Here are some that I can think of:
iter8r - A community operated social news site
iter8r - Because transparency is not a just a plastic film :-)
iter8r - We are "Open for business"
> Because transparency is not a just a plastic film
Reveals nothing about your business.
> We are "Open for business"
Reveals nothing about your business.
I personally think it's important to both emphasize that you're a social news site and that you pay the users for their contributions. Something like "Social news shared both ways", not sure -- I find it easier to criticize bad slogans than to come up with good alternatives.
I was slightly confused about the design of the front page until I realised you had nicely pointed us to the FAQ.
I'm always slightly sceptical of companies that are 'just like X, only with an innovative ownership scheme'. What made you decide to go down that route?
If startups believe that Web 2.0 is all about users, then we must find a way to really engage with them. Web 2.0 users are savvy, have a strong sense of community. Then why treat them as just passive consumers. Debian (spi-inc) allows users to graduate to board members. We would like a Web 2.0 company to do the same.
In what possible world would the "share" assigned to each user ever be amount to something big enough to be visible with the naked eye?
Sorry to be snarky but this idea seems so ridiculously silly that I just can't comprehend how anyone could entertain it for even a second. What am I missing?
What profits though? The profits of free collaborative news site with adverts are always going to be very low on a per-user basis. How much money can you get for showing ads to 1 person?
Unless you're saying that it should just be the very very top submitters who get paid. But didn't Netscape.com already try paying "top submitters" to come use their site?
If he makes the data API truly open, as he says he will, it is incredibly enabling for a wide variety of 3rd-party applications to build on top. I'm not saying this will happen necessarily, but iter8r could potentially see a whole ecosystem built on top of its platform. That is, of course, if people use access to all the data.
The founders persuaded the users
To read web sites, and pick winners from losers.
As the users increased,
Founder ownership ceased
Handing the reigns to a board of directors.
I think the hardest thing for a site like this is ramping up from nothing, and the invitation-only / revenue split is an interesting way of approaching that problem.
It doesn't seem like anyone's problems are really being solved. I accomplish all of this with Hacker News, Delicious, Digg, and my own browser bookmarks. If I tried to become involved in every company whose products I use, I would not have time to create my own company/products.
I can appreciate your enthusiasm for community and the web, but I think your passion may be better served elsewhere.
edit Then again, maybe I'm just not your target user/owner.
Work on the UI...and you need to simplify the language in some sort of Elevator style pitch. No one would spend time in looking for what it does...and how it stands I had to spend a bit of time. So, Kaizan
35 comments
[ 2001 ms ] story [ 1161 ms ] threadHere are some that I can think of: iter8r - A community operated social news site iter8r - Because transparency is not a just a plastic film :-) iter8r - We are "Open for business"
Aren't all social news site community operated ?
> Because transparency is not a just a plastic film
Reveals nothing about your business.
> We are "Open for business"
Reveals nothing about your business.
I personally think it's important to both emphasize that you're a social news site and that you pay the users for their contributions. Something like "Social news shared both ways", not sure -- I find it easier to criticize bad slogans than to come up with good alternatives.
I'm always slightly sceptical of companies that are 'just like X, only with an innovative ownership scheme'. What made you decide to go down that route?
Sorry to be snarky but this idea seems so ridiculously silly that I just can't comprehend how anyone could entertain it for even a second. What am I missing?
Unless you're saying that it should just be the very very top submitters who get paid. But didn't Netscape.com already try paying "top submitters" to come use their site?
But how much money can be distributed if the objective is to be truly equitable?
Maybe its sustainable, maybe its not. But we had to ask this question. Who else would be this foolish? :-)
Its not just submitters who share the profits. People who read and vote are helping to filter and sort content. They are just as important.
"Iter8r is a social bookmarking website that enables users to post and discover interesting articles and have discussions around them."
Don't mean to be dismissive, but that doesn't really sound like such a compelling proposition. How is this better than HN? Or Delicious? Or Reddit?
When we say Open, we really mean it.
http://www.bingocardcreator.com/blog-images/hn/iter8r-review...
Do you need me to elaborate?
Can you use the about/contact page?
Thanks.
I can appreciate your enthusiasm for community and the web, but I think your passion may be better served elsewhere.
edit Then again, maybe I'm just not your target user/owner.