3 ms·

It is fascinating how our online behavior deviates from our physical world behavior. This whole thread is about how asking for donations is a big fail online.

It is fascinating how our online behavior deviates from our physical world behavior. This whole thread is about how asking for donations is a big fail online. Yet, there's no lack of street performers in most major metros. Whether that is people in superhero costumes on Hollywood Blvd, or street dancers in times square, they all seem to be doing fine off donations. There is something about the online "free duplicate copy" concept that just makes value dissappear

vulcan01 6y ago
> they all seem to be doing fine off donations. They may be doing fine, but I bet that, for most, donations aren't their only source of income and they probably have another job.
elevaet 6y ago
Maybe it's not the "free duplicate copy" making the value disappear, but that the social context makes us feel anonymous and less obliged to reciprocate on the web. We're a social species that evolved in tribes. Street performers probably do a better job of stimulating that sense of tribe than abstract interactions on a web page do.
bemmu 6y ago
Donations seem to work for livecasters though. Maybe the donation button needs to give some response like that from the creator to work?
lotsofpulp 6y ago
>Whether that is people in superhero costumes on Hollywood Blvd, or street dancers in times square, they all seem to be doing fine off donations. All websites are not comparable to Times Square or Hollywood Blvd, in terms of how much attention they get. You also don't see performers in 99.99% of cities, even in other areas of the same city like NYC and LA.
paxys 6y ago
Yup, people are just wired to think of physical vs digital goods or experiences very differently. Cliche comparison by now, but I know so many people who will spend $4 on a Starbucks latte every day, but the thought of spending $4 a month on a web app that they use for hours every day is unimaginable.
- ducharmdev 6y ago
  I'd argue that people have been taught to expect it to be free. When fundamental services like search, email, chat, etc. are provided to consumers for free, why shouldn't other services be free too? Of course we know these services aren't really free; Google and Facebook still run their services on physical servers that have hosting costs. But by making their apps free and finding alternative revenue streams (i.e. selling data), they can set norms that harm competitors with less capital while making it easier to adopt new users (and collect more data).

vulcan01 6y ago

> they all seem to be doing fine off donations. They may be doing fine, but I bet that, for most, donations aren't their only source of income and they probably have another job.

elevaet 6y ago

Maybe it's not the "free duplicate copy" making the value disappear, but that the social context makes us feel anonymous and less obliged to reciprocate on the web. We're a social species that evolved in tribes. Street performers probably do a better job of stimulating that sense of tribe than abstract interactions on a web page do.

bemmu 6y ago

Donations seem to work for livecasters though. Maybe the donation button needs to give some response like that from the creator to work?

lotsofpulp 6y ago

>Whether that is people in superhero costumes on Hollywood Blvd, or street dancers in times square, they all seem to be doing fine off donations. All websites are not comparable to Times Square or Hollywood Blvd, in terms of how much attention they get. You also don't see performers in 99.99% of cities, even in other areas of the same city like NYC and LA.

paxys 6y ago

Yup, people are just wired to think of physical vs digital goods or experiences very differently. Cliche comparison by now, but I know so many people who will spend $4 on a Starbucks latte every day, but the thought of spending $4 a month on a web app that they use for hours every day is unimaginable.

ducharmdev 6y ago
I'd argue that people have been taught to expect it to be free. When fundamental services like search, email, chat, etc. are provided to consumers for free, why shouldn't other services be free too? Of course we know these services aren't really free; Google and Facebook still run their services on physical servers that have hosting costs. But by making their apps free and finding alternative revenue streams (i.e. selling data), they can set norms that harm competitors with less capital while making it easier to adopt new users (and collect more data).