Watching leftists and people whose ostensible raison d'etre come to the defense of Substack by criticizing Ghost is pretty sad.
By any objective metric, a non-profit that provides a f/oss product capable of being self-hosted, and which funds the development of that product via
By any objective metric, a non-profit that provides a f/oss product capable of being self-hosted, and which funds the development of that product via
paid hosting services, is far more aligned with progressive values re: concentrated economic power and platform censorship than a VC-funded, for-profit company that solicits big names by paying them advances, and giving them employee-like benefits without actually hiring them.
The real question shouldn't be "why are Nathan and others leaving Substack for Ghost", it should be "why the hell didn't you all move to Ghost in the first place, and why aren't you doing it now independent of Nathan et al's reasons for doing so?"
It's easy to reduce this whole saga to the question of whether or not you agree with the reasons particular people are leaving the platform, but that misses the bigger picture, which is that to the extent Substack's model is an improvement over traditional platform journalism (a
question reasonable minds may disagree about), Ghost is an improvement over Substack's model, so if people are going to make the move, they might as well skip the middle step and go to the good thing from day 1.
There's never time to do it right, but always time to do it again.
There's never time to do it right, but always time to do it again.
*whose ostensible raison d'etre is fighting concentrated corporate power and it's ability to erode personal freedom
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
