The End of Free

by ledgermain - 07/31/2003 - 23:32

:( While it may get cash for a few, I doubt that very many comics can afford (ironic that) to go to pay site. A lot of this game is college kids and they often read 5-8 comics. If they went to a pay site, I bet these numbers would hit the floor reguardless of price.

• Array

Quote: The End of Free

by Otis Frampton - 08/07/2003 - 17:03

It's about time. -Otis

• Array

Otis- But why? I mean, for

by sethtriggs - 08/07/2003 - 23:22

Otis- But why? I mean, for example, my own strip... it's just a hobby. I don't see myself ever wanting to charge for it. (Not like it's a hot item or anything, but still.) I think there should still be free comics out there.

• Array

Quote: Otis- But why?

by Otis Frampton - 08/08/2003 - 12:52

Because professional-level web cartoonists who produce a quality product and attract a sizable enough abudience to earn a living, should be able to have a system that allows them to do so. Then continue do work at your hobby, enjoy it, and treat as nothing more than that. There will always be a place for hobbyists and cartoonists who have no long term or professional goals. But this should not be the enforced standard for all, especially if some are capable of earning money from their creations. Then don't charge for it, no one is saying you have to. When I say "it's about time", I'm only referring to the end of an idea that all content on the internet should be free. I think it's about time that people will have an option to do more than give it away when it comes to the product they provide. -Otis

• Array

I understand, then. Thanks

by sethtriggs - 08/08/2003 - 20:05

I understand, then. Thanks for the clarification. I think that people like the idea of things being free on the Internet because there is an idea that the Internet must have unfettered and good access to information. -Seth

• Array

Quote: Because

by FractalDragon - 08/12/2003 - 16:17

yeah, there is... it's called printing a book... or selling merchandise... I seriously have to disagree (yeah, I'm one of those people who believes that content on the net should be free)... mainly for the following reason. People can attract such a large following on the web in the first place mainly because it is an open and free environment. I really do not believe that a lot of successful web creators would be where the are now if the net weren't such a place; so I find it a bit hypocritical when people who have taken advantage of this aspect of the net now wish to restrict it. Personally, I have never gone to a site that requires some sort of payment for entry. Heck, I even find it hard to go through many of those "free registration" things. There is so much content out there (especially in the realm of creative works) that I have yet to find a site where the information there was so unique and special that I felt that the required cost was justified. I will and have sent donations to creators I like, but I'm not going to pay a compulsory fee. That's not because I'm a cheap bastard (well, maybe a little) but mainly because there's just too much other good stuff that's free out there for me to go through. It's a simple matter of supply and demand economics. That's not to say I'm against people making money and getting fairly paid for their work. I'm just saying that the net is not the place to be if that's what you're looking for. The net, like anything else, has pros and cons. Those have to be considered when one chooses a medium to publish his or her work on. People are welcome to try whatever they want to, but I have a feeling that effectively charging for content on the net and gathering a sizable audience are two diametrically opposed ideas when it comes to the net. That is to say, ff you're going to put up a pay-per-view web comic, I people are likely not going to read it... at least not the same number of people if it were free.

• Array

Those are some good points,

by AmyGanter - 12/16/2003 - 11:43

Those are some good points, FractalDragon. Free and accessible content is what makes the net such a diverse place, but I think people would be willing to pay for something if it's good enough or if it offers something tangible. I work for a webgame company that's been alive for three years, and their company is only growing. They sell downloadable games, I never thought anyone bought those things but people do. I'm also one of those cartoonists that's part of a new subscription based website to launch in january. I've already received emails from some of my readers telling me they can't wait to subscribe, so I dunno. There's lots of cartoonists selling themselves short, giving away their artwork and ideas for free and I'd like to give back in any way I could, even if that meant something like 15 a year for access to their comics. The prices for online comics that charge are so tiny, I don't see how it could be bad, unless those comics are absolute shit but then if they are no one would buy them. You wouldn't be making money the way you would selling books or merchandise, but it's just another way to compensate creators who put hours of effort into what they do. I don't think that it's even about making money, it's just about saying that these comics are worth SOMETHING, however small that price may be. I just don't see how it could hurt. And we'll never know if it could really work unless we at least try.

• Array

by stubbs - 12/16/2003 - 14:37

Don't forget that many of the "free" websites still indirectly charge for admission, e.g. through advertising. It has become so ubiquitous on the web now, that people forget that in the hoary olden days of the web (like only '95 or so) the mere thought of advertising was sacrilegious and flouted the free and open origins of the net. If I had more than three readers (and I'm counting my own checks to my site to see that keenspace hasnt gone through one of it's periodic bouts of imploding) I would think about making it a subscription service. The flip side of the pay per view coin is that if you are adopting the role of professional, your product better be professional as well. This means regular and consistant updates, good writing and artwork, deadlines, and value added service like a well maintained blog, good running comentary, and an eye to good site design. The bar is pretty high and if you want people to pay, you have to give tham something to pay for.

Unfortunately, I am a cheap bastard, and probably will never subscribe to comic sites as long as there are free ones out there, thus undercutting the very model of a professional cartoonist that I personally am striving for.

• Array

by Bob Corona - 12/16/2003 - 19:12

I think the move to commercial models in webcomics is inevitable (whether based on advertising, merchandise, subs, micro-payments, or whatever). The "selling-out" issue that acts as a hurdle to independent artists breaking into the traditional media does not apply online: you can offer a commercial product over which you have total creative and editorial control.

The free thing is just about done. Just three years ago, I began working online, and found a vast array of free support services; portfolio hosting, outsourcing sites and the like, and today they are all gone. The only free options remaining are tryouts with limited time or functionality.

In the webcomics arena, it is absolutely critical to foster a commercial alternative to the hobbyist model. Free comics will never go away, and it would be terrible if they did, but I want to have the option of regularly accessing professional quality work online, which will only be possible if that creative effort is being supported financially.

• Array

I guess my feelings on the

by Steve_Hogan - 12/17/2003 - 12:39

I guess my feelings on the issue fall somewhere down the middle. I have no problem with people charging for content and have paid for web content. (Including Modern Tales and Serializer) I'm just not convinced that subscription is necessarily the inevitable best system for the future of webcomic revenue. There are still the advertising and merchandising models which have their respective success stories. (People who are making a living off their strips.) Part of the advantage of the webcomics medium as opposed to traditional comics is that it seems to be able to pull in more non traditional readers who aren't already predisposed to reading comics. I'm not so sure that won't be diminished if the bulk of comics become pay per play. My other concern (Let me sound all capitalist here) is that one of the values of developing content on the web is the ability to get exposure and develop an audience that may increase the value of the property as a marketable commodity Is there a danger that the small immediate revenue from subscription may interefere with long term development that might result in a larger overall payoff? As I said, I don't have a problem with anyone running or participating in a subscription based site, nor would I be willing to rule it out in my own future. I'm just concerned with looking at all the possibilities and weighing what works best.

• Array

by FractalDragon - 12/17/2003 - 14:01

I don't know why I keep banging my head against this issue. Maybe it's because of the way I see the online environment, or maybe it's just me being naive.

The way I see it, there are two major angles to look at it. You can be someone who wonders what the net can do for you, or you can wonder what you can do for the net.

The internet is the closest thing to a completely free (as in speech) and open medium that we have to date, and I for one would like it to stay that way. Being that it is open, almost anyone can post almost anything that he or she wants to, and whatever is posted can be accessed by almost anyone else. Maybe I'm just being a simpleton, but I find this statement to be extremely profound. You or I could post something (like this message), and the potential readership is EVERYONE IN THE WORLD WITH A NET CONNECTION. Before the internet, a person, whether it be an artist, writer, activist, politician, company, etc, wouldn't even have dreamed that something like that was possible for them.

Now, being that it is a free and open medium, it would be hypocritical of me to say that people can't try and make some money off of it. Sure, go ahead. More Power to you. However, when I the words "The End of the Free, " it disturbs me to think that the thing that made the net great in the first place is coming to an end. I also find statements about "professional quality" work being defined as content that is pay-per-view. Just because someone may want to make some money off of the net doesn't mean that everyone has to follow suite; and, just because there are some people out there that would be willing to pay for content, doesn't mean that you have to start charging for it.

I, for one, am still at awe with the thought that I have my work displayed in the worlds largest gallery (accessible to almost anyone). Just being able to contribute to such an environment is enough for me, and I for one will continue to do so as long as I possibly can.

• Array

by AmyGanter - 12/17/2003 - 15:18

I guess I just don't see why you can't do both. I don't think there'll be an "end to free" for the internet, but I see room for both free content and subscription content and one can help the other if the artist chooses to do that. I guess I'm just uncomfortable with extremes, I don't think something should be free if someone wants to charge for it, but I don't think that everything should be charged for because it's one of the only mediums of absolute freedom and control we have today. This argument kind of reminds me of the webcomics is the future vs. print comics is the future argument, I think in both cases both can exist in harmony and help each other and help improve the public perception of what comics are and what they can be in general.

• Array

by UpDown_Greg - 12/17/2003 - 16:20

If there is a consumer willing to pay something, then someone will charge for it. Whether it's on the Internet or not. Even if it's free from elsewhere. There's still a mindset with Joe Average that if it's free, you get what you pay for. That's tough to beat as more people come online.

Also there's a mindset among some creators that all the free crappy webcomics out there drag down the image of webcomics as a whole, and make people dismiss the "good" ones without giving them a chance.

So what to do? Follow your heart. Pay, don't pay. Charge, don't charge. Because there's going to be plenty of both out there.

• Array

by UpDown_Greg - 12/17/2003 - 22:46

Nope. Definitely not my opinion. Just one I've read a bunch of times on webcomic related forums. (fora?) I agree that it's all opinion and there's no right or wrong there.

As to your other point, just because I can't buy it from a brick and mortar store doesn't mean I won't pay for it. And neither of our opinions are wrong about that either. I feel my Modern Tales subscription is one of the best buys I've ever made. Nothing but pixels there. The medium doesn't matter to me - printed or on a screen. If I like it enough, and the author is asking, I don't mind paying for a webcomic. I even hit the donation buttons now and then.

• Array

by William Beckerson - 12/18/2003 - 01:29

I see it like this: Sticking the Bitpass button on your site is all fine and dandy, but if you want me to go buy something from you, you better be real damned good, or able to offer me comics in a convenient manner. It's not convenient to carry my harddrive into the toilet with me for a bit of reading. A graphic novel is. That's why people are willing to shell out for the paper version instead of the pixel version.

Look at Small Stories Online. As far as I know, everything DKK offers in the book is on his site for free, yet he seems to have sold out the print version. Now, I'm not trying to dis him by saying that it wasnt the love of DKK that got people buying his book. It was the love of DKK in an easy to read format that sold him all of those books.

Until the day of electronic paper arrives, people wont and shouldnt, be willing to pay for things on the web. Pixels are not convenient.

• Array

by AmyGanter - 12/18/2003 - 01:57

I dunno, I respect your opinion but saying that people won't and shouldn't? People already have. They understand that whatever they're paying for will help their favorite artists somehow, and paying for something shows that you respect it. In a world where we can download movies and music, it's a wonder why anyone would buy any cd's anymore but they still do. They may feel like they own something because of the cd itself, but essentially you still have to pay for the cd, and the price of one cd is like the price of hundreds of pages of comics at a subscription site. And arguing that you already paid 2K for a computer is like counting how much it cost you to buy that video game console and that video game disk, and saying it wasn't worth buying because all you really are paying for is the experience of the game. Or for the case of cd's you had to buy that cd player AND you have to buy a cd every time you want to listen to new music but essentially you're paying for the privilege to hear that beautiful song.

I dunno, I guess I'm just defending it because I'm part of one of those subscription sites now, but at the same time I understand where you're coming from. Comics on a screen doesn't feel as rewarding for your buck as a graphic novel in your hands does. Then again, they're usually offered really cheap. As it is, most people out there wouldn't pay for online comics, but some have so it's not an impossibility. I don't think anyone's gonna be getting really rich from online comics and I don't think it's anyone's goal to. People just want to be compensated for what they put so much effort into sometimes, but only if people are willing to help compensate them and they get something in return. Yeah. Anyway, I could go back and forth on this forever without reaching any real conclusion so I'll stop now. It's fun to read opinions and argue about things that have no impact on the grand scheme of things -_-

• Array

by William Beckerson - 12/18/2003 - 09:31

Sure. Not saying I'm 100% right (today) But webcomics arent interactive like games, and not convenient to carry around like CD player. Webcomics arent an indespensable part of the internet experience.. most non-porn things online aint... which is why most of what you get on the internet is free.

So, to sum up my position: Wecomics arent convenient, and similar material can be found in the real world. It needs people to give it away for free, because only the hardcore will pay for it, and the hardcore is a minority.

• Array

by UpDown_Greg - 12/18/2003 - 10:56

That's the good thing about having comics in books and on the web. I send most of the day at my computer. But I like having a book to tote around also. That's probably why I don't mind paying for either. But I'll definitely pay more for a book because of the extra convenience.

Plus a very self-serving reason for paying for or donating to webcomics is to entice the author to keep it going. Bandwidth and webhosting cost money just like paper and ink does for print. I'm lucky that I can afford to pay for my hosting. There's not even any paid ads on my site. I get a buttload of space and bandwidth that I'll probably never come close to using. Hmmmm. I should find more webcomics that need a place to roost... but that's another topic.

• Array

"FractalDragon"

by Indigo Kelleigh - 01/16/2004 - 19:23

My interpretation of that phrase, "the end of the free", as it pertains to online content is not so much the complete disappearance of all financially-free content in favor of for-pay content. I think of it more as the eradication of the notion that for-pay content won't work online, that nobody would or should pay for access to online content, and in that case, "The Free" ended several years ago, with the subscription services of newspapers such as the New York Times, Salon, etc. Not to mention the porn sites. What I'm saying is, "Free" and "Not-Free" have coexisted peacefully online for several years, and the fact of the 'Not-Free' being there certainly hasn't hampered or impeded on the existence or the flourishing of the 'Free' content. As someone who is trying very hard to make a living with my online comic, the idea that all online content MUST be free, simply because it is online, just grates me like you wouldn't believe. What that statement equates to is that I shouldn't be allowed to make a living with online content, even though I can't afford to actually print my comics.

• Array

"William_Beckerson"

by Indigo Kelleigh - 01/16/2004 - 19:34

This argument has been dragged out for the last several years every time I see a discussion about paying for online content - "I already pay for internet access, why should I have to pay to view the site, too?" The comparison I like to make is this: Your computer is like your car. You had to make the large initial payment to have it, and you have to pay regularly to put gas into it, but when you do, it can take you to lots of different places. But, when you get to those places, the movies, the theatre, a record store, a concert, do you expect to be able to get in free, to view their show, just because you bought a car and put gas into it? No, you don't. Why should the web be any different? When you go see a concert, you don't get to take it home with you (though you can buy a t-shirt to help 'support' the band ;) ), same with a movie. It's no more tangible than a webcomic, really, except that you can usually pull a webcomic onto your harddrive to read it again later. Now, it's true that online stores don't charge you to view their catalogs - they're hoping you'll buy a tangible item and support them that way, just like a brick-&-mortar store. But entertainment venues don't have that option. They *have* to charge a cover fee. And nobody complains about that at the bar, why so on the web? And don't give me that 'Information wants to be free' argument. This isn't information, it's entertainment. And if you are entertained by our hard work and effort, shouldn't we receive some compensation for that if we want it? And if you really hate paying for your 'car', you can always ride the bus! Most public libraries have free web access, you know...

• Array

by ledgermain - 01/17/2004 - 03:51

I still think its a bad idea to think that just because you want to get paid means you're going to get paid. Especially in an industry that basically requires you to build up an army of loyal fans to spread your URL and buy your stuff.
If you charge for the fanbase builder, you're stunting your potential. Ever notice how readily Broadcasters pimp out thier TV shows to put the characters on every god awaful product known to man? They can do that because they have a free source of fans to buy it.
The fans are in charge of your destiny. And if you charge them at the door, you're going to have a lot less of them.

• Array

"indigo" wrote: The

by William Beckerson - 01/17/2004 - 14:17

Because, from the get-go, all you're doing is sitting on your ass and looking at pictures. The internet is basically interactive TV. Once you set out the cash for the TV and the cable, you don't want to pay a few dollars more everytime you want to watch CSI, do you? Most people don't I'm not saying this helps us make money off of our hard work, but this is pretty much how it is. Which is why a lot of casual viewers vanish like smoke whenever someone switches to pay per view. I totally agree, but until there's a radical shift in the way the casual audience views the internet, I feel that most of us won't be able to get away with demanding cash, and we'll have to stick with the electronic equivalent of leaving our guitar case open while we perform. (ie: Pay Pal) Using the pay per view analogy- I would gladly shell out the cash to get the Wrestlemania PPV this year because it has two of the criteria I feel is nessecary. 1) A big "name". Even non wrestling fans know the word. 2) It's something I enjoy a lot. The problem is that most don't like wrestling. This makes me a wrestling fanboy. (And I don't mean that in the derogitory manner.) I feel that you can get fanboys to pay for just about anything if their broke asses have the cash for it, but fanboys are still a minority. Unless you have a big enough name to draw in the casual viewing majority, they're still going to see the internet like TV, and wont want to pay for anything that doesnt have the words "Paris Hilton Sex Tape" on it.

• Array

Sorry, I had to leave the

by William Beckerson - 01/17/2004 - 16:34

Sorry, I had to leave the computer quickly, so hope anyone reading this will view my two posts as one. What I feel is the big problem these days is that we, as comic artists, really don't have any big names to draw in enough people to make our product desirable to the majority. I was made aware of this when, on my old board, I happily posted, "Scott McCloud pimped my comic!" to which most people replied, "Scott who?" because they don't read comics. It's hard to take a step back and look long and hard at what we do, but the simple fact remains is that we are a subculture within another subculture. Most people don't read comics, print or pixel. Simple as that. I know this may be a bit convoluted, but stick with me, I wasnt planning on writing an essay here. :wink: If we want to be able to charge for our comics, we need to have the casual reader want to pay for comics. Our current little subculture is not enough to sustain this idea. If we want to regain those casual readers that were there in the 1980s for print comics, I feel we need to do a few things. Buy and close down Marvel, DC, Image, Dark Horse, etc... Because we need the respect. Our current fanbase are people who grew up reading these things. And it was their excess that killed the industry. The casual viewer is no longer interested in comics because they'll look at the main examples of our beloved medium and say, "Spidey is fighting Doc Oc again? He was doing that when I was twelve. I'll wait for the more exciting film to see how it turns out." Since the big companies have a stranglehold on the medium, I feel we wont be getting the respect our medium needs because all the public will see is costumed jerks pounding on each other. You Modern Tales/ Serializer/ etc guys are currently doing something far more important than getting money into pockets, you're trying to change how people view comics by presenting new fresh personal art statements, but... We need to start marketing towards different groups than us. There are a million great webcoimcs out there. All of them a beautiful dream that someone is sharing. The lucky ones have a dream that many can appreciate, but generally speaking, almost all of us are making comics for ourselves. I'm just as guilty of the ego masturbation as most everyone else, but if we want to be realistic here, we're not helping gain ourselves a wider (paying) audience by doing this. We need to start creating stuff for a wider audience if we're serious about "ending free". One of the main reasons manga has grabbed so much of the market is because it's been offering different things to different people. Dragonball/ Pokemon have the kids enthralled with their silly antics. Girls are digging on the "romance" in manga. All of these comics were created specifically for certain audiences. They are not personal visions. Yet the manga industry shows our comic industry up as the joke it is. We need to start doing that. We need to have someone ike Joey Manly come in and say "Listen, I'm taking submissions for Modern Tales: Kids. All of your stories must include the themes of -Friendship, Hard work, and Success. Try to keep it PG-13 at worst. If I don't think it cuts the mustard, you're not in. I don't care how lovely it is." And if this mythical site was actively marketed towards kids, it would be a large step towards creating a situation where there will be casual users getting interested in paying for what we do.Keep doing what we're doing Because we're at the situation where we have a product that no one respects, and no one is interested in. Other than ourselves. We have to keep slowly building up that repsect. We have to keep putting the word out that comics are a lot better on the web than what you see in the comic shops. We have to keep making art. I really believe that once we start getting some sort of respect from the casual reader, as well as stopping creating comics solely for ourselves, then we can start making money off of our personal dreams. Until then, I think we must keep giving it away for free.

• Array

by Joey Manley - 01/18/2004 - 19:52

The most popular and lucrative form of computer-based entertainment, videogames, started out as a hobbyist medium. Sure, there was your PONG, and eventually your Pac-Man and your Space Invaders, but before that period (and even during that period) there were lots and lots and lots of free or near-free videogames swapped on floppy disks and BBS's. I am old enough to remember those days. The first videogames I ever paid for, I "bought" as part of an issue of, say, Byte Magazine, where they were printed in source code form (and I had to carefully type them in). In the earliest of early days (before my day, even), there were impassioned debates about whether or not one could or should charge for videogames, or any software, given the ease with which copies could be made, and the fact that "so much great software is free," or, "it's just ones and zeroes, it's not something you can hold in your hand."

Sound familiar?

There are still free videogames -- probably more than there ever were. But the ones that get the most attention (the ones that get <i>any</i> attention) are the slick, expensively-produced, extremely professional works that come out of places like Electronic Arts, Activision, etc., etc. The fact that there are a hundred thousand free videogames out there does not lessen my desire to buy, and play, Halo 2 one little bit. Quite the contrary.

I could be wrong, but I predict a similar arc for webcomics.

This is bad news for the hobbyists of the future. But it's good news for the hobbyists of today. After all, Electronic Arts, Activision, etc., were all founded by precisely those people who were hobbyists at the dawn of the videogame age. The keys to their success have been talent, enthusiasm, and the fact that they got into the field early -- before there even was a field.

Twenty years from now, people will be saying the same thing about some group of fabulously successful webcomics people. And that group will be a subset of the current webcomics community. It just happens to be impossible to tell which people in our community today will belong to that fabulously successful subset twenty years from now.

This prediction is not particularly idealistic in nature, since it ultimately points to a massive centralization of the form -- or, at least, a centralization of those works in the form that are considered notable. Yes, my efforts can be said to be helping to create that outcome. And I'm ambivalent about that fact. But what I'm not is idealistic. Some sort of centralization of interest around certain webcomics is inevitable. And so is the creation of a professional class, who will, by their nature, gather more attention, praise, monetary reward, and, generally, power than non-professionals. It's already happening. And, no, I'm not just thinking of Modern Tales and its sister sites. We're not the only promising business blooming on this particular frontier. Whether we (or any of the others) will be the Atari's and Commodore's of the future, or the EA's and Activision's of the future, remains to be seen.

Make no mistake: I am enthusiastic about this vision of the future. I just acknowledge that it's not a very utopian outcome or an idealistic worldview -- which, you know, disappoints me a little in myself. I'll get over it.

I used to be idealistic, too. And I also used to hate people who would smarmily say things like, "I used to be idealistic, too." But now I'm one of them. Ay me!

• Array

Quote: So, when are you

by Otis Frampton - 01/19/2004 - 00:19

I'd subscribe to that. -Otis

• Array

by Joey Manley - 01/19/2004 - 00:29

I do believe I've started enough sites for a while. Also, I'm not particularly fond of children.

If somebody else wants to give this business model a shot, I'd be thrilled, though!

Joey
www.moderntales.com

• Array

"joeymanley" wrote: Also,

by Steve Ince - 01/19/2004 - 05:04

This is odd when everyone knows that comics are for kids.

• Array

by Pepius - 01/19/2004 - 12:37

Well, making a profound research on target audiences, I think that the mighty line of profit should be: Modern Tales: Big boobed 1337 ninja mutants!!!oneone.

Every series will have to face some restrictions, like a minimum of splash pages per chapter, and at least a cyborg, a were-something, and a leather dressed nympho. Or better yet, a squad of cyber-nympho furries. Extra points if they are teenage cheerleaders in their daily life.

Success guaranteed! (o^.-)o

• Array

"Pepius" wrote: Big

by Joey Manley - 01/19/2004 - 12:50

Somebody else beat me to that niche. http://www.comicsontheweb.com/ Dunno how much longer they'll be around, though.

• Array

"joeymanley" wrote: Also,

by rkm0001 - 02/05/2004 - 15:46

You just don't know how to cook them. I've got very mixed views on this whole "subscribe to read my comic" thing. I like how Penny Arcade has chosen to do it (i.e. we have the main comic on the site, but if you want some EXTRA coolness, there's a little cover fee and you can go to our special cool area). To me, that makes more sense than paying for a comic I've never really heard of and can only read the current strip for since all the archives are blocked from me. For me, merchandising has done well. It's offset the costs of my site and I'm happy. I'd never put my archives up as subscription only because word of mouth has ALSO been extremely kind, and people's abilities to send their friends a link and saying, "Look at this comic." But that's me. Maybe if I was going to do a second comic, I'd be more apt to do subscription - but suddenly charging all my readers to read my archives after they've done so much for promoting me and supporting me via merchandise and donations just seems like saying to them, "Hey... Screw you." This all came out a lot more disjointed than I intended. Bah... never post while medicated again...

• Array