Author Topic: Friday's Mumble with BM for a tip?  (Read 5051 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline gamey

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2253
    • View Profile
Have you thought of using advertisers and sponsors as a way to generate income?  You could have dedicated 15-30 second blocks where you read an ad.  I'm sure several companies would find value in doing this. You also could add a subscription model where people pay to get add free recordings. You also could allow subscribers to be guaranteed answers to questions by giving them some sort of token or uia that they can spend for airtime with bm or whoever is being interviewed.  Just a rough idea of ways to possibly monetize beyond bitcoin.

I remember Arthur who started out the project with Fuz came around trying to get people to buy ads on his show and it gets far far more viewers via placement on the LTB portal. It didn't seem like he was having a lot of luck with an ad based approach. A lot of this stuff requires more development time than it is worth.

The idea of having people pay to guarantee their question being asked is interesting.  Not sure how that'd play out.
I speak for myself and only myself.

Offline lil_jay890

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1197
    • View Profile
Have you thought of using advertisers and sponsors as a way to generate income?  You could have dedicated 15-30 second blocks where you read an ad.  I'm sure several companies would find value in doing this. You also could add a subscription model where people pay to get add free recordings. You also could allow subscribers to be guaranteed answers to questions by giving them some sort of token or uia that they can spend for airtime with bm or whoever is being interviewed.  Just a rough idea of ways to possibly monetize beyond bitcoin.

Offline gamey

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2253
    • View Profile
Either you want input or you don't; not everything should be considered a complaint.

Again, there are different audiences. Some prefer prompt raw full audio and good data; some don't mind a presentation of the facts; some don't mind PR; and some will believe anything they hear.

Yea my attitude has been showing a lot lately but everyone knows that promptness is desired. I was just giving insight to the considerations aj/fuzzy have to deal with as I used to do what AJ is doing.  People can wait, but then some people may have more time on Saturday etc.  There are different audiences and one can seemingly never make everyone happy.  IMO it really is a discussion about promptness and not whether one has to listen to an edited version or not.

Everyone has the option to record it if they wish. People do this.  Logon mumble and hit record then listen to it later.

I like the idea of the .99 cost to get an unedited recording, just because bitshares is woefully lacking in applications of commerce.
« Last Edit: April 19, 2015, 01:47:14 pm by gamey »
I speak for myself and only myself.

Offline fuzzy

Let's please keep this productive.  I'm paying attention and I understand this is something the community cares about. I also know everyone working for this project is empassioned about it and wants people to be happy with the content. 

It is best to not let this devolve the conversation to a slapping fight. We have no pool filled with jello...and even more importantly, no bikinis.
« Last Edit: April 19, 2015, 01:42:06 pm by fuzzy »
WhaleShares==DKP; BitShares is our Community! 
ShareBits and WhaleShares = Love :D

Offline davidpbrown

Either you want input or you don't; not everything should be considered a complaint.

Again, there are different audiences. Some prefer prompt raw full audio and good data; some don't mind a presentation of the facts; some don't mind PR; and some will believe anything they hear.
฿://1CBxm54Ah5hiYxiUtD7JGYRXykT5Z6ZuMc

Offline gamey

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2253
    • View Profile
Maybe Aj should put all the cut out stuff on a seperate track.
So you can play the edited version first and later listen to the clicks and pops.
Problem solved.

lololol
I speak for myself and only myself.

Offline JA

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 650
    • View Profile
Maybe Aj should put all the cut out stuff on a seperate track.
So you can play the edited version first and later listen to the clicks and pops.
Problem solved.
« Last Edit: April 19, 2015, 01:11:27 pm by jabbajabba ༼ つ ◕_◕ ༽つ »

Offline gamey

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2253
    • View Profile
I personally have never heard anyone express any concerns about authenticity.

It's one factor among others. Media and PR etc isn't trusted widely anyhow but especially in the blockchain world there are too many people talking up their own interests;  even devs and early developers, play to their own interest and become unrealistic in their expectations. Someone stumbling over raw 'data' as it were, might consider that more valuable, than another polished presentation of a hope and a dream.

It all depends how it's done but seeing a certain level of commitment coupled with a consistency over time, give investors confidence. Perpetually changing the sources of information, can be frustrating. I don't want to listen to all the mumbles but on occasion might look to catch up on them by random sampling and I don't find skipping over topics that aren't relevant at all difficult.

No one implied it is "difficult" - just time consuming and annoying. It isn't skipping over topics as much as skipping over technical glitches. The horrible pops on poorly adjusted mics... mismatched volumes etc.  Someone might find that data more valuable but I'm skeptical to say the least.

If you've listened to much radio in your life you'd get a feel for how much radio guys hate dead air time. I suppose listening to a audio stream on your computer is different in some ways, but the general concern is that you lose your audience because they'll change stations.

I agree about the level of commitment for investors etc, but that is what editing and putting out a polished product shows.

If I were you guys I'd complain more about not having the edited versions pushed out into other venues.
« Last Edit: April 19, 2015, 01:02:08 pm by gamey »
I speak for myself and only myself.

Offline davidpbrown

But many people complained how "unprofessional" it was unedited, and stated that it looked bad on our community.  So we eventually got aj to do a more professional edit.
Interesting conversation here.  Please continue.

Again, that reflects what I've been suggesting for a while that BitShares PR/Marketing; core devs; FAQ/wiki editors etc need to consider that they are and will increasingly be addressing different audiences with different needs. That's why having a clearly stated focus is important.. where are the Mission and Vision statements?..

BitShares will succeed if it keeps in mind what makes blockchain tech appealing.. transparency is part of it. We also need to understand community management will be different that what a company might do, it's more like open source with investors interests too.

Obviously, there will be more need for polished output.. to the point that we see press releases and media celebrities but most important is the depth of information available. Where someone does find a polished snappy presentation, that might be a good hook but if they want more and do their research, find raw feeds and data for themselves, that will only help their confidence and understanding.

The community support may prove as important as any other factor and if you want to draw people into supporting the effort, then they will need educating.. their doing that for themselves is cheaper. If you have to pay everyone, then you'll burn money attracting talent to do a job; people doing what they are passionate about is again one of the core drivers of open source and blockchain - we might expect those will give better quality than paid employees too.
฿://1CBxm54Ah5hiYxiUtD7JGYRXykT5Z6ZuMc

Offline fuzzy

I personally have never heard anyone express any concerns about authenticity.

It's one factor among others. Media and PR etc isn't trusted widely anyhow but especially in the blockchain world there are too many people talking up their own interests;  even devs and early developers, play to their own interest and become unrealistic in their expectations. Someone stumbling over raw 'data' as it were, might consider that more valuable, than another polished presentation of a hope and a dream.

It all depends how it's done but seeing a certain level of commitment coupled with a consistency over time, give investors confidence. Perpetually changing the sources of information, can be frustrating. I don't want to listen to all the mumbles but on occasion might look to catch up on them by random sampling and I don't find skipping over topics that aren't relevant at all difficult.

This was actually why we initially didn't edit.  I wanted this to be something raw that others could use (like blogs and other media) to create their own BitShares-related news and use the hangouts as a source of information.  It would be building up toward being more like a conference where everyone gets a free press pass. 
This was specifically to give everyone an equal footing on the investment side of the equation. 
But many people complained how "unprofessional" it was unedited, and stated that it looked bad on our community.  So we eventually got aj to do a more professional edit.
Interesting conversation here.  Please continue.
WhaleShares==DKP; BitShares is our Community! 
ShareBits and WhaleShares = Love :D

Offline davidpbrown

I personally have never heard anyone express any concerns about authenticity.

It's one factor among others. Media and PR etc isn't trusted widely anyhow but especially in the blockchain world there are too many people talking up their own interests;  even devs and early developers, play to their own interest and become unrealistic in their expectations. Someone stumbling over raw 'data' as it were, might consider that more valuable, than another polished presentation of a hope and a dream.

It all depends how it's done but seeing a certain level of commitment coupled with a consistency over time, give investors confidence. Perpetually changing the sources of information, can be frustrating. I don't want to listen to all the mumbles but on occasion might look to catch up on them by random sampling and I don't find skipping over topics that aren't relevant at all difficult.
฿://1CBxm54Ah5hiYxiUtD7JGYRXykT5Z6ZuMc

Offline gamey

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2253
    • View Profile
Keep it simple; Content is more important than Presentation; and making it useful, is about making it available.

Putting it out unedited, gives an audience more confidence what they have is authentic. Tarting it up, does not add value, except on occasions where there is very high information density. Putting the raw feed out promptly also aids communication.. we can skip over the bits we don't want. It's not as if the host doesn't have a grip - fuzzy does it well enough the raw is good. If you want edited content then that could be fed into BitShares.tv as highlights or some other presented content. An edited mumble is just more work for little added benefit.

The alternate would be to focus mumble sessions on a core topic, edit those carefully and use that as a marketing aid to describe in detail certain aspects to targeted other audiences than just those here.. pass those to MSM and let them feast on it.

I personally have never heard anyone express any concerns about authenticity.

You are right about editting have questionable value but you are seeing it from the view of someone heavily into Bitshares.  Those who just come across  the recordings will definitely be put off by long technical glitches etc. I haven't listened to an unedited  recording in a long time, but you'll be hard pressed to find a podcast elsewhere that is raw like you believe is desirable. 

Skipping forward isn't so simple when you don't know how far to skip ahead. THe process is more like skip forward, then backwards a bit, then forwards a bit.... perhaps then backwards a few seconds. etc

I always hoped the edited versions would be put on youtube.

Mainly people just don't want to wait and thats understandable.  Perhaps it would be better to not edit them. I do not know. I just know it has little to do with economics or trying to monetize a public good.
I speak for myself and only myself.

Offline davidpbrown

Keep it simple; Content is more important than Presentation; and making it useful, is about making it available.

Putting it out unedited, gives an audience more confidence what they have is authentic. Tarting it up, does not add value, except on occasions where there is very high information density. Putting the raw feed out promptly also aids communication.. we can skip over the bits we don't want. It's not as if the host doesn't have a grip - fuzzy does it well enough the raw is good. If you want edited content then that could be fed into BitShares.tv as highlights or some other presented content. An edited mumble is just more work for little added benefit.

The alternate would be to focus mumble sessions on a core topic, edit those carefully and use that as a marketing aid to describe in detail certain aspects to targeted other audiences than just those here.. pass those to MSM and let them feast on it.
฿://1CBxm54Ah5hiYxiUtD7JGYRXykT5Z6ZuMc

Offline gamey

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2253
    • View Profile
fuzzy, are you trying out some economic experiment with Mumble?

This is what it looks like to me. You are running a free public concert out on the street where anyone can join and listen and even has permission to record it with their cameras. And then you try to somehow align incentives so that all the people (and it really could be any stranger) recording the live concert in public are somehow economically motivated to not give out the recording to someone else unless the person requesting the recording happens to possess a special sticker that you sell.

It's an interesting experiment I guess, but I think the end result will be that the economic motivation won't work out and someone (even if it is just one person) who recorded the live event will just stick it up online thereby making the stickers worthless.

Edit: My view is that if this raw recording is a public good (which it is) that we as a community value, then the community should fund that public good the same way we fund other BitShares-related public goods: delegate pay. Obviously any extra funds you can receive from ads in the final edited shows or just from donations would be useful in offsetting the delegate funds necessary. However, if this is truly something we value as a community, it should be possible to fund it entirely from delegate pay without relying on altruism or the effectiveness of advertisements (which can be bypassed).

It takes time to edit it so the audio doesn't have multi-mins of awkwardness.  When you put out the raw  one upfront lots view it and you have no way to track how many people actually view the session overall.  Not only that, it is personally demotivating when you put effort into trying to make it sound like a real show and 1/2 the people (diehards) listen to it raw. However people who are new to the  community might not want to listen to a pure hangout and might tune out when someone spends 5 mins trying to get their mic working. (for example)

AFAIK everyone has always been allowed to record it and do what they wish. 

In the end, it is just like you said at first.  If you want to get your own stickers, then figure out a way to attend and record it then post it for stickers!

It has nothing to do with economics unless Fuzzy has decided to issue a token and enforce it.  Sometimes it is smaller day to day things and not something economic or market based.

Granted I do understand your frustration.
I speak for myself and only myself.

Offline fuzzy

Brilliant!

I'd pay .99 to get the edited version which definitely has a value-add for me!

Make the unedited free and earn compensation for the value you add.

Added value:  adds more to the cryptofresh web site - supporting its traffic.


The problem with this is that no one will buy the edited hangout (except a few generous souls like you) if we put the unedited content out because they would prefer to have it right now (unedited).  This would then also mean that noone will want to have advertisements  on the edited hangouts because very few people will listen.  History has actually shown this.  Not trying to sound foul here of course but it is just the way things are.

That would mean I'd eventually be back to paying people like aj out of pocket... :/
WhaleShares==DKP; BitShares is our Community! 
ShareBits and WhaleShares = Love :D