Would you pay someone to drive customers away to another store?
Do you think I don't know in order to view the actual content, I must leave the platform?
There's no actual content here. This is an advertisement.
Lie or mistake? How about some basic business sense...
There's no video here, unless when you click on that selfie it starts talking to you, but that's not what's happening for me.
Are you saying that if someone puts links to their videos that are on other platforms, that angers you?
I clicked on the Odysee one. I already have an account on all those platforms. There was no 'advertisement' that I can see. Can you point that out?
No, I'm not saying it angers me. I will say it appears as if you're attempting to frustrate me. Trying to have your big 'gotcha moment'.
Do you pay the people who drop flyers in your mailbox? Do you pay the people who drop spam emails in your inbox? Do those spam emails not provide a link that leads to a product? This post is nothing more than a spam email. You're in denial if you disagree.
People don't pay for the ads. They pay for the product and in this case that would be actual content. There's no product here. Only an advertisement leading to the product. If I dropped a link on Twitter that leads here, that link would be me advertising my content, which is located here. Would you pay for a link on twitter? If so, I'll gladly offer you some. How much do you think is fair? $100? Or is that too high?
Your Paranoia is noted.
No, I do not agree with your premise that linking to other platforms is 'wrong'.. But you've already made your Assumption though that I am in denial. So we are all finished. Have a good life.
I never said linking to other platforms is 'wrong'. I said there's no content, here.
I most certainly will have a good life. Good luck with yours.
And it's probably worth mentioning, this gentleman would be making far more money if he encouraged more members of his community/following to come here, stake tokens and support his work that way rather than asking for donations. Fans and followers of his work (such as yourself) would no longer be throwing their money away. Fans and followers of his work would earn curation/consumer rewards. Fans and followers of his work could earn when he's around upvoting comments. Fans and followers of this work could earn upvoting one another's comments. All those earnings go back into creating larger votes for his work. And when one offers consumers more incentives, one attracts more paying consumers.
He's shooting himself in the foot by not being here, all while directing traffic away. If he did it the other way around, he'd be setting himself up with a solid revenue stream that continuously grows well into the future. And his content here would be jammed with actual supportive engagement, rather than looking like a barren wasteland.
If you think I'm pouting about links, you've missed the point completely.
They put their content on all the 'platforms' out there. You should be glad they put their PRESENCE on here as well. Any popular creators that are here, the better, whether they link to insert media host or not, isn't the point. I know, you are all focused on $$, and some are more interested in Information first. As I said I am subscribed to all those other platforms already, and I think many are. But I do not peruse them all, daily. I do however check some of the tags here, and see a LINK TO HIS CONTENT on here, where I would have otherwise missed it.
Perhaps you don't care, that other Hivers are appreciative that it is here?
Now, I do agree with you that it would be great if they actually 'interacted' further than they have, but if they don't, so be it let them make less then...
The more these creators plaster their work everywhere, and take from systems that require money coming in as well in order to stay afloat, while not attracting paying consumers, the more likely they are to destroy each platform they use. They're setting themselves up to be deplatformed. Money out, with no money in is unsustainable. With decentralized media, one must build from the ground up, on their own. The money itself doesn't care about fame. Once they build, they can no longer fall prey to things like 'cancel culture' and all these other problems we see when dealing with central authority (deplatformed, demonetized, etc.)
Fame doesn't mean shit around here. The most famous human in the world can arrive but if they don't attract their own sources of income, but get voted heavily, all they're doing is taking, while the platform below crumbles.
Maybe as a consumer, you're only concerned about the information. The content creator is creating, for money.
Without bringing his own market/fans/followers, this guy is just some dude creating content, like millions of other people. Maybe their market puts them high on a pedestal and thinks they're larger than life, but once outside the echo chamber, it's a totally different story. The whole point of fame though, is to make money. Fame without money flowing in is like that guy downtown everyone knows to avoid because he's just going to make a scene.
If you prefer content creators treat this platform like they would twitter, that's fine. No amount of arguing with me will change how I feel about this.
P.S. One positive review doesn't impress me. People can buy those these days.
P.P.S. I actually like some of this dude's work. Not so much once he started leaning more towards tabloid journalism, but some of his earlier stuff was great. I arrived to this post as a consumer, and left feeling ripped off.
Yes. These creators also shoot themselves in the foot by making it inconvenient to the consumer when it comes to basic consumption. Fracturing entire markets into tiny portions means you get a couple views here, a couple views there, but nothing substantial anywhere. A platform like Youtube works because all consumers have trouble leaving. Corralling them all into one profitable pool is most beneficial to all involved. That's why things like stadiums exist and worked for thousands of years.
Ok I see your points better now.
But then, who is really to blame? The poster, or the voters that 'give' him the money? Where is the buck going to stop? These guys have been doing this forever. You have a downvote on him but his fanbase out payed it. (I'm not exactly a fan either as I feel the same as you about his content).
Max Igan's does this too and many of the other 'popular' ex-youtubers.
The popular thing that I mention was just to bring more attention here from the 'followers'.
Now if he were to write some content (Hive only) along with the pointing to where he has videos posted elsewhere, would that constitute still being 'advertisement'? Just trying to find the line here since I see tons of posts telling people to literally try out such and such platform because it is so much better than such and such, etc..
Thanks
He's not even posting here. A robot is. If you give a waiter a tip, and they blow you off, will you be tipping them again?
Only if I tip him to go away ;)
This is an advertisement for other platforms.
That's not really how I see it. Talking about it on the comments above. Basically trying to fine the actual line here.
My points:
I (and so many others here) already are on these other platforms. It isn't like we are going to ditch Hive for one of them.
He is not saying anything about the platforms (better, will pay you, etc). Other than (the content is posted there).
So many others on Hive talk of these platforms, promote them, push people to them, beg them to try them out, etc.
I agree with some of the points for (an advertisement) but smacking that hammer down without clarification on others just looks like this guy is not in some club.