4 ms·

This is hinted at by dbingham's comment elsewhere, but I believe many fan communities and information stores that host user-generated content should be run as n

This is hinted at by dbingham's comment elsewhere, but I believe many fan communities and information stores that host user-generated content should be run as non-profits. One of my favorite YouTube channels is PanTheOrganizer, who is effectively how I learned to detail and care for my own vehicles. Far and away the best channel in that particular niche, but something that stands out about it he is extremely professional, with well-produced content, but he doesn't support himself with the YouTube channel. Dude lives in a McMansion and drives a Porsche, but it's entirely from a normal day job, and filming videos about car detailing is just him filming a hobby he's been passionate about for decades and would be doing anyway even if YouTube didn't exist. Asking how to monetize something like GameFAQs or Wikia feels like how do you monetize friends sharing tips and talking about common passions with each other? Why does that need to be monetized? Some dude figures out left-right-B-A-B-B and posts it to a message board and doesn't need to be paid for it. I guess another example is my favorite podcast, Iron Culture. Both the podcast and the YouTube channel don't accept sponsorships and lose money, but the hosts are both coaches, one is a scientist, one runs a small supplement company and hosts a History channel YouTube show, and they make their money from that. Recording themselves talking about their research and interests that they'd be talking about with each other anyway doesn't need to be its own full-time job. Granted, I don't know what this means for real journalism that involves running beats, traveling, long-form investigations, all of which are definitely full-time jobs and not something you just want people doing as a hobby they record themselves during. But a lot of "good content" is not journalism. It's just people recording their thoughts and findings while doing a hobby they love in a way that they would have done for free in the past while still having a regular job, but for whatever reason, that's no longer good enough.

snide 4y ago
I think that's valid. I guess then what I'd look to create is something akin to Stripe Atlas + a content delivery platform for non-profit communities. I think it's a lot easier to just say "make it non-profit" without understanding how hard doing something like that might be for your average content creator.
- giantrobot 4y ago
  Maybe the average content creator isn't actually making something that is financially sustainable. Just because a lot of effort went into something doesn't mean someone else owes them for the act of creation. Someone else has to value the created content. Even then that value needs to be somewhere north of a dollar because it's not practical to conduct transactions less than that. Before anyone screams "crypto" the transaction fees for cryptocurrencies are ludicrous and even in the best case there's not really a way to pay someone less than a dollar. Even though magazines are largely dead/dying that subscription model seems like the only workable one. You get a bunch of content for a relatively low yearly price. Even then no individual creator is going to get independently wealthy.
snet0 4y ago
> Why does that need to be monetized? Because it costs money. Some things, e.g. contributing to the Wikia, don't cost money, they just cost time. You can't pay for a website with time, though, you need to pay a host.

snide 4y ago

I think that's valid. I guess then what I'd look to create is something akin to Stripe Atlas + a content delivery platform for non-profit communities. I think it's a lot easier to just say "make it non-profit" without understanding how hard doing something like that might be for your average content creator.

giantrobot 4y ago
Maybe the average content creator isn't actually making something that is financially sustainable. Just because a lot of effort went into something doesn't mean someone else owes them for the act of creation. Someone else has to value the created content. Even then that value needs to be somewhere north of a dollar because it's not practical to conduct transactions less than that. Before anyone screams "crypto" the transaction fees for cryptocurrencies are ludicrous and even in the best case there's not really a way to pay someone less than a dollar. Even though magazines are largely dead/dying that subscription model seems like the only workable one. You get a bunch of content for a relatively low yearly price. Even then no individual creator is going to get independently wealthy.

snet0 4y ago

> Why does that need to be monetized? Because it costs money. Some things, e.g. contributing to the Wikia, don't cost money, they just cost time. You can't pay for a website with time, though, you need to pay a host.