If the NYT and other outlets can't make it at scale with model where users pay--and scale is the big issue--then social media sites won't succeed either. Which brings me to my point: With CounterSocial, what you see now is what it will always be without proper funding. If you are happy with that, then good for you.

Historically, models where the users pay have never worked in media. Newspapers and magazines always made the lion's share of their profits from ads, as did TV. User funded TV like the BBC has always lost money.

What about media companies like HBO and Netflix? They are able to survive on user fees. However, they can do so only when they are able to offer premium, high-demand content that cannot be found anywhere else. That's why Netflix is now in trouble.

I get the fact that some people like the lack of scale at Mastodon and CounterSocial, but the main value of Twitter to me has been its scale. When looking for a Twitter alternative, I'm not looking for chat or messaging. I'm looking for interactive news and commentary.

Twitter has become the premier place on the internet to find this. Without news providers or newsmakers, the other sites will never fill this niche.

@John_Scotus it's a good thing you're not in charge.

@Brisse What do you mean? Are you against movie nights with free pizza and beer? Because that's what I'd offer all CounterSocial users. Of course, under the current model, they'd have to donate money first.

@John_Scotus woah it's almost like you don't understand the product vs the person being the product. People pay for movie night here because THEY AREN'T THE PRODUCT and they don't wish to be. the VC model makes them the product, and it's a shit business move. It goes against everything CoSo was built for.

@John_Scotus It's successfully run this way for the last five years with Jester filling in the gaps from time to time. I'm just pitching suggestion for folks that like the place to help us fund it too.

@John_Scotus
It's called occupying a niche. A platform with investor funding needs to pay off the investors eventually. If the user/donor model doesn't pay the bills, it can't pay the bills plus the investors.

Coso not being beholden to advertisers makes it unique. It doesn't have to serve every person on the internet as long as there is a sufficient minority of people willing to pay for a non-advertiser-funded platform.

@John_Scotus

Funders might seek control over content or access. We saw how that turns out, which is why we are here.

@John_Scotus But if people want it to be what it is, there's no need for it to "take off". Goal matters. Otherwise, you're trying to convince someone who only wants a flowerbed at the front of the house that they'll never be a successful farmer and be able to compete in the industry.

@John_Scotus How old is Post? I’m willing to bet it’s younger than CoSo

@John_Scotus Besides I refuse to join anything with a waitlist. Eff. That. You want users that badly you make room for them. Now.

@John_Scotus what kinds of things things would venture capital provide? What enhancements or changes do you imagine are possible? CoSo isn’t a twitter replacement. It’s a different vibe. I’ve not been on mastodon.

@John_Scotus

Me.
I say No. Nope. Nada.

The "user-donor/subscription model" works well, there are thousands of examples.

This is NOT a for profit outfit.

@John_Scotus I tend to agree with you, but I ultimately don’t think Coso is trying to be the same. Twitter has become way too political. Transitioning from Twitter to Coso has helped me realize just how much I was using Twitter daily for news and healthy (as well as unhealthy) discussion. I ultimately got off of there because of Elon and disrespectful people. I find the community here to be more decent and genuine for a passive user like myself.

@John_Scotus you can still get news without Twitter quite easily. It takes a touch more work, but it’s not hard to do.

The primary driver for Twitter was/is sh*tposting. The most popular tweets weren’t serious or informative or meaningful. It was a celebrity in a silly hat, or partisan political sh*t talking. It is a tool for creating drama (like right now and why so many people stay even while the hate Mr M)

That’s why Twitter will never be recreated because it amounts to recreating trash.

@John_Scotus Why not subscribe to some legitimate news outlets for your news? It’s not that expensive for online access. E.g. I read The Guardian everyday and I pay $5 a month. You can get it for free but they ask you to contribute if you can. I set up my monthly “donation” at a price I can afford. Or you can get online access through the local library. Depending on soc media for news has some big downsides. IMO

@John_Scotus
I get that you don’t want to just read the news, you want to discuss it. There’s a number of CoSoNauts who post news articles - try #news #Cosonews. Also follow @tmbrown327 and @Madken65 for starters. Good luck!

@John_Scotus
here's a common perspective from people who find what they love and need here.
https://counter.social/@kel/109436026256505721

@John_Scotus
In the newspaper model, the subscriptions pay for the physical paper and circulation, and the advertisements pay for the content, roughly speaking. The salaries of reporters, editors, advertising staff, etc plus syndicated content is the vast majority of the cost.

We provide our own content. So we only have to pay for the hosting costs and salaries for the few people managing it (currently only one guy).

@John_Scotus

Perhaps the scraping of large media outlets’ work by Facebook & Google (plus SM competing as ‘citizen journalists’) might have something to do with it being a hard sell.

Also perhaps people don’t want to pay because they are used to trading themselves for access. Many folk probably still don’t understand or care enough to balk against that free stuff for access to meeee model.

@John_Scotus you're right. you get what you pay for. i'm quite happy w/ my exp on coso. so much that i'm going pro next month.

do i want it to be tw? nope. i didn't really engage much there & got to know a few peeps but it really wasn't my thing. it made me angry, ragey, pissed off w/ the human condition. it made me more misanthropic than usual.

coso doesn't make me hate people. if it got big & let in every tom, jerk, & asshole, then i'd likely fade away. it's just right for me...as it is.

@John_Scotus
I get what you're saying. Post will need big accounts. And I think they want to be profitable. Good for them.

Coso is place for people to gather and talk about what they want to. Not large accounts but they are welcome. Everyone is welcome.

@John_Scotus I fail to understand why one has to be “over” the other. I’m happy subscribing to a variety of sites for different reasons. The beauty of CoSo is the small town vibe, or as likened to in the past, the bar from the TV show Cheers. CoSo doesn’t have to have the same model or the same subscribers. We only need the people who truly enjoy being here. If that keeps us small, so be it. I’m prepared to continue donating just as I have these past 5 years and I suspect others feel as I do.

@John_Scotus I don't think Jester's goal is to grow or be the biggest. He's not opposed to it either. I think he's quite happy with how things are working now. Organic growth is good.

@John_Scotus There are also original content issues. And preaching to the choir issues. And rented infrastructure issues. They will rely on advertising - which is key for media as you point out. CoSo, on the other hand, is not media. That isn't the point of it at all. CoSo is a way to enjoy social media without YOU being a commodity. And that has a value you overlook in your comparison. 100% Post data is going to 3rd party retailers. That's just business, right? :/

@John_Scotus At any rate, my point is that Post and CoSo is an apples/orange comparison. People are on Coso for the social experience you eschew. I like both - and honestly don't mind them being separate experiences and entities with moderate crossover.