What a lovely reminder for us to be grateful! I really enjoy the community you've built here on Substack (and not having to deal with a thousand Medium showoffs is always a nice bonus).
Thanks, I enjoy it too. Show-offs do exist, but the culture and practical mechanisms on Substack are not allowing for this kind of thing to become dominant. Still, we shouldn't forget that there are some much appraised big shots here as well. Only, they have to deliver a constant stream of good writing to stay on top, so they are all the time earning their position, over and over again.
As I read your piece here, I am struck by two things. The unfathomable reach of the whole of a thing (like this platform, or the world, for that matter) and the ironic trick of perspective that, for all of us, wherever we are, and wherever we look, we are at the center of all things, with the whole universe extending outward from us at every angle.
My experience here in this Substackian world, is a feeling that there is nowhere to get. And I guard against an instinct to grow too fast. Grow into what? How many friends can I have at once? Can I call them a friend if I don't take the time to read their work deeply, and at least try to feel where they are coming from?
I don't have a thesis here, but I appreciate your essay and the fact that it focuses me on the recognition of what I got.
The reach is even expanding all the time — like if we were trying to measure the distance to the ends of an expanding universe, because this is what a place like Substack is: More people inside all the time, and more people from the outside having heard about it. It is ever-expanding. And we sit in there, somewhere, on an asteroid that we can easily overview, but know that there is all the rest too — maybe worth exploring? Maybe worthwhile for the rest of the universe to explore us?
Our understanding of the universe differs, depending on our understanding of ourselves, but heavily influenced by what we hear from others about their understanding.
A world view is shaping and reshaping, and we act accordingly. Growth seems to be present in all world view, for all Substackians, because we are raised with that view, starting out with nothing, having the one goal as beginners to find some subscribers, and then then some more... it becomes a habit, and it is difficult to define what the right amount of subscribers could be. Most people would continue the growth forever, expecting to one day become one of the big fishes.
Some will have thoughts and dreams about the economy as well, as this is very much in the DNA of Substack.
"Friends" is a great word. A bit mistreated by places like Facebook, but aiming to be friends will all subscribers is noble. If it can be done, you are a lucky man, having created a happy space for you and them.
With ambitions in a different direction, not excluding friendship, though, I think that having readers is already great. And active readers, who react on the written, are what I dream of. With such a dream, I don't think that there has to be any limits for how many subscribers can be there. At least, I am not anywhere near that point, and when I see such amounts of readers that it begins to become a problem, I will most likely notice, and I can set a limit by then, as needed.
The other way around, though, I am getting increasingly worried: I subscribe to very many substacks, and I cannot read more than a few posts each day, so the many Substackians who see me as a subscriber, will worry about their low open rate and engagement level, for which I am partially responsible.
So, I am considering how to reduce the amount of stacks I subscribe to.
And here comes the catch: Should we, for social reasons, strive for mostly having mutual subscriptions? In that case, the number of subscribers for my stack should be limited to the number of stacks I am seriously able to follow and support.
I don't think that way, not now, but if someone does, this will define their actions.
These are great questions and good insights, my opinion, Jorgen.
There is so much here...I like your reference to measuring the expanding universe. We know from modern physics that measurement is what in fact creates manifest reality. The clicking of a like button...great example of measurement. Before the click, there is only the potential of that click (along with millions of other possibilities). Before we click, Schroedinger's cat is just a hovering unknown.
I have no answers to these questions. Like all of us, I am deeply grateful for thoughtful readers.
My own limited experience here is that I am digging the engagement itself. The connections of hearts and minds that I am making with souls across the planet that I have never met. It is a heady feeling, and in balance, it is helping me feel connected in a way that is comforting, particularly in a chaotic time. I am pleased to have run across you here and look forward to more such exchanges in the future. Maybe we will someday tip a beer back at the same table. Cheers.
What a lovely reminder for us to be grateful! I really enjoy the community you've built here on Substack (and not having to deal with a thousand Medium showoffs is always a nice bonus).
Thanks, I enjoy it too. Show-offs do exist, but the culture and practical mechanisms on Substack are not allowing for this kind of thing to become dominant. Still, we shouldn't forget that there are some much appraised big shots here as well. Only, they have to deliver a constant stream of good writing to stay on top, so they are all the time earning their position, over and over again.
As I read your piece here, I am struck by two things. The unfathomable reach of the whole of a thing (like this platform, or the world, for that matter) and the ironic trick of perspective that, for all of us, wherever we are, and wherever we look, we are at the center of all things, with the whole universe extending outward from us at every angle.
My experience here in this Substackian world, is a feeling that there is nowhere to get. And I guard against an instinct to grow too fast. Grow into what? How many friends can I have at once? Can I call them a friend if I don't take the time to read their work deeply, and at least try to feel where they are coming from?
I don't have a thesis here, but I appreciate your essay and the fact that it focuses me on the recognition of what I got.
The reach is even expanding all the time — like if we were trying to measure the distance to the ends of an expanding universe, because this is what a place like Substack is: More people inside all the time, and more people from the outside having heard about it. It is ever-expanding. And we sit in there, somewhere, on an asteroid that we can easily overview, but know that there is all the rest too — maybe worth exploring? Maybe worthwhile for the rest of the universe to explore us?
Our understanding of the universe differs, depending on our understanding of ourselves, but heavily influenced by what we hear from others about their understanding.
A world view is shaping and reshaping, and we act accordingly. Growth seems to be present in all world view, for all Substackians, because we are raised with that view, starting out with nothing, having the one goal as beginners to find some subscribers, and then then some more... it becomes a habit, and it is difficult to define what the right amount of subscribers could be. Most people would continue the growth forever, expecting to one day become one of the big fishes.
Some will have thoughts and dreams about the economy as well, as this is very much in the DNA of Substack.
"Friends" is a great word. A bit mistreated by places like Facebook, but aiming to be friends will all subscribers is noble. If it can be done, you are a lucky man, having created a happy space for you and them.
With ambitions in a different direction, not excluding friendship, though, I think that having readers is already great. And active readers, who react on the written, are what I dream of. With such a dream, I don't think that there has to be any limits for how many subscribers can be there. At least, I am not anywhere near that point, and when I see such amounts of readers that it begins to become a problem, I will most likely notice, and I can set a limit by then, as needed.
The other way around, though, I am getting increasingly worried: I subscribe to very many substacks, and I cannot read more than a few posts each day, so the many Substackians who see me as a subscriber, will worry about their low open rate and engagement level, for which I am partially responsible.
So, I am considering how to reduce the amount of stacks I subscribe to.
And here comes the catch: Should we, for social reasons, strive for mostly having mutual subscriptions? In that case, the number of subscribers for my stack should be limited to the number of stacks I am seriously able to follow and support.
I don't think that way, not now, but if someone does, this will define their actions.
These are great questions and good insights, my opinion, Jorgen.
There is so much here...I like your reference to measuring the expanding universe. We know from modern physics that measurement is what in fact creates manifest reality. The clicking of a like button...great example of measurement. Before the click, there is only the potential of that click (along with millions of other possibilities). Before we click, Schroedinger's cat is just a hovering unknown.
I have no answers to these questions. Like all of us, I am deeply grateful for thoughtful readers.
My own limited experience here is that I am digging the engagement itself. The connections of hearts and minds that I am making with souls across the planet that I have never met. It is a heady feeling, and in balance, it is helping me feel connected in a way that is comforting, particularly in a chaotic time. I am pleased to have run across you here and look forward to more such exchanges in the future. Maybe we will someday tip a beer back at the same table. Cheers.