Thank you, totally agree. The pull of likes is so toxic. I try to justify that "I'm growing my newsletter" but am I really? Even new subscribers you "collect" here, if so lucky, aren't necessarily really reading. I think the real readers will find their way if we are free to just focus on the good work of making good writing, end of stor…
Thank you, totally agree. The pull of likes is so toxic. I try to justify that "I'm growing my newsletter" but am I really? Even new subscribers you "collect" here, if so lucky, aren't necessarily really reading. I think the real readers will find their way if we are free to just focus on the good work of making good writing, end of story. (I do like to make things prettier though since I'm very visual and love design, it's the social pressure component now that worries me.)
Yeah, that's the problem with pure numbers. You can have X subscribers, but how many are really reading? For my part, I want readers, not numbers.
I see the changes happening here which are focused on numbers, metrics, etc. without considering if this produces engaged readers or just a higher dot on a line chart. It concerns me because Substack was great, focused sharply on delivering writing to folks.
I find the movement toward social media not so welcome. However, I understand it's probably inevitable because the #1 rule of tech is that you can never let a good thing be.
IDK. In my experience as a reader, don't lots of folks subscribe just for access and then go straight to the site themselves (instead of messing with emails)? That's what I do. My inbox is overcrowded already with subscriptions. I just go to those sites on my own after I've signed up.
Thank you, totally agree. The pull of likes is so toxic. I try to justify that "I'm growing my newsletter" but am I really? Even new subscribers you "collect" here, if so lucky, aren't necessarily really reading. I think the real readers will find their way if we are free to just focus on the good work of making good writing, end of story. (I do like to make things prettier though since I'm very visual and love design, it's the social pressure component now that worries me.)
Yeah, that's the problem with pure numbers. You can have X subscribers, but how many are really reading? For my part, I want readers, not numbers.
I see the changes happening here which are focused on numbers, metrics, etc. without considering if this produces engaged readers or just a higher dot on a line chart. It concerns me because Substack was great, focused sharply on delivering writing to folks.
I find the movement toward social media not so welcome. However, I understand it's probably inevitable because the #1 rule of tech is that you can never let a good thing be.
Once my email open rate drops below 40% I actively delete those who aren’t engaging as it’s just demotivating.
IDK. In my experience as a reader, don't lots of folks subscribe just for access and then go straight to the site themselves (instead of messing with emails)? That's what I do. My inbox is overcrowded already with subscriptions. I just go to those sites on my own after I've signed up.
That is EXACTLY what I do as well. Thanks Christiaan, for bringing that up. How do I know when my readers area actually reading?
They tell me in the comments and invite more people/share the content. If there's another way to tell, I don't know what it is yet.
I do the same thing. Keeping the open rate high is the real dopamine hit for me.
Vanity metrics otherwise if no-one is engaging.
Truth!