A new revenue model: pay-per-awesome?

[twigletzone]

Title:
A new revenue model: pay-per-awesome?

Area:
Payment/revenue/keeping DW ad-free.

Summary:
After reading <user name=synechdochic>'s essay on the flaws in Web 2.0, I've had an idea for a potential new revenue stream for sites like Dreamwidth. I'd love to know what you guys think.

Description:
I recently re-read <user name=synechdochic>'s <a href="http://synecdochic.dreamwidth.org/234496.html">essay</a> on Web 2.0, and why the advertising model is doomed to failure. It made me think. I'm not an economist and have no experience of running an Internet business but the basic idea I had seems like common sense, so I'm throwing it out there for more experienced minds to consider.

<user name=synechdochic> suggests that the basic problem with the subscriber model is achieving sustainable revenue as the site grows over time. DW is young, and therefore small, and hasn't hit this problem yet. <user name=synechdochic> further suggests that the centralised model of revenue generation, in which the user is the product being sold to advertisers, quite rightly alienates users and creates a downward spiral of ever more intrusive advertisements.

Livejournal has attempted to generate extra revenue by allowing users to purchase gifts for other users - but all this provides for the user receiving it is an image to display on their profile page. The Archive Of Our Own has kudos points, which are free social status you can hand out to creators of content you enjoy. DW has a "Gift a random user" function that lets you donate paid time. What if all these ideas were linked up and taken one step further?

Imagine an opt-in system where users could pay to buy kudos points or something like them, which they can then donate to whoever created any piece of DW content they find particularly awesome. Kudos points could then be exchanged for site services like paid account time. Perhaps, if a user acquires a very high level of points in a certain time period, the excess could even be converted back into real-world money.

DW, as the provider of the platform that publishes this awesome content, could take a percentage from purchases of points - say that spending $10 buys 900 points instead of 1000, or something (where each point represents $0.01 worth of site services the recipient could buy with it). Or perhaps users could even choose what percentage of their point buy to pass to DW directly to help run and improve the site, and what percentage they want to convert into points they can donate to other users.

DW isn't meant to be a crowd-funding site so there would have to be some mechanism in place to stop users begging for points for content that hasn't yet been created. That's essentially a social problem, so the solution would probably have to be about DW's culture; policing anyone abusing the system, and clearly explaining the intentions of the system to start with. It would seem sensible to run it alongside the current subscriber model, so that people still have the option of contributing both socially and financially to DW without being dependent on other users' goodwill. Nobody should be denied a voice, after all.

The idea here is to stop the user becoming the product, and make the content the valuable thing instead; the financial model behind the site becomes more democratic since each individual user can be both a seller and a buyer. The users who produce the best content are materially rewarded for it by the community, and even those who don't have a lot to contribute in terms of content have a way of getting involved and showing their appreciation. Since DW contains a lot of fanfic, anonymous donations of kudos could even be made possible so that less family-friendly content can be appreciated without the donation being traceable to a particular account name. Any author who wants to keep their content free could simply opt out of receiving kudos for a particular post or a whole journal - whether that's because they believe information should be free to all or because the idea of being paid for writing adult fiction skeeves them out!

As I said, I'm neither an economist nor an experienced Web business person - just a left-leaning person with a reasonably good mind. And I do understand that implementing this would be a massive project. But - does this fit DW's philosophy, and could it be a model for the future?

Poll #9394 A new revenue model: pay-per-awesome?

Open to: Registered Users, detailed results viewable to: All, participants: 90

View Respondents

This suggestion:

View Answers

Should be implemented as-is.
10 (11.1%)

Should be implemented with changes. (please comment)
9 (10.0%)

Shouldn't be implemented.
53 (58.9%)

(I have no opinion)
15 (16.7%)

(Other: please comment)
3 (3.3%)

Comments

[denise]

Instructions for discussing this suggestion: don't worry about any of the business end of things; assume we can make it work however. I am interested in how people envision this working (and possibly tying into the instant feedback button option that has been migrated from a previous suggestion?)

[azurelunatic]

*tries not to worry*
*falls over a bit*

[thorfinn]

Hrm. I'm not sure whether "retrieving points into real cash" is a "business end of things" issue... But as soon as you do that, you're in the same space as second-life, or any number of places that have an exchange rate between site-currency and real currency. Not a bad thing, necessarily, but it comes with some issues. I'm extremely dubious about any model where the transfer of value is actually instant - I think the gamification is probably likely to lead down some bad paths.

More comments definitely unrelated to business further down in another thread.

[andrewducker]

I like the "Flattr" model, whereby you can "like" something, and this gives a portion of the points you've put into your pool to them. If I set aside (say) $5 per month, and click on 20 things, then each one gets 25c worth of points.

This also adds the concept of "liking" to a post - which is something I think a large chunk of users actually want (as it gives them feedback that people are reading them, without requiring people to write a comment). I can see a vocal group really loathing the idea though.

[azurelunatic]

The thing that makes me uneasy is that with a strictly money-tied "like", even if it's just $0.10 USD (the value of 1 point) -- users who don't have enough disposable income that they feel comfortable tying up some of it in a pool of Dreamwidth points might not even be able to *leave* "like" on something. I'm not okay with that idea.

I do like the idea of being *able* to send points along with the "like" if possible/wanted.

[kyrielle]

I don't like the idea of it as a strict percentage, since it would discourage me from "liking" things if I wanted the money in my pool to go to one thing and the others were nice but not *that* nice. If this is done this way definitely it should still be possible to like even with no money in the pool.

[zeborah]

Perhaps, if a user acquires a very high level of points in a certain time period, the excess could even be converted back into real-world money. plus Since DW contains a lot of fanfic makes me a bit nervous, though I think generally fans will be sensible about not making a profit off fan-stuff. Plus, converting back into real-world money in general could be... complicated, with the international nature of DW. I know Denise says not to worry about the mechanics of it, but even Amazon (with the Mechanical Turk) I think only pays out to the US, and it's always galling to be excluded. Dog in the manger that I am, if it can't work for me I don't want it working for anyone. :-)

But anyway, I like the rest of the idea, of micropayments for kudos that can then be spent on site features (including, one presumes, kudos for someone else). I am not an accountant, but depending on how much was involved and how fast it moved, DW might not even need to skim a percentage off in order to gain revenue - interest could be accruing while the kudos are being shuffled around without getting redeemed for other services. But that mightn't work out to be revenue-gaining enough, considering the costs of it, in which case 10% would seem eminently fair.

[noxie]

I just somehow don't like the idea of "kudos" being paid for. Perhaps if it was called something else, I wouldn't be opposed to the idea. Alas, I have no idea what to call it instead myself, but perhaps you will.

That being said, I would generally really like a "leave kudos" feature like there is on A03, but it shouldn't be something that involves money.

[twigletzone]

I have to say I have the same problem with it myself to a certain extent, even though I actually made the suggestion. On the one hand, I wholeheartedly support ideas like Creative Commons licensing and the free-access culture. But on the other, I also recognise that I'm a creative person, and shouldn't I and other creative people be allowed to earn money out of what they create if they choose?

I certainly think it should be possible for people to opt any particular post or journal out of the system and make it free. Which I think a lot of the fanfic authors might choose to do, as zeborah points out above. Ultimately I think whether or not DW goes with this will be about the site's culture as a whole - whether DW people fall more on the "free to all" side or more on the "creating is work too" side.

[the_shoshanna]

I guess I'm missing something, but -- how is this any different from the existing system of Dreamwidth points? (Except for the suggestion that "kudos points" be convertible to money.)

[zvi]

Yes, that's my problem with this suggestion, I don't understand how it's different from our current system of points.

[boundbooks]

Yes, this. Barring the kudos points being convertible back to money, I don't see a substantial difference between this system and the current DW point system.

I'm not really sure about DW becoming, in essence, a money converter too. Lots of issues like exchange rates, 'what did X' do with that money, and potential for DW to become involved with disputes. I could see this system used for fundraising, which while it could be good, strikes me as a very big leap from what DW does now.

I like being able to buy people straight services, like paid time. I'm not sure about just handing them points so that they can convert it to cash. =/

[azurelunatic]

I already occasionally send points to other users -- though usually because it looked like they were having a kind of lousy day and could use a little thanks-for-putting-up-with-the-spam pick-me-up.

I wouldn't mind letting someone display some vaguely linked, but maybe not 1:1, social points on their profile or in a journal module, or both -- but I don't like the thought of reinforcing the idea that only the people who attract the positive attention of people who have money and are willing to spend it are worthwhile.

I would not mind *loosely* linking things like memories, social points, and Dreamwidth points -- if the "add memory" system had a quick way to send Dreamwidth points and/or some form of publicly visible kudos, that would make me very happy -- but I don't think they should be the same.

Sending points as a booby prize for winning the spam jackpot is fun (when I have a stash of spare points, which I should replenish at some point) but it's not the sort of thing where I would feel happiest about also making that point transfer public -- and if I do point transfers because someone's broke and I happen not to be, I don't want to necessarily advertise that fact to the casual observer.

[mokie]

Because it directly applies to content, if I'm understanding right. It's not User A gifting User B with a month of paid account time on general principle, but User A dropping a nickel into the machine and hitting the "Encore!" button after a particularly good post.

[adalger]

This pokes me the way things like Helium and Yahoo Contributors Network and the like do. If other people liking content becomes a revenue stream, there's now an incentive for dw to push you to go out and promote yourself a lot. There's also an incentive for a spate of spamming of "myscamjournal.dw.etc/phonyarticle?action=like" links.

For a site that isn't primarily about people selling things to each other, it shouldn't be easy for users to give each other money, and the business shouldn't derive revenue from it. Any time non-core competencies are monetized, they pull resources away from core competencies. dw's core competency is caring about every user. If some users, by dint of popularity, become larger sources of revenue, their needs will become by default a little more important than those of that girl sitting in her studio apartment, hunched over the keyboard, keeping an intensely personal account of her daily anxieties that she'll never share with anyone.

This is all opinion. I do have a little knowledge of economics, but I wouldn't call this a provable point based on well-founded factual reasoning. I'm guessing and predicting based on what I've seen elsewhere with things that are at best moderately analogous. I would, however, be disquieted by any step that makes dw bear any recognizable similarity to the gazillion "get paid to blog" sites out there.

I am voting "Shouldn't be implemented". It isn't a dumb idea. There are others out there making money from that revenue stream alone. It's just not a direction I think is any good for dw.

[akamine_chan]

If some users, by dint of popularity, become larger sources of revenue, their needs will become by default a little more important than those of that girl sitting in her studio apartment, hunched over the keyboard, keeping an intensely personal account of her daily anxieties that she'll never share with anyone.

Yes, this.

[twigletzone]

Any time non-core competencies are monetized, they pull resources away from core competencies. dw's core competency is caring about every user.

I accept your opinion, but I'd be very interested to discuss this with you a bit. My biggest question is, how does the site monetize the core competency of caring about its users to keep the business viable as DW grows? How do we stop the site eventually becoming unable to support the girl in her studio apartment anyway, because the business model isn't working given the running costs? Should DW become a registered charity, instead of a business? What other options are there to keep DW running long-term?

I proposed this idea because it struck me that the DW community itself is part of the core competency you're passionate about - individual users caring about other individual users. I would also never want to see DW become the Ebay of blogging; the wonderful culture of mutualism is why I'm here at all. But I work in the UK's largest employee-owned business, and it really seemed like common sense to me to think about avenues through which DW's caring userbase could communicate their support for one another and at the same time give DW itself a helping hand.

You seem to be well informed, and if you have other thoughts about possible ways of achieving long-term stability I'd be really interested to hear them.

[noracharles]

I like supporting Dreamwidth with a little extra money when I have it. Giving paid time to a random active user is nice, but I have sometimes wished there were such a thing as an anonymous tip button I could push. There isn't a culture for transferring small amounts of points to other users, and even if there were, I wouldn't want to do it with my name attached because of the potential awkwardness.

I would also like for users to be able to choose to diplay a kudos or like button on an entry, because I find them very useful on other sites. But I would not want the tip button (the transfer a small amount of points button) and the kudos button to be the same.

I don't think the Dreamwidth points should be redeemable for money.

[dragonfly]

but I have sometimes wished there were such a thing as an anonymous tip button I could push.

Me too. I have bought people anonymous paid time when I felt they really needed a boost, but I can't do that often or casually. A tip button (and I agree--not automatically connected to kudos) would be cool. In that case, though, I think how many tips someone is getting should not be displayed. Save that for the free kudos. And if DW needed to skim a percentage of the tips I give, I would not complain.

[jazzfish]

I'm intrigued by the idea of making DW points easily transferrable / tippable. BoardGameGeek, which is heavily forum-based, has both "thumbs" and "tipping GeekGold" for posts/content; it's an example of how such a system can work, at least in one environment. Which may not be the kind of environment that DW wants to encourage. I don't know.

I'm not at all in favor of any way to convert DW points back into cash for users, for all the reasons adalger describes.

And... a lot depends on the design, on where and how a 'tip' button is placed on a given post (or comment). Too small and nobody notices, any bigger than that and it's just irritating.

So... I guess I'm tentatively in favor?

[msilverstar]

Looking at the experiences of BoardGameGeek seems very wise, learn from their mistakes.

[sofiaviolet]

I like the idea of a tipping feature for Dreamwidth (and I already sporadically tip using the existing points transfer feature). Here's how I would want it to work:

* The tipping feature is not be tied to "like"/"kudos" because not every user has the disposable income and/or inclination to leave a tip along with every instance of low-effort feedback.

* Tips are funded using Dreamwidth points (purchased in the shop and/or received as tips). Tips cannot be "cashed out" and Dreamwidth points are purchased exactly as they are now (no additional fees).

* The ability to receive tips is controlled per-journal and per-entry. The per-journal setting establishes default behavior and the per-entry setting allows an override.

* For a journal, the default is controlled by the account holder, with two possible settings: "on" (tip jar will appear by default) and "off" (tip jar will not appear by default).

* For a community, the default is controlled by the admin, with three possible settings: "on" (tip jar appears by default, but entry poster can turn it off), "off" (tip jar does not appear by default, but entry poster can turn it on), and "disabled" (tip jar does not appear and entry poster cannot turn it on).

* The per-journal setting is located in the same place as the per-journal comment setting. The per-entry toggle is located on the same part of the update page as per-entry comment settings.

* The link to leave a tip appears in the entry interaction area, along with the link to leave a comment. This link is the same size and style as all of the other entry interaction links.

* The tip system supports anonymous tipping. The user's preferences for anonymous tipping could be derived from their comment settings, or an additional setting could be added.

* The tip interface is simple. It displays the logged-in user leaving the tip, and a pre-filled tip amount (a default of 1 point; the user can choose to leave a larger tip if they prefer). If anonymous tipping is permitted, there's a tickybox to leave this tip anonymously.

* A user can see how many tips they've given and received (both in number of tipping transactions and number of points spent/received).

* We might also show the user how they allocate their tips, by account. (I've given denise 5 tips totalling 18 points.)

* Account-wide tip info is not publicly available and does not feed any kind of user social metrics.

* If we expose per-entry tip information, it's in the form of "This entry has been tipped X times" and not "This entry has received X points in tips."

[azurelunatic]

User should be able to change their own tip default.

[jeshyr]

I'm putting "no opinion" *not* because I actually have no opinion but because this whole discussion terrifies me - introducing stuff related to money more prominently has the potential to ruin a gift/appreciation economy and thereby much of our culture. I know that the owners and other decision makers here are aware of this and understand the psychology involved and I trust that whatever they do will work but it's too anxiety-provoking for me to actually pay attention to it at the moment.

If there are any specifically accessibility-related things that come up, can somebody ping me so I can read them?

[deborah]

Will do, milady. ♥

For what it's worth, I agree with you. I am equally concerned about the effect of tip jars on a gift economy. There's already enough politics involved with those who have the skills/time/resources/spoons/whatever to make more popular gifts -- let's not involve money in the discussion.

[kerravonsen]

No, no, a thousand times no.
I really do not like the idea of introducing money into our gift culture, and I don't like the idea of popularity equating to worth.

[lassarina]

^^^ I am in agreement with this comment very much.

Also, as has been said upthread, there are lots and lots of fanworks here; even if this is not set up in such a way as to benefit the author of the fanworks (i.e. it becomes basically only a revenue stream for DW), then that could be potentially problematic should someone with a copyright axe to grind turn up; the argument "But DW profits off these infringing works!" is not one I'd like to see made pmuch ever. (Not that someone couldn't make that now, but the bar of proof seems lower if these kudos can be attached to a specific item.)

[arethinn]

I've put "No opinion" but really it's more like "I don't feel strongly for or against but this sounds kind of strange." Don't both LJ and deviantART have systems like this?

[amielleon]

I like the idea of being able to express very quickly that you like something, and I like the idea of putting a penny behind each like -- I think that makes the "like" more valuable. And I also like the idea of supporting the site through this!

However, I do not like the idea of these points/likes/kudos being redeemable for anything. I think the idea that a stranger was willing to toss a coin into your hat is already a beautiful thought.

[cesy]

I'd like a way to make it easier to give a small amount of points to another user, either anonymously or not, with the note automatically filled in as a link to the post you were on at the time. I'm not sure that needs a whole new system, though.

[matgb]

Theoretically I think this could be done fairly easily within S2, might need a few backend tweaks though.

http://www.dreamwidth.org/shop/points?for=cesy

http://www.dreamwidth.org/shop/transferpoints?for=cesy

Could hardcode them as links at the end of a post or similar, and could even have them only display the transfer option for logged in users, etc. I might even consider putting links in for point purchase to my layout, I have friends that like to throw money at people on occasions, including non DW using friends. Assuming I go back to posting at all frequently that is, might happen.