If there is a new gimmick there is, by definition, a change of some kind. Which means maybe all we need to do is tweak a few very easy to tweak parameters and that will unclog the flow of money. I don't know if that is what going to help. But not just try and see what happens?

[–] rglullis@communick.news 2 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

But not just try and see what happens?

Because it has been tried before, and there are no significant results to show.
Because these types of changes take time and effort that would be better spent elsewhere.
Because it is solving the wrong problem. The problem is not "how to unclog the flow of money". Sending money around has never been easier. The problem is not the flow of money, the problem is that most people are not willing to give money for something unless they absolutely have to, so there is not a lot of money to be sent around.

I'm sorry. When I first saw your blog post I thought you were closer to what I've been saying for three years already , but it seems that you don't have an actionable proposal.

[–] blenderdumbass@lm.madiator.cloud 2 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

Maybe I am just overly optimistic. I don't know. But it seems like with enough gimmicky advertising tricks we could get enough people excited about giving money.

[–] rglullis@communick.news 2 points 8 hours ago

Again, I'm sorry. This is not "optimism" but baseless wishful thinking.

If you want to talk about actual strategies to get people to see the value of a free Internet and how to educate them, I'm all ears. But I'm not interested in continuing the conversation if you are just arguing what you wish would happen.