Usually the quid pro quo is derided as inappropriate, because if there's no common ground between the two writers it's meaningless. So your point about people being more circumspect about how often and with whom they share their address is valuable, and a stronger argument not to do it.
As soon as a measurable is set, the measurement becomes the goal, which renders the measurement pointless. This is true everywhere, not confirmed to social media. Businesses can meet all their KPIs and still be providing crap service or defective products. The measurement ends up negating the thing being measured.
In the online world, mere reach has become useless, I think just white noise.
As for sub for sub, it's naive and foolish. It shows a misunderstanding of the environment.
That whole concept, of how measuring something inevitably betrays the original purpose, I find absolutely fascinating. It's like inverse quantum mechanics: as soon as something is observed, all the possibilities disappear from reality.
Yes, it sounds a bit bonkers when you say it out loud, but it's also true. Having written and managed contracts with endless KPIs, I can affirm that the measurements instantly become the goal.
In the old days, having large numbers of followers or likers on platforms like FB and Twitter actually did something. People regarded it as social proof and assuming there was more value in what you had to say. But, as you so rightly point out, subscription is a bigger commitment here than just following someone. And just having the numbers no longer helps those numbers to grow, anyway.
To your excellent points, I will also that Substack is now starting to accumulate a supply of scammers and/or bots. I noticed them because sometimes they look like readers--and we all want to find readers. But every time I try to pursue an actual reader, the "people" I find just want to have small talk with me that usually culminates in a request for personal information, an attempt to pull me to another platform, or something like that.
The moral of the story is to vet people, even those you follow, but especially those you subscribe to. Someone who shows an interest in your may also be interesting to you, but that's not a given. And, even though I hate to say it, someone with no information in the profile is not a good bet. This person could be someone who just wants to find new reading material, but my experience suggests that they are mostly not what they appear to be. They may randomly follow and free subscribe to make themselves look real, but you can usually tell if you examine what they're doing closely.
In the early days of social media, smaller numbers meant more. 100 followers on Twitter or Facebook was an exciting thing back at the start. I don't think creators or audiences changed massively, but the underlying structures certainly did.
I just read this and I didn't think about how subscribing willy-nilly gives strangers my email address. It's made me really see the value of just following people now - not that I fell for the subscribe to me/subscribe to you tactic - but I have been generous with my subscribes.
Also, I was thinking of quitting cos I just get more engagement on insta and that feels more fun, but you've made me rethink this and keep going for a little bit longer. Maybe my audience will never grow like how it does on insta but I see now that they are two very different beasts. I like what you say about subscribers being really interested in the work. So thanks.
Good points Janice, and any time I see someone using willy-nilly it warms my heart (as a long time language teacher, these are the words that my students love and remember).
I’ve never been too overly concerned with getting actual subscribers - followers is just fine, if people see me, great, if not, no worries - my approach doesn’t change. I follow plenty of people and if they follow back, great.
Just keep doing your thing, and subscribe to/follow who you want.
I am so glad you wrote this. I've been thinking about it a lot as I switch from a nonfiction to a fiction section. I'm looking for engaged readers and helpful comments. I want to read your post more thoroughly later [bit of a busy day] and will comment more, but it's a discussion that's been going on in my head so glad you put it in print.
This actually makes perfect sense to me. I was never an X user I was seldom got on Twitter but I completely abandoned it once it went to X and I have seen a lot of these subscribe and I’ll follow you back which I have not responded to and I’m glad I didn’t because I’m like why are these random strangers asking me to follow them so this makes great sense and I think it’s great advice thank you.
Very Straightforward and Authentic. Loved the Pointers shared for Beginners.. I was Anyways planning to warm up before writing My Posts.. Thanks.. Ganga
This article was insightful. I 100 percent agree with how big of a following one has will translate to influence or sales etc. It's about going deep with the following you have, quality over quantity. This is the first time I'm reading about "Ghost". I'm not sure what that is, I'm going to look it up.
I was one of those people who read your article - and it was on the day of the American election! I live in Australia and I watched the coverage when the results came in - it was an unusually cold and rainy day so I stayed home and watched the telly. At the same time I was going through my emails and noticed a post from a newsletter I’d subscribed to. I didn’t know that it was a Substack newsletter. Having time to investigate I thought what is Substack anyway (after I’d donated a cup of coffee to the writer - what a great easy way to show appreciation!) I asked Google - and hey presto there was your article! I realised that this is a great space for writers and while the results came flooding through I joined up, yet have still to write my first newsletter! I am not in a hurry! Thanks for your wisdom and clarity I learned a lot.
Simon, I think for many of us you are preaching to the converted and the challenge is getting this to the target audience - the nitwits who use this tactic.
Who honestly knows what they are after or what they're thinking. There was one person weeks ago who blatantly said his goal was to accumulate as many subscribers as he could this way and then start producing 'content' so he could say 'hey, look, I've got 1,000 subscribers' and he was under the impression that would lead to more paying subscribers.
I've developed a reputation as a prankster where I name and shame these people, it's for a bit of a laugh but I hope it at least gets them to think - I'll restack their note with a snarky comment like 'hey gang, we've got a live one here!' because I know many of the people who follow and engage with me know what I'm doing.
Have you ever clicked on some of these profiles? A lot of it looks suspiciously like bots or AI-generated nonsense.
All we can do is write to our heart's content, do our thing and get on with it.
As you point out, anyone reading this newsletter is already going to understand all of this. As will anyone taking part in actual discussions on Notes. In that regard it's probably a little pointless - but it was cathartic to write it!
When it comes to pointless, believe me, I know! I wrote a book and my Substack is very much geared towards language learners and yet, the people I'm trying to reach don't read my nonsense, precisely because they are such bad learners! The ones who read and enjoy it are already doing the things I bang on about, so I sometimes ask myself what the point is...
BUT...Simon, in all honesty, cathartic or otherwise, this was far from pointless. You raised other great points, especially about the privacy and submitting email addresses, something I hadn't thought about at all (it could be why many of my own readers, for example, who come from Eastern Europe, are reluctant to subscribe, but will regularly read my stuff, and then frustratingly comment on FB or Instagram but not Substack itself...)
Also, it's great writing for people who feel comforted by your words. It's soothing in a way (sorry if this sounds cheesy), that we're in this together, doing it the right way, for the right reasons.
And now, next time I see any of those silly messages, I can continue calling them out, but I can also share this post and perhaps it'll strike some sense into them?
BUT...(final point, I swear) the biggest reason this post wasn't even remotely pointless is because (yay, the beauty of Substack!) it allowed me to discover you (thanks to Hanna Delaney's restack) and I can now see the interesting stuff you've written on serialised fiction, which I'm considering doing.
I pride myself in, I guess, being an “early adopter” of Substack and therefore knowing the very unique difference here between subscribing and following someone. And it occurs to me as I say this sentence that what makes this place different and so unlike social media platforms (which I don’t consider Substack to be) is that they were “subscribe first” and it isn’t till recently, in their infancy, that the idea of follows…for lack of a better word, followed.
The number I subscribe to I keep to under 15 at all times here, and that is intentional for several reasons:
1. I already subscribe to plenty of people and organizations and companies outside of Substack.
2. Keeping my email inbox at “inbox zero” is deathly important to me. I’m not about to create hundreds of folders and rules if I don’t have to.
3. I want whoever finds my Substack profile to know I’m serious about who I’m subscribed to and know that those few must be good if I’ve chosen them over the thousands of others. My public subscription carries way more weight than if I subscribed to 50+ or 400+.
4. My time is immensely valuable. And since I earn my living at my day job I can devote only so much time reading personal emails.
Now, I know Substack has this fancy thing where I can choose not to receive emails and just use their fancy app. But I grew up in the gen of the computer and eventually the internet. Meaning I had a childhood before these things became a household necessity ( thank God). And I suppose this makes me old to say, but I prefer email and I hate reading long things on my phone unless I absolutely have to. Like right now bc it’s 630am and I’m not yet out of bed.
All this to say, bc I know I have so few newsletters I subscribe to here, I feel fairly certain in saying that the number of subscribers I have is genuine. Meaning it wasn’t a sub for sub exchange. And I hope, with the exception of bots and non-English speaking as their first language, that this point is clear by my small number. It may account for why I don’t get these DMs and others do.
Now Follows is something I can understand bc we’ve all been “trained on the concept” from the beginning of social media. And like our training, it’s easy to fall into two categories:
A. Those who just want an inflated number of followers.
B. Those who care about their algorithmic timeline.
The former isn’t using Notes in any meaningful way besides to just grow through endless self-promotion.
The latter is using Notes all the time for engagement and authentic conversation. Looking for community. Scrolling their timeline in search of conversation to have and people to connect with.
I am always in the second camp. But my Follow trigger finger is much more loose. Because the MOMENT I see someone say or share something I don’t want to see, unfollowing and blocking and trusting the algorithm will understand and remove that person from my vision will happen. And I think of the act of Following as a “community venture” whereas Subscribing is more of a “1:1 agreement”.
Thanks as always Simon for giving me the space to share my non-fiction thoughts. I chose a while back to just no longer share my non-fiction thoughts besides once a month. It means I am silenced in sharing my thoughts in and around this platform or other spaces but I’m really insisting that those who subscribe to me are in for 100% fiction. It’s a personal goal. And my fear has always been when my non-fiction things blow up then and now that my increased numbers are for that and that’s not who I want to brand myself as. I need to be not just fiction and not just 100 word stories but horror fiction. So I always look forward to your thoughts on topics that I feel equally passionate about and can flex my thoughts thusly!
Can I follow your subscribe off a cliff? Don't these guys realize substack doesn't have much of an algorithm, so inflated numbers are nothing but an ego boost?
Usually the quid pro quo is derided as inappropriate, because if there's no common ground between the two writers it's meaningless. So your point about people being more circumspect about how often and with whom they share their address is valuable, and a stronger argument not to do it.
As soon as a measurable is set, the measurement becomes the goal, which renders the measurement pointless. This is true everywhere, not confirmed to social media. Businesses can meet all their KPIs and still be providing crap service or defective products. The measurement ends up negating the thing being measured.
In the online world, mere reach has become useless, I think just white noise.
As for sub for sub, it's naive and foolish. It shows a misunderstanding of the environment.
That whole concept, of how measuring something inevitably betrays the original purpose, I find absolutely fascinating. It's like inverse quantum mechanics: as soon as something is observed, all the possibilities disappear from reality.
Yes, it sounds a bit bonkers when you say it out loud, but it's also true. Having written and managed contracts with endless KPIs, I can affirm that the measurements instantly become the goal.
Your analogy is excellent. 😂
In the old days, having large numbers of followers or likers on platforms like FB and Twitter actually did something. People regarded it as social proof and assuming there was more value in what you had to say. But, as you so rightly point out, subscription is a bigger commitment here than just following someone. And just having the numbers no longer helps those numbers to grow, anyway.
To your excellent points, I will also that Substack is now starting to accumulate a supply of scammers and/or bots. I noticed them because sometimes they look like readers--and we all want to find readers. But every time I try to pursue an actual reader, the "people" I find just want to have small talk with me that usually culminates in a request for personal information, an attempt to pull me to another platform, or something like that.
The moral of the story is to vet people, even those you follow, but especially those you subscribe to. Someone who shows an interest in your may also be interesting to you, but that's not a given. And, even though I hate to say it, someone with no information in the profile is not a good bet. This person could be someone who just wants to find new reading material, but my experience suggests that they are mostly not what they appear to be. They may randomly follow and free subscribe to make themselves look real, but you can usually tell if you examine what they're doing closely.
In the early days of social media, smaller numbers meant more. 100 followers on Twitter or Facebook was an exciting thing back at the start. I don't think creators or audiences changed massively, but the underlying structures certainly did.
I just read this and I didn't think about how subscribing willy-nilly gives strangers my email address. It's made me really see the value of just following people now - not that I fell for the subscribe to me/subscribe to you tactic - but I have been generous with my subscribes.
Also, I was thinking of quitting cos I just get more engagement on insta and that feels more fun, but you've made me rethink this and keep going for a little bit longer. Maybe my audience will never grow like how it does on insta but I see now that they are two very different beasts. I like what you say about subscribers being really interested in the work. So thanks.
Good points Janice, and any time I see someone using willy-nilly it warms my heart (as a long time language teacher, these are the words that my students love and remember).
I’ve never been too overly concerned with getting actual subscribers - followers is just fine, if people see me, great, if not, no worries - my approach doesn’t change. I follow plenty of people and if they follow back, great.
Just keep doing your thing, and subscribe to/follow who you want.
Haha I thought hard about using that term but I was brought up in the olden days
Love this!
Thanks, Hanna!
Great post, Simon. Thanks.
Thanks, Jeanine.
I am so glad you wrote this. I've been thinking about it a lot as I switch from a nonfiction to a fiction section. I'm looking for engaged readers and helpful comments. I want to read your post more thoroughly later [bit of a busy day] and will comment more, but it's a discussion that's been going on in my head so glad you put it in print.
This actually makes perfect sense to me. I was never an X user I was seldom got on Twitter but I completely abandoned it once it went to X and I have seen a lot of these subscribe and I’ll follow you back which I have not responded to and I’m glad I didn’t because I’m like why are these random strangers asking me to follow them so this makes great sense and I think it’s great advice thank you.
Very Straightforward and Authentic. Loved the Pointers shared for Beginners.. I was Anyways planning to warm up before writing My Posts.. Thanks.. Ganga
This article was insightful. I 100 percent agree with how big of a following one has will translate to influence or sales etc. It's about going deep with the following you have, quality over quantity. This is the first time I'm reading about "Ghost". I'm not sure what that is, I'm going to look it up.
I was one of those people who read your article - and it was on the day of the American election! I live in Australia and I watched the coverage when the results came in - it was an unusually cold and rainy day so I stayed home and watched the telly. At the same time I was going through my emails and noticed a post from a newsletter I’d subscribed to. I didn’t know that it was a Substack newsletter. Having time to investigate I thought what is Substack anyway (after I’d donated a cup of coffee to the writer - what a great easy way to show appreciation!) I asked Google - and hey presto there was your article! I realised that this is a great space for writers and while the results came flooding through I joined up, yet have still to write my first newsletter! I am not in a hurry! Thanks for your wisdom and clarity I learned a lot.
Thanks, that’s really interesting to hear!
Simon, I think for many of us you are preaching to the converted and the challenge is getting this to the target audience - the nitwits who use this tactic.
Who honestly knows what they are after or what they're thinking. There was one person weeks ago who blatantly said his goal was to accumulate as many subscribers as he could this way and then start producing 'content' so he could say 'hey, look, I've got 1,000 subscribers' and he was under the impression that would lead to more paying subscribers.
I've developed a reputation as a prankster where I name and shame these people, it's for a bit of a laugh but I hope it at least gets them to think - I'll restack their note with a snarky comment like 'hey gang, we've got a live one here!' because I know many of the people who follow and engage with me know what I'm doing.
Have you ever clicked on some of these profiles? A lot of it looks suspiciously like bots or AI-generated nonsense.
All we can do is write to our heart's content, do our thing and get on with it.
Thanks for this - I hope the message spreads.
As you point out, anyone reading this newsletter is already going to understand all of this. As will anyone taking part in actual discussions on Notes. In that regard it's probably a little pointless - but it was cathartic to write it!
When it comes to pointless, believe me, I know! I wrote a book and my Substack is very much geared towards language learners and yet, the people I'm trying to reach don't read my nonsense, precisely because they are such bad learners! The ones who read and enjoy it are already doing the things I bang on about, so I sometimes ask myself what the point is...
BUT...Simon, in all honesty, cathartic or otherwise, this was far from pointless. You raised other great points, especially about the privacy and submitting email addresses, something I hadn't thought about at all (it could be why many of my own readers, for example, who come from Eastern Europe, are reluctant to subscribe, but will regularly read my stuff, and then frustratingly comment on FB or Instagram but not Substack itself...)
Also, it's great writing for people who feel comforted by your words. It's soothing in a way (sorry if this sounds cheesy), that we're in this together, doing it the right way, for the right reasons.
And now, next time I see any of those silly messages, I can continue calling them out, but I can also share this post and perhaps it'll strike some sense into them?
BUT...(final point, I swear) the biggest reason this post wasn't even remotely pointless is because (yay, the beauty of Substack!) it allowed me to discover you (thanks to Hanna Delaney's restack) and I can now see the interesting stuff you've written on serialised fiction, which I'm considering doing.
So you've gained another subscriber ☺️
Thanks, much appreciated!
Usually I write more, but my day is - troublesome. Yet I still wanted to say thank you for the well researched and timely advice. Thank you! 😊
Thanks, Meg!
Wise counsel as ever, Simon, thank you. You have a knack of saying exactly what I need to hear!
👍
I pride myself in, I guess, being an “early adopter” of Substack and therefore knowing the very unique difference here between subscribing and following someone. And it occurs to me as I say this sentence that what makes this place different and so unlike social media platforms (which I don’t consider Substack to be) is that they were “subscribe first” and it isn’t till recently, in their infancy, that the idea of follows…for lack of a better word, followed.
The number I subscribe to I keep to under 15 at all times here, and that is intentional for several reasons:
1. I already subscribe to plenty of people and organizations and companies outside of Substack.
2. Keeping my email inbox at “inbox zero” is deathly important to me. I’m not about to create hundreds of folders and rules if I don’t have to.
3. I want whoever finds my Substack profile to know I’m serious about who I’m subscribed to and know that those few must be good if I’ve chosen them over the thousands of others. My public subscription carries way more weight than if I subscribed to 50+ or 400+.
4. My time is immensely valuable. And since I earn my living at my day job I can devote only so much time reading personal emails.
Now, I know Substack has this fancy thing where I can choose not to receive emails and just use their fancy app. But I grew up in the gen of the computer and eventually the internet. Meaning I had a childhood before these things became a household necessity ( thank God). And I suppose this makes me old to say, but I prefer email and I hate reading long things on my phone unless I absolutely have to. Like right now bc it’s 630am and I’m not yet out of bed.
All this to say, bc I know I have so few newsletters I subscribe to here, I feel fairly certain in saying that the number of subscribers I have is genuine. Meaning it wasn’t a sub for sub exchange. And I hope, with the exception of bots and non-English speaking as their first language, that this point is clear by my small number. It may account for why I don’t get these DMs and others do.
Now Follows is something I can understand bc we’ve all been “trained on the concept” from the beginning of social media. And like our training, it’s easy to fall into two categories:
A. Those who just want an inflated number of followers.
B. Those who care about their algorithmic timeline.
The former isn’t using Notes in any meaningful way besides to just grow through endless self-promotion.
The latter is using Notes all the time for engagement and authentic conversation. Looking for community. Scrolling their timeline in search of conversation to have and people to connect with.
I am always in the second camp. But my Follow trigger finger is much more loose. Because the MOMENT I see someone say or share something I don’t want to see, unfollowing and blocking and trusting the algorithm will understand and remove that person from my vision will happen. And I think of the act of Following as a “community venture” whereas Subscribing is more of a “1:1 agreement”.
Thanks as always Simon for giving me the space to share my non-fiction thoughts. I chose a while back to just no longer share my non-fiction thoughts besides once a month. It means I am silenced in sharing my thoughts in and around this platform or other spaces but I’m really insisting that those who subscribe to me are in for 100% fiction. It’s a personal goal. And my fear has always been when my non-fiction things blow up then and now that my increased numbers are for that and that’s not who I want to brand myself as. I need to be not just fiction and not just 100 word stories but horror fiction. So I always look forward to your thoughts on topics that I feel equally passionate about and can flex my thoughts thusly!
This is a totally pointless and meaningless thing to do.
Can I follow your subscribe off a cliff? Don't these guys realize substack doesn't have much of an algorithm, so inflated numbers are nothing but an ego boost?