Replies

I suggested some sort of subscription model in a previous post, just as an example. I have a few ideas about that, but they're just that, ideas. Anything more than that at this point is speculation. Without buy-in of the idea (that Twitter is broken, for example) from a core group of starters, anything more is a waste of time. It's not to say you can't have ideas about it, but you never know until you implement if it's going to work or people would accept it.

So, Wuli, what you are saying is if you know what the financial model is, you'll help with the project? Or you'll consider it?

I mean, a very basic model would combine both ads and subscription. $2/month and no more ads. Text ads if they don't pay. That model is in place in hundreds of thousands of sites across the web. That's as simple as it gets. Would it work? Functionally yes, but would people pay $2 to have a stable platform with no ads? Who know?

I also am not suggesting to add to FR. The platform/site is quite stable without introducing new tech. Why fix what isn't broken?

What I am saying is if someone gives me a financial model from something, and I can make some intelligent analysis of that model, then if I liked that model I could consider supporting the idea. In other words, I wouldn’t buy into a “pig in a poke”.

I will agree to this much.

It may be that consideration of some ideas about specifics about a social media platform & system have to be put together and agreed on, by persons who are going to be its intiators, in order to see where and by what means financial support for the system could be produced. I am not sure that is correct, but I will concede that reasonable people may think it is.

If I thought I had the paths open to me to some Conservative venture capitalists, and there was a great social media platform idea I thought should be given the chance, I’d hope to be able approach them for some seed money. My problem is I know they would want to see a financial plan.

Then again some of such persons may not be “ideal”, not “pure” Conservative enough in some folks eyes, even though some such backers may not be looking for political purity of a Conservative sort in those bringing the idea. Not all Conservatives are absolutist in alignment with all other Conservatives, yet are willing to work with other Conservatives on general principles. I think any Conservative social media platform will be doomed if there is a Conservative litmus test.

I suggested some sort of subscription model in a previous post, just as an example.

You're getting way ahead of yourself.

First you have to find the people with talent who can build such a site. That's where you have to start.

The free or subscription model is pointless to discuss until find the people to make it happen.

It's like asking, 'what color should we paint the house' when there aren't even blueprints for the house.

You can discuss things along the way while you're buidling but until you have the people assembled who can build the house the color doesn't matter.