You guys act like an infinitesimally small blip of traffic coming from a relatively niche community will be enough to make reddit successful again. People on /r/place drawing “fuck spez” using 1d old accounts and adblockers are nothing. Ruining this year’s /r/place in exchange for a blip of mostly useless traffic is a W imo.
Traffic benefits them in two main ways: directly via ad loads (plus coins and rewards while those were a thing), and indirectly via content added by that traffic. If you block ads and aren’t adding content, your traffic just costs them money in compute resources and bandwidth.
Clicks themselves don’t generate revenue. Thinking that they are directly translatable to revenue might be why Reddit is in this mess better they saw lots of clicks and wanted to turn them into money but it’s not that simple and they fucked up their attempt (well, maybe, time will tell the long term effects of this).
How far back do you think user engagement on r/place will stall reddit failing?
Do you think not using the canvas would cause more harm than their favorite event being covered in language shitting on the CEO and making the pretty canvas not marketable?
Personally, I strongly disagree if you do think so. Even if every Lemmy user drove 0 traffic to reddit, it would change very little of their day to day engagement.
It’s important in the long term to move away from reddit and reduce engagement of the site, but the cost benefit ratio of fucking up the marketability of r/place strongly outweighs the effect users would have engaging the site.
Do you think not using the canvas would cause more harm than their favorite event being covered in language shitting on the CEO and making the pretty canvas not marketable?
Not just that. The whole /r/place event has been covered by (tech) news sites every year. This year, it’s a much better story than ever before.
Exactly, this is a huge marketing event for them. If the marketability of Reddit is shown to be “FUCK SPEZ FUCK SPEZ FUCK SPEZ”, that is going to cost them in terms of that white glove corporate cleanliness they crave to provide and profit off of.
I don’t expect anything. I don’t know how ad execs think and I don’t think I want to know. Who the fuck can say if they value traffic or clean language more? What I know is that SEPARATE ENTIRELY, to quote a great thinker of our time, is the best route in terms of personal mental health. Whether reddit fails or continues, I’m doing my best to not give a shit. That includes not interacting with the site, regardless of the reason.
Bad enough that I still find myself with a reddit post being the only place I can find an answer to a problem every once in a while. I don’t need to go there voluntarily.
I respect the mental health boundaries you need, but not all of us have that conflict* (trying to find a word that does not sound demeaning, I am not a wordist sorry).
For me, yes I’m upset that reddit is a burning shithole, but it weighs on my mind no more than leaving myspace, Icanhascheeseburgers, ragecomics, 4chan, Facebook, or any of the other numerous forums and social media sites I have split from.
So I respect your need to avoid it, but I do not believe this is the same for the majority of people who are interested in taking action.
I do think it would be best for most of us. Not least because it’s more important to build our space here on Lemmy than to waste time on a site that we want/expect/hope to fail. The analogy with a nasty breakup isn’t too farfetched - try to avoid running into your ex, at least for a while, it can only lead to more pain and won’t help you move on. Especially when there’s a real possibility that your ex actually benefits financially from the two of you meeting.
The breakup analogy falls short for numerous reasons, primarily because we are talking about communities rather than individuals.
More like a divorce with kids involved than a simple breakup. Some people are happy to divorce and run from their kids, abandoning them to their ex, but some people want to keep as much of their family healthy and intact as possible, forcing them to go to court or other forms of confrontational discourse in order to achieve their goals.
Many of us come from communities that have been split and the only way to rebuild and regroup is by engaging the missing community members where they are.
Sure, that’s a valid view, but a healthy divorce also doesn’t include yelling obscenities at the other parent in public and raiding the house you both used to live in (not that I object to the language used). It’s still minimising contact to what’s necessary. And maybe accepting that some kids would like to stay with the other parent and focusing on those kids that want to stay with you.
Which is another failure of using personal relationships as an analogy to corporations vs people.
We are not talking about interpersonal emotional discourse, we are talking about consumer vs corporation and corrupt capitalist corporate powers at work.
I say burn the megacorps myself but I understand not everybody is as passionate on that topic.
The original discussion was about user engagement and the cost to benefit ratio of engaging them. I find it somewhat hypocritical to claim we shouldn’t care about their success and to accept that some people want to use the site, while your original comment is complaining about user engagement on the other website.
If we are supposed to accept users being on the other website, why are you commenting about site traffic?
This is still traffic on the site.
You guys act like an infinitesimally small blip of traffic coming from a relatively niche community will be enough to make reddit successful again. People on /r/place drawing “fuck spez” using 1d old accounts and adblockers are nothing. Ruining this year’s /r/place in exchange for a blip of mostly useless traffic is a W imo.
Easy there, Robespierre. You won’t “ruin” r/place by creating some tiny logo that will be scrubbed away by the moderators in five minutes.
Idk if you’ve actually seen what /r/place looks like right now but it’s way more than just a single tiny logo lol. The majority of it is about spez.
That’s the same thinking that leads to “what’s my one vote going to do?”
Traffic benefits them in two main ways: directly via ad loads (plus coins and rewards while those were a thing), and indirectly via content added by that traffic. If you block ads and aren’t adding content, your traffic just costs them money in compute resources and bandwidth.
Clicks themselves don’t generate revenue. Thinking that they are directly translatable to revenue might be why Reddit is in this mess better they saw lots of clicks and wanted to turn them into money but it’s not that simple and they fucked up their attempt (well, maybe, time will tell the long term effects of this).
Do you expect to see the site die in a week?
How far back do you think user engagement on r/place will stall reddit failing?
Do you think not using the canvas would cause more harm than their favorite event being covered in language shitting on the CEO and making the pretty canvas not marketable?
Personally, I strongly disagree if you do think so. Even if every Lemmy user drove 0 traffic to reddit, it would change very little of their day to day engagement.
It’s important in the long term to move away from reddit and reduce engagement of the site, but the cost benefit ratio of fucking up the marketability of r/place strongly outweighs the effect users would have engaging the site.
Not just that. The whole /r/place event has been covered by (tech) news sites every year. This year, it’s a much better story than ever before.
Exactly, this is a huge marketing event for them. If the marketability of Reddit is shown to be “FUCK SPEZ FUCK SPEZ FUCK SPEZ”, that is going to cost them in terms of that white glove corporate cleanliness they crave to provide and profit off of.
I don’t expect anything. I don’t know how ad execs think and I don’t think I want to know. Who the fuck can say if they value traffic or clean language more? What I know is that SEPARATE ENTIRELY, to quote a great thinker of our time, is the best route in terms of personal mental health. Whether reddit fails or continues, I’m doing my best to not give a shit. That includes not interacting with the site, regardless of the reason.
Bad enough that I still find myself with a reddit post being the only place I can find an answer to a problem every once in a while. I don’t need to go there voluntarily.
I respect the mental health boundaries you need, but not all of us have that conflict* (trying to find a word that does not sound demeaning, I am not a wordist sorry).
For me, yes I’m upset that reddit is a burning shithole, but it weighs on my mind no more than leaving myspace, Icanhascheeseburgers, ragecomics, 4chan, Facebook, or any of the other numerous forums and social media sites I have split from.
So I respect your need to avoid it, but I do not believe this is the same for the majority of people who are interested in taking action.
I do think it would be best for most of us. Not least because it’s more important to build our space here on Lemmy than to waste time on a site that we want/expect/hope to fail. The analogy with a nasty breakup isn’t too farfetched - try to avoid running into your ex, at least for a while, it can only lead to more pain and won’t help you move on. Especially when there’s a real possibility that your ex actually benefits financially from the two of you meeting.
The breakup analogy falls short for numerous reasons, primarily because we are talking about communities rather than individuals.
More like a divorce with kids involved than a simple breakup. Some people are happy to divorce and run from their kids, abandoning them to their ex, but some people want to keep as much of their family healthy and intact as possible, forcing them to go to court or other forms of confrontational discourse in order to achieve their goals.
Many of us come from communities that have been split and the only way to rebuild and regroup is by engaging the missing community members where they are.
Sure, that’s a valid view, but a healthy divorce also doesn’t include yelling obscenities at the other parent in public and raiding the house you both used to live in (not that I object to the language used). It’s still minimising contact to what’s necessary. And maybe accepting that some kids would like to stay with the other parent and focusing on those kids that want to stay with you.
Which is another failure of using personal relationships as an analogy to corporations vs people.
We are not talking about interpersonal emotional discourse, we are talking about consumer vs corporation and corrupt capitalist corporate powers at work.
I say burn the megacorps myself but I understand not everybody is as passionate on that topic.
The original discussion was about user engagement and the cost to benefit ratio of engaging them. I find it somewhat hypocritical to claim we shouldn’t care about their success and to accept that some people want to use the site, while your original comment is complaining about user engagement on the other website.
If we are supposed to accept users being on the other website, why are you commenting about site traffic?