andrewducker: (Default)
andrewducker ([personal profile] andrewducker) wrote2012-05-11 12:00 pm

Interesting Links for 11-05-2012

[identity profile] nancylebov.livejournal.com 2012-05-11 03:16 pm (UTC)(link)
In re Facebook: $2/post seems really steep. If I were running Facebook, I'd make highlighting posts free, and the ability to only see highlighted posts (possibly only highlighted posts from selected people) cost something like $2/month.

[identity profile] octopoid-horror.livejournal.com 2012-05-11 06:40 pm (UTC)(link)
I wonder if this would be tied into to disallowing the current "subscribe to all updates from X" option, or if the assumption is that most people leave it at the default of only see important updates or that many people have so many friends on FB that they couldn't set it to see all updates from most people without having a nigh-endless feed of updates.

Having the person who wants their posts visible be the one who pays is clever, since it means people can think "Heh, I'll never be one of those suckers who pays", while having the option to pay to -view- something would make it seem like people were being locked out of (for want of a better word) content.

[identity profile] nancylebov.livejournal.com 2012-05-11 09:23 pm (UTC)(link)
My suggestion isn't that people would have to pay to view highlighted posts, it's that they would have to pay to not see non-highlighted posts.