zlacker

>>jjcm+(OP)
The idea of posters getting real money instead of fake internet points when their posts do well seems interesting, but maybe an unintentional experiment in unintended consequences. Moderation will be extremely important to prevent low-effort memes and content regurgitation and the like from saturating your main channels. Have you considered how you will encourage moderation and keep it free from the corrosive influence of quid quo pro? (hey moderator, you overlook this spam post and maybe I cut you in on the profits)

When real money is involved on the internet the worst kinds of stuff results, and it takes a lot of effort to avoid it. How's that going to work?

None of this is to take away from your accomplishments here, by the way. The exact opposite in fact, you've got an interesting enough idea that it prompts interesting questions of the mechanics.

P.S. do you have any long-term plans to IPO this if it becomes successful? If not, some kind of guarantee that this platform is immune to enshittification would probably be very, very popular.

>>idiots+oh
> do you have any long-term plans to IPO this if it becomes successful? If not, some kind of guarantee that this platform is immune to enshittification would probably be very, very popular.

This is a solid call out. Part of me wants to keep things private in order to maintain the "user is the customer" alignment. One issue with going public is it then means shareholders become your primary customer, with your users becoming second tier. I'm not quite sure what the answer is.

This also brings me to the question of funding - on one hand, proper funding here would help drastically with launching, on the other hand it comes with expectations and requirements.

Part of the reason why I want paid users though is it means the site can be self-sustaining without that funding, if it can get past the network effect threshold.

Lots to think about.

>>jjcm+yE
The thing to keep in mind that alignment is often good initially but deviates over time. Funds have horizons that they want to respect lest they get in trouble with the LPs or end up with piles of money allocated but not turning a profit for them (because of the sunset clauses on management fees). Shareholders may see eye to eye - for a while - and then split up due to unforeseen development (that's when you'll find out how good that shareholder agreement really is). All in all this is a tricky thing and you will want to get yourself very well informed before pulling the trigger on any investment.