to the richard stallman "press a button send a dollar directly" that I know of, and I really believe in that concept. However, and this is my autism not being able to let stuff go, as I realize i should let this thread die a peaceful death, however, a few dollars split among many, doesn't make you a quote unquote true fan, in the definition of the article. I will now stop arguing with you, as you support developers with your personal dollars. Regarding only fans, i'm pretty sure that crosses over to paying for a service rather than paying for entertainment, although it does have 'fan' in the title so you've got me there at least.

by rStar 6y ago

coldtea 6y ago

I don't see anything "bait and switch" about it. It explicitly states you need "1000 true fans" not merely "1000 fans", and the wording already makes it evident that having a "true fan" is harder than merely having a fan or follower. The title already was clear, and the quote you posted doesn't change anything. So, to talk in paradigms, it's not so much that the article is "bait and switch" but that maybe you were expecting a "silver bullet".

rStar 6y ago
an article whos title translates to, in the mind if most readers, you can be successful with 1000 fans, and then suggests with the definition of the specific type of fan that you may need 100000 to have a thousand of the kind described, is disingenuous, literally, on its face. Therefore, bait and switch seems to me to be an accurate description. Also, the article makes that jump, but doesn’t actually state it straight out, because that would be admitting the title is just clickbait. Enjoy it, benefit from it, be inspired by it if you are so moved, you do you; but in my opinion, it’s trash garbage writing. it reminds me of the way people talk when they are trying to talk you into their cult or pyramid scheme.
- coldtea 6y ago
  You had to use the qualifier "essentially" and avoid mentioning the actual title of the article, to make your point though... >but in my opinion, it’s trash garbage writing. Whatever. It's an article that makes a simple observation: that in this day and age, there are ways to make a viable living with small-scale patronage, facilitated by the internet, direct payments, and so on. It's not about being it easy to make it without putting the work.
  - rStar 6y ago
    i changed my last post to remove the word essentially, since at the time there wasn’t a reply button below your reply and I thought you had blocked me from replying or something. not trying to make you look bad and change specifically what you alluded to.
    - rStar 6y ago
      “ It's an article that makes a simple observation” - it’s an article that plays games with language to mislead its audience. to reiterate read the definition of true fan. are you that big of a fan of literally anyone? the true fan bar is so high, the article ceases to have meaning based on its own words. feel free to extrapolate your own meaning, which is what i believe you are doing.
      - coldtea 6y ago
        >to reiterate read the definition of true fan. are you that big of a fan of literally anyone? Well, I do have a few Patreon accounts I support, so there's that. As for $100+, I have given such amounts to several causes (devs working on something like Asahi Linux etc). And there are indeed lots of people who are $100+ Patreon / Substack, etc supporters as you can see directly there. Not to mention OnlyFans, where the amounts can get crazy...
        rStar 6y ago
        that's reasonable. patreon is the closest we've come to the richard stallman "press a button send a dollar directly" that I know of, and I really believe in that concept. However, and this is my autism not being able to let stuff go, as I realize i should let this thread die a peaceful death, however, a few dollars split among many, doesn't make you a quote unquote true fan, in the definition of the article. I will now stop arguing with you, as you support developers with your personal dollars. Regarding only fans, i'm pretty sure that crosses over to paying for a service rather than paying for entertainment, although it does have 'fan' in the title so you've got me there at least.