4 ms·

I won't advertise but I work for a company which holds a social media for cooking and recipes. Folks there are totally averse to those and based stuff. It has

I won't advertise but I work for a company which holds a social media for cooking and recipes. Folks there are totally averse to those and based stuff. It has been hard for the company. The owner decided the company will die before using ads (for many reasons). The paid plan is stupidly cheap and when people sign and use for a month they stick with the company for years. But it is hard. Company laid off 80% of the team some time ago and is fighting to survive. I won't defend the owner or anyone, but things came to a point where people think they are not having consequences by giving infinite permission for being tracked all the time. They think if they are not logged they are not identified so they can't be exploited. It sucks because no one appreciates that. Though I have my opinions about business and whatever I kinda appreciate for the company not running on money from ads and not collecting a single piece of user information which is not required for work.

kikokikokiko 2y ago
If the company you work for REALLY does behave like that, you SHOULD DEFINITELY advertise it. Companies like this must be acknowledged and celebrated. The owner must be a really good person.
- purple-leafy 2y ago
  No form of advertising is good, I don’t want your advertising assaulting my senses. I don’t care if you piss gold or if you’re the pope or king, don’t advertise to me
  - pessimizer 2y ago
    Please advertise or you will go out of business before I ever hear about you.
  - EasyMark 2y ago
    Find sites that let you pay for content then I guess? Very few sites are charity sites, and need money to keep the lights on unless it’s just a passion site for the owners and they don’t care to be a community service. I don’t blame people trying to make some money for (many times) obviously hard work and curation of a site.
- keiferski 2y ago
  Unfortunately people love to complain about ads, but rarely actually get their wallets out when an alternative payment method is presented. Case in point: the frequent archive.org links to get around paywalls.
  - AlienRobot 2y ago
    That's sickening, honestly. IA is a tool to help you access websites that literally can't be accessed ever again otherwise. It's a noble and beautiful project. Some people use it just to get free stuff, to commit piracy, to infringe upon copyright. It's a perversion of what it was meant for.
    - pot4shhash 2y ago
      Piracy is a service problem. A paywall literally says “you might like this but pay me first to see what it is.” Substack has a “let me read it first” button and I’ve never seen an archive link to that even though there are plenty of private articles. The concept of gift links exists, but these websites footaxe themselves by limiting their most viral content —- ostensibly the best and cheapest marketing they could get, down the drain. You’re right. It is sickening.
      - keiferski 2y ago
        Substack's "let me read it first" is just a way to close the subscription popup, it has nothing to do with reading otherwise paywalled content. The thing is, having had some of my own content "go viral" before - it's not worth much. Most people will read it for a minute and move on. A tiny percentage will subscribe and an even tinier percentage will give you any money. So from the point of view of a creator, it makes a ton of sense to put up paywalls on things – but only once you've already gotten a bit of an audience and distribution method figured out.
        pot4shhash 2y ago
        > Substack's "let me read it first" is just a way to close the subscription popup, it has nothing to do with reading otherwise paywalled content. It has everything to do with telegraphed intention of not having content be gratis. The fact that you cannot even mentally keep the idea of subscription gates in the same bucket as paywalls says a lot.
- watwut 2y ago
  I think that big issue there might just be that infinite reoccurring payments for cooking app is just not something reasonable for most people to set up. People likely prefer to not have a cooking app over paying regularly for it and it is actually reasonable decision.
  - motbus3 2y ago
    That's the challenge. But at the same time, it costs like 1 usd/month if you get a holiday promotion and maybe 2/mon if full price. I know subscriptions and to the end of the month but there is no ad, no tracking, no personal stuff sold anywhere... Advertising is a facade industry for companies who tracks and sell your data. They gather info wether you have healthy habits, if you watch adult stuff, if drive well or if you need money and then sell that data for someone who will use to personalize prices to extract as much from you as they can.
- motbus3 2y ago
  Not sure if he is a good person or not. There may be multiple reasons for doing something BUT what matter s is that anyway it is a transparent honest product. If some one wants to look for it, it is called cookpad. Probably not the best but it works and although the subscription does not look super promising it works.
EasyMark 2y ago
I mean can the owner compromise and just do ads based on the content on the page? Those weren’t so bad in the “before times”. Maybe that just doesn’t bring in enough cash as ads that follow you around 10 different sites trying to sell you the same thing, but it seems like giving up free money and might be worth a shot.

kikokikokiko 2y ago

If the company you work for REALLY does behave like that, you SHOULD DEFINITELY advertise it. Companies like this must be acknowledged and celebrated. The owner must be a really good person.

purple-leafy 2y ago
No form of advertising is good, I don’t want your advertising assaulting my senses. I don’t care if you piss gold or if you’re the pope or king, don’t advertise to me
- pessimizer 2y ago
  Please advertise or you will go out of business before I ever hear about you.
- EasyMark 2y ago
  Find sites that let you pay for content then I guess? Very few sites are charity sites, and need money to keep the lights on unless it’s just a passion site for the owners and they don’t care to be a community service. I don’t blame people trying to make some money for (many times) obviously hard work and curation of a site.
keiferski 2y ago
Unfortunately people love to complain about ads, but rarely actually get their wallets out when an alternative payment method is presented. Case in point: the frequent archive.org links to get around paywalls.
- AlienRobot 2y ago
  That's sickening, honestly. IA is a tool to help you access websites that literally can't be accessed ever again otherwise. It's a noble and beautiful project. Some people use it just to get free stuff, to commit piracy, to infringe upon copyright. It's a perversion of what it was meant for.
  - pot4shhash 2y ago
    Piracy is a service problem. A paywall literally says “you might like this but pay me first to see what it is.” Substack has a “let me read it first” button and I’ve never seen an archive link to that even though there are plenty of private articles. The concept of gift links exists, but these websites footaxe themselves by limiting their most viral content —- ostensibly the best and cheapest marketing they could get, down the drain. You’re right. It is sickening.
    - keiferski 2y ago
      Substack's "let me read it first" is just a way to close the subscription popup, it has nothing to do with reading otherwise paywalled content. The thing is, having had some of my own content "go viral" before - it's not worth much. Most people will read it for a minute and move on. A tiny percentage will subscribe and an even tinier percentage will give you any money. So from the point of view of a creator, it makes a ton of sense to put up paywalls on things – but only once you've already gotten a bit of an audience and distribution method figured out.
      - pot4shhash 2y ago
        > Substack's "let me read it first" is just a way to close the subscription popup, it has nothing to do with reading otherwise paywalled content. It has everything to do with telegraphed intention of not having content be gratis. The fact that you cannot even mentally keep the idea of subscription gates in the same bucket as paywalls says a lot.
watwut 2y ago
I think that big issue there might just be that infinite reoccurring payments for cooking app is just not something reasonable for most people to set up. People likely prefer to not have a cooking app over paying regularly for it and it is actually reasonable decision.
- motbus3 2y ago
  That's the challenge. But at the same time, it costs like 1 usd/month if you get a holiday promotion and maybe 2/mon if full price. I know subscriptions and to the end of the month but there is no ad, no tracking, no personal stuff sold anywhere... Advertising is a facade industry for companies who tracks and sell your data. They gather info wether you have healthy habits, if you watch adult stuff, if drive well or if you need money and then sell that data for someone who will use to personalize prices to extract as much from you as they can.
motbus3 2y ago
Not sure if he is a good person or not. There may be multiple reasons for doing something BUT what matter s is that anyway it is a transparent honest product. If some one wants to look for it, it is called cookpad. Probably not the best but it works and although the subscription does not look super promising it works.

EasyMark 2y ago

I mean can the owner compromise and just do ads based on the content on the page? Those weren’t so bad in the “before times”. Maybe that just doesn’t bring in enough cash as ads that follow you around 10 different sites trying to sell you the same thing, but it seems like giving up free money and might be worth a shot.