Content
@
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
links 🏴
@links
Channel changes have significantly change the « FC game » we’re all playing. Let’s talk abt it Old meta: cast in channels for distribution New meta: cast in channels for connection The reasons for casting in channels has changed. Casting in channels is friction - you have to select the channel rather than YOLOing your post to your followers. The new changes add MORE friction (must be a member) while reducing algo boost. We will likely have far fewer casts in channels but hopefully those casts will get engagement from people who actually care about the topic. “Connection” isn’t easily measurable, but the idea is that you will more satisfied posting into a channel because the quality of discourse will be higher.
8 replies
4 recasts
31 reactions
links 🏴
@links
Old meta: build an audience (PvP) New meta: build a community (TvT) It’s HARD to build a self-sustaining channel (in terms of content and money). Pretty much only channel owners with large followings could make it work because they could use their reach to promote. Even big channels like /memes and /tabletop can’t really be monetized enough to make it worthwhile for owners to commit. The new changes shift the game for channel owners - instead of trying to attract people with big audience, you want to attract people who show up and contribute. Channels with engaged memberships will outperform those with less engaged memberships, because they will provide more connection and thus better satisfaction for those casting in channels.
2 replies
0 recast
8 reactions
links 🏴
@links
Old meta: Marketing is Dan’s job New meta: Marketing is channel owners’ job. Ultimately MM is aiming to shift the work of scaling from their org to channel communities. The channels changes are a big opinionated bet on this. They are geared towards making channels a destination (rather than tags). If that destination is worth visiting, and worth hosting, FC will grow. So Merkle’s job is making tools to make channels worth hosting and visiting (ie the frames/actions legos)
2 replies
0 recast
2 reactions
Dirthippy
@dirthippy
I think channels with an audience can be monetized...it is just finding the value that members are willing to pay for. It likely isn't "I pay for membership so that I can post content into the channel". "The new changes shift the game for channel owners" - the same rules apply as before, honestly. Maybe the difference is that membership focuses channel owners on cultivating members that contribute? However, getting a consistent base to contribute is the trick. Develop a consistent content plan with them (and seeing what generates engagement).
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
