pull down to refresh
and I truly appreciate your contributions to the discussion here. It helps to see all perspectives and brainstorm solutions.
I guarantee you though, the lack of engagement on your content is purely due to low adoption of the platform at this time, not the quality of your content. There have been ~230 signups in the first month of operation. As of last week's real platform stats, I can tell you that about 56% of all signups also registered a Monero wallet to their account. Of those users who registered a wallet (indicating they intend to participate on the platform) I would be conservative and assume 10% of them are active on the platform daily or every other day. That equals an average of 13 daily active users, which is consistent with what I've observed.
Of those ~13 active users on any given day, what is the likelyhood that they are interested in the topics you talk about?
Its become clear marketing and adoption should be the current focus. We're only a month in, the stats are decent for such a young platform, but there is plenty of work to do. I am taking note of all your suggestions, don't think I am dismissing anything.
Thank you very much for your thoughtful reply and let me say that I understand that both Ailla and yourself are very much in a slightly calculating position as neither of you may want to be considered to be sympathetic to some of my more controversial views as key contributes to the platform and monero community at large. Considering 13 DAUs I think I'm actually probably killing it in terms of generalizable metrics for whatever they're worth as applied to this platform. Not to mention cumulative reputation matters (in the eyes of the consumer) so I'm probably better off dominating discourse where and when I can. I'll take this into consideration and use that as an impetus to increase my writing output. Thanks for the feedback!
Fair point, maybe my pain points are more so a product of a lack of engagement which may be due to either a quality of my content (relative to the subjective value of the consumer), the relative wealth of my engagement base, or the size of the broader stasher community at large. All this being said, using a bitcoin community of upstream as an example of functionality is a dangerous precedent. In the monero community, I (and I'm sure you) recognize their failure to identify and align against problems such as privacy, decentralization (ASICs/lack of sufficient privacy for miners), and sustainability in funding mechanisms (tail emission) (amongst other things). I think your point regarding the upstream is valid, but I would urge that its application must still be used with caution. Maybe it's also a broader incentive problem. I as a creator and commenter want to do things like be polite and encourage those who engage, but maybe I should aggregate indication of appreciation into larger posts/comments where I express appreciation via callouts as opposed to upvotes. That wouldn't significantly affect weighting/sorting though. Maybe an added filter for callouts by OPs?
All this to say, I appreciate what you guys do here. You guys have successfully made the only social media in history I've found compelling as well as an article format that preserves writer anonymity and balances that with engagement and financial incentive. That's no small feat. Please don't take my comments and suggestions as anything other than a genuine desire to improve a product I greatly appreciate.