Late to this party, but honestly, I don't think any content creator can know why any individual subscribes, unsubscribes, follows, unfollows, pays, skips the paying, whatever, at any given time. It likely has more to do with the individual than anything you personally are or are not doing. They subscribe to you when you're hibernating, sure, they probably subscribed to a shit ton of others, too. Then they realize it's too much, and start unsubscribing. You're spared that fate until you post again, they get the email notice, and bam, they unsubscribe because they're just in a headspace where they want fewer emails, fewer substacks, whatever. Tying it directly to the substance of your content is understandable, but an act of ego in its way. Suspecting an "algorithm" is too non-human, like blaming the weather. There isn't even much of an algorithm at work here in Substack. Likely, it was an act that was completely divorced from your content, and you as a creator. It's just how things roll because we're all living complex lives fuled with too many things. Welcome to humanity.
Appreciate this. And I agree. As per my last comment to you on my latest newsletter, this was all just a symptom of me trying to live in the moment. If I’m sitting down to write and am feeling angsty, that’s what I’m gonna write.
I’ve got back into a flow here so the subs/unsubs aren’t making much of an impact. While I was away I used the “oh I got another sub” as an antidote to the sense of fomo I had.
The content algorithms reward content that is familiar; if I create an 8-second video about the Sorting Hat, it will catch attention 1000 times better than something about my own creations. I don't know that this applies yet to Substack; there doesn't seem to be an algorithmic "feed" here, and instead Substack is encouraging writers to cross-pollinate their readerships through recommendations, sharing, etc. The outstanding question though is how to get new people on here on in the first place.
Regarding your lost followers, I think it is exactly a function of being top-of-mind. Every email you send out gives someone the chance to hop off. Let them show themselves out if they are not interested. It will ultimately help your open rates and you are also left with the people who read and enjoy your work.
The cross-pollination is something I need to tap into now that I'm coming back to the world of creative writing. My time off gave me a much needed break and now I feel like I have the space to begin that type of outreach.
That said, you are the number one driver of subscribers for me on Substack and you and I should consider how to take advantage of that fact. Obviously our readership is similar enough that they might appreciate some more for each of us.
All of this is well-said. I struggle with it myself (and I also have gained subscribers in absentia, oddly -- perhaps they just like what they see and subscribe to "set it and forget it").
It all comes back to what I can control. I can't control what the internet or algorithms respond to, or what audiences are looking for. I can control what I create, and I can control my behavior. I don't want to be a dancing fool, either. I have opinions and sometimes I share them, but people should come to me for my art, not my opinions on the Israel/Palestine conflict.
There'll always be some dovetailing. Some playing the algo game, some speaking out on causes you care about, etc. But if you let FOMO run that tricky balance, you end up doing more of the stuff you don't want to do, less of the stuff you _do_ want to do.
Utlimately, everything that passes from your mind into the world should do so when it crosses one bright, red line -- your own approval.
I know I'm just saying a bunch of stuff you already know, but, it's stuff I know too, and I still need the daily reminder.
This was a great reminder. The filter of my own approval is and should be enough but it's easy to forget that fact. The last year or so of my life (professionally, personally, and creatively) has been about slowing down and accepting that doing less isn't necessarily a bad thing. Instead I've learned to embrace it as the opportunity for more meaningful work that it actually is.
I actually had a fellow creator tell me recently that she was envious of how "prolific" I am and how I manage to have a new project each year, and tons of prints in between, and that really made me go "... huh." Definitely wasn't my perception of my output. So if I'm prolific, how much more are you?
Anyway, keep it coming (at your own pace and subject to your own approval)!
Late to this party, but honestly, I don't think any content creator can know why any individual subscribes, unsubscribes, follows, unfollows, pays, skips the paying, whatever, at any given time. It likely has more to do with the individual than anything you personally are or are not doing. They subscribe to you when you're hibernating, sure, they probably subscribed to a shit ton of others, too. Then they realize it's too much, and start unsubscribing. You're spared that fate until you post again, they get the email notice, and bam, they unsubscribe because they're just in a headspace where they want fewer emails, fewer substacks, whatever. Tying it directly to the substance of your content is understandable, but an act of ego in its way. Suspecting an "algorithm" is too non-human, like blaming the weather. There isn't even much of an algorithm at work here in Substack. Likely, it was an act that was completely divorced from your content, and you as a creator. It's just how things roll because we're all living complex lives fuled with too many things. Welcome to humanity.
Appreciate this. And I agree. As per my last comment to you on my latest newsletter, this was all just a symptom of me trying to live in the moment. If I’m sitting down to write and am feeling angsty, that’s what I’m gonna write.
I’ve got back into a flow here so the subs/unsubs aren’t making much of an impact. While I was away I used the “oh I got another sub” as an antidote to the sense of fomo I had.
The content algorithms reward content that is familiar; if I create an 8-second video about the Sorting Hat, it will catch attention 1000 times better than something about my own creations. I don't know that this applies yet to Substack; there doesn't seem to be an algorithmic "feed" here, and instead Substack is encouraging writers to cross-pollinate their readerships through recommendations, sharing, etc. The outstanding question though is how to get new people on here on in the first place.
Regarding your lost followers, I think it is exactly a function of being top-of-mind. Every email you send out gives someone the chance to hop off. Let them show themselves out if they are not interested. It will ultimately help your open rates and you are also left with the people who read and enjoy your work.
The cross-pollination is something I need to tap into now that I'm coming back to the world of creative writing. My time off gave me a much needed break and now I feel like I have the space to begin that type of outreach.
That said, you are the number one driver of subscribers for me on Substack and you and I should consider how to take advantage of that fact. Obviously our readership is similar enough that they might appreciate some more for each of us.
You are the number two driver for me, so that definitely makes sense to me! Happy to chat live to kick around some ideas!
All of this is well-said. I struggle with it myself (and I also have gained subscribers in absentia, oddly -- perhaps they just like what they see and subscribe to "set it and forget it").
It all comes back to what I can control. I can't control what the internet or algorithms respond to, or what audiences are looking for. I can control what I create, and I can control my behavior. I don't want to be a dancing fool, either. I have opinions and sometimes I share them, but people should come to me for my art, not my opinions on the Israel/Palestine conflict.
There'll always be some dovetailing. Some playing the algo game, some speaking out on causes you care about, etc. But if you let FOMO run that tricky balance, you end up doing more of the stuff you don't want to do, less of the stuff you _do_ want to do.
Utlimately, everything that passes from your mind into the world should do so when it crosses one bright, red line -- your own approval.
I know I'm just saying a bunch of stuff you already know, but, it's stuff I know too, and I still need the daily reminder.
This was a great reminder. The filter of my own approval is and should be enough but it's easy to forget that fact. The last year or so of my life (professionally, personally, and creatively) has been about slowing down and accepting that doing less isn't necessarily a bad thing. Instead I've learned to embrace it as the opportunity for more meaningful work that it actually is.
I actually had a fellow creator tell me recently that she was envious of how "prolific" I am and how I manage to have a new project each year, and tons of prints in between, and that really made me go "... huh." Definitely wasn't my perception of my output. So if I'm prolific, how much more are you?
Anyway, keep it coming (at your own pace and subject to your own approval)!