| |||||||||||||
On the future of LWNOn the future of LWNPosted Jul 28, 2002 1:45 UTC (Sun) by BryceK (subscriber, #2886)Parent article: On the future of LWN The situation is as I feared. The problem is basic market economy stuff. LWN is simply of too hiqh a quality for the market to bare. When the LWN donations page went up, I did a back of the envelope calculation of your economics and donated $100. I figured that if 1/4 of your readers did the same, you would be able to continue for a year. It seems my calculations were correct, but your donations fell way, way short. The problems of LWN (free journalism) are the same as those of free music, free publishing, free software and etc.. They may be better and more efficient than their commercial counterparts, but we (humanity in general) simply must find a way to increase the demand ($) side of the equation if we are to continue to reap their benfits and efficiencies. The internet infrastructure has provided a jumpstart, but it is simply not enough to allow them to thrive longterm. It breaks my heart to write this, but my advise is to continue with your plans to end LWN unless donations increase about 5x. The staff of LWN has my absolute best wishes. LWN is/was wonderful. Bryce Kimmel
(Log in to post comments)
On the future of LWN Posted Jul 28, 2002 13:43 UTC (Sun) by DeletedUser2902 ((unknown), #2902) [Link] Gotta agree here. One thing that I don't understand is, how can Linux itself be maintained without subscriptions ! We have a lot of excellent free software, including the kernel, documentation, etc for gratis.It feels unnatural to subscribe to an internet based journal, you can read almost any newspaper for free ... Perhaps the answer is to create a community based magazine with minimal editorial interaction, like simple mailing list moderation. All you get for this moderating is status among your peers, not hard cash. I do believe that this would be a good enough incentive for many.
On the future of LWN Posted Jul 28, 2002 18:04 UTC (Sun) by DeletedUser2910 ((unknown), #2910) [Link] I think the problem with donations or a subscription in the context of an online journal is that people are not really clear what they are getting for their money. In other words, lwn needs to find the right value proposition that would trigger a critical mass of people to subscribe/donate money.I posted my own suggestion below but I think the key is that lwn needs to have an attractive plan for what to do with the "extra" money. In general people are a lot freer with their money if they understand where it is going and there is sufficient transparency for them to see that their understanding is correct. I think a good "what if" senario for the "extra" cash and a means of following the cash flow would ease a lot of people's minds and open their pocket books. Robb
On the future of LWN Posted Jul 28, 2002 21:46 UTC (Sun) by Baylink (subscriber, #755) [Link] ... it is going to pay for the cakes, coffee, car payments and light bills of the human beings (remember human beings?) who make the whole thing happen. They might be reticent to say it, but I'm not: Damnit, but Jon can write. People who can do that aren't all that easy to come by.As it happens, they're all technically qualified to do stuff that will make them more than $18 a hour. How many of you reading this make more than that? I sure as hell do. If they're willing to only make $18 an hour to do the good job they do keeping me ahead of the curve, I'm willing to pay some of it. But we live in the real world, and unlike open software, open journalism is a real-time pursuit. You can't turn it loose and then "go back to work". It *is* work. "To each according to his ability, from each according to his needs." Yeah, I know; I did it backwards on purpose. But hell, maybe it's just me.
Cheers,
|
|||||||||||||