[AlienRobot]

Ironically, I found the opposite. Tumblr users will pay Tumblr to "blaze" posts of other users, sending the post to everyone on the platform.

I don't think there are many platforms in which users are willing to give the platform money.

If you asked me whether I'd give money to support Reddit, I'd say just let it crash and burn.

[pjc50]

Very few social platforms have figured out that the right way to get money is from the readers supporting the posters, not from the posters themselves.

Reddit gold is a pale version of this. Neither Twitter nor Bluesky show any signs of getting it.

[AlienRobot]

Hard to say that isn't the "right way" when they are making money with it.

If we're talking hypothetical right ways, I think what "social" media gets wrong is to envision an anarchy for its users. People are never equal in a society. A teenager isn't the same thing as an elder, nor is a doctor the same thing as a nurse.

I think I've read before that anarchy doesn't work because eventually people find someone who is reliable and naturally that person becomes their authority on the subject, creating an hierarchy.

Social media tries to put all users in the same bucket even when it's well-known that most users belong in the "never posts anything" bucket while very few users belong in the "power user" bucket. There are passive users and active users.

While hierarchies can become ugly fast, I don't think resigning on implementing them in any form is the right answer, specially now that everyone is on the Internet.