3 ms·

But that's what I mean - I don't feel like they're beating users for more profit here as much as just eating Patreon's lunch. As a user, if someone I'm paying $

But that's what I mean - I don't feel like they're beating users for more profit here as much as just eating Patreon's lunch. As a user, if someone I'm paying $5/month on Twitch or Patreon wants me to pay them via Discord instead, that's fine by me as a user. Discord has generally been doing a good job of making more money by selling more and better features to people, or at least trying to. If they're not profitable now, and I doubt they are, I'd rather they keep trying to innovate or improve on other people's bad businesses to grow vs. charging to not make the platform worse like Reddit and co. As someone who used to pay for a Vent/Mumble/Teamspeak server, as well as hosting for chat apps, Discord is currently giving me that for free. I understand that that's costing them money they need to make back some way, so if they can do that by stealing Patreon's business, or making a better Steam, or a better Jackbox, or charging companies for better server features like higher bitrate audio/video, then that's fine by me. I'm just not seeing how this new feature is obviously worse for users where we have to "take it little by little until it's too late". You're acting like Discord is removing features and doing clearly malicious things that we're all just tolerating. The name changes are a misstep, but doesn't seem malicious. Them adding new features and trying to sell them seems like just an extension of the brand, which as long as it doesn't degrade the core product, is pretty much the best way for a company to grow.

jjulius 3y ago
>I'm just not seeing how this new feature is obviously worse for users where we have to "take it little by little until it's too late". You're acting like Discord is removing features and doing clearly malicious things that we're all just tolerating. Huh? In my first response to you I said, "I'd argue that the improvement for the users is just a byproduct in Discord's eyes". I've never said that this particular move is an inherently negative one for users who use Patreon. Two things can be true at once - a move primarily motivated by fiscal reasons can also be good for users. Because sure, as you and another user in this comment chain (their quote is the second quote below) have said... >If they're not profitable now, and I doubt they are... >There's no way Discord is profitable. ... I get that they need to make a profit. But as I've also said, I can't help but be pessimistic. This change may benefit users, but if they're still not profitable after this change, what next? Yeah, this might not "feel like they're beating users for more profit here as much as just eating Patreon's lunch", but that's the whole point. Again, "pardon my pessimism"...
- noirbot 3y ago
  Sure, but the long-horizon pessimism is back to what I was saying re: isn't that just being pessimistic about capitalism writ large? I don't think that's a wrong position to take, but it doesn't feel healthy or helpful to look at every banal or even positive thing a company does and immediately jump to "but because of capitalism, they're probably going to ruin it all later on." There's no decision you can't make that statement about. It's always true that a capitalist company will have incentives that cut against the user. Pessimism is what it is, but at some point it feels like texting your friends every morning with "another day closer to dying." It's not wrong, but why do you feel it's important to bring up? If anything, the part of your original statement that I most disagree with is that this is "the encroachment of enshittification". It's only an "encroachment" if you see pretty much any decision by any company as being a step towards enshittification. The only thing that wouldn't qualify is closing the company down.
  - jjulius 3y ago
    >Sure, but the long-horizon pessimism is back to what I was saying re: isn't that just being pessimistic about capitalism writ large? I tend to think that, yeah, more often than not, capitalism ruins good things. The only difference is... >... it doesn't feel healthy or helpful to look at every banal or even positive thing a company does and immediately jump to "but because of capitalism, they're probably going to ruin it all later on." ... I don't do that for every company all the time as some kind of "blanket take". I take it on a case-by-case/circumstantial basis and, in this instance, Discord's current situation (VC-backed tech company taking losses for user growth but will ofc need to profit at some point) makes it, in my eyes, a stronger candidate for the enshittification path than many companies. >... at some point it feels like texting your friends every morning with "another day closer to dying." It's not wrong, but why do you feel it's important to bring up? Because I initially commented only taking issue with someone's use of the word "just" when they said this was "just Discord making it easier to set things up and manage" - "just" is disingenuous because it's obvious that Discord would like (needs?) some of that money. It would only be the equivalent of waking up and texting my friends if I were to have made my own freestanding comment that said, "Hey everyone, this is enshittification!". I didn't do that - I only used that word once you responded to me and prompted me to expand on my thoughts.

jjulius 3y ago

>I'm just not seeing how this new feature is obviously worse for users where we have to "take it little by little until it's too late". You're acting like Discord is removing features and doing clearly malicious things that we're all just tolerating. Huh? In my first response to you I said, "I'd argue that the improvement for the users is just a byproduct in Discord's eyes". I've never said that this particular move is an inherently negative one for users who use Patreon. Two things can be true at once - a move primarily motivated by fiscal reasons can also be good for users. Because sure, as you and another user in this comment chain (their quote is the second quote below) have said... >If they're not profitable now, and I doubt they are... >There's no way Discord is profitable. ... I get that they need to make a profit. But as I've also said, I can't help but be pessimistic. This change may benefit users, but if they're still not profitable after this change, what next? Yeah, this might not "feel like they're beating users for more profit here as much as just eating Patreon's lunch", but that's the whole point. Again, "pardon my pessimism"...

noirbot 3y ago
Sure, but the long-horizon pessimism is back to what I was saying re: isn't that just being pessimistic about capitalism writ large? I don't think that's a wrong position to take, but it doesn't feel healthy or helpful to look at every banal or even positive thing a company does and immediately jump to "but because of capitalism, they're probably going to ruin it all later on." There's no decision you can't make that statement about. It's always true that a capitalist company will have incentives that cut against the user. Pessimism is what it is, but at some point it feels like texting your friends every morning with "another day closer to dying." It's not wrong, but why do you feel it's important to bring up? If anything, the part of your original statement that I most disagree with is that this is "the encroachment of enshittification". It's only an "encroachment" if you see pretty much any decision by any company as being a step towards enshittification. The only thing that wouldn't qualify is closing the company down.
- jjulius 3y ago
  >Sure, but the long-horizon pessimism is back to what I was saying re: isn't that just being pessimistic about capitalism writ large? I tend to think that, yeah, more often than not, capitalism ruins good things. The only difference is... >... it doesn't feel healthy or helpful to look at every banal or even positive thing a company does and immediately jump to "but because of capitalism, they're probably going to ruin it all later on." ... I don't do that for every company all the time as some kind of "blanket take". I take it on a case-by-case/circumstantial basis and, in this instance, Discord's current situation (VC-backed tech company taking losses for user growth but will ofc need to profit at some point) makes it, in my eyes, a stronger candidate for the enshittification path than many companies. >... at some point it feels like texting your friends every morning with "another day closer to dying." It's not wrong, but why do you feel it's important to bring up? Because I initially commented only taking issue with someone's use of the word "just" when they said this was "just Discord making it easier to set things up and manage" - "just" is disingenuous because it's obvious that Discord would like (needs?) some of that money. It would only be the equivalent of waking up and texting my friends if I were to have made my own freestanding comment that said, "Hey everyone, this is enshittification!". I didn't do that - I only used that word once you responded to me and prompted me to expand on my thoughts.