StevenB on Nostr: I think people misunderstand some of the issues. I don’t care if someone wants to ...
I think people misunderstand some of the issues. I don’t care if someone wants to pay for or charge for hosting. Now I’d argue if you are, you’re not v4v, you’re charging for a service, but I don’t care if you want to charge for your service. I pay for services all the time.
My main beef with Wavlake (and for the record I think what WL does is good for a lot of people) is they are an exclusive platform. If your music isn’t hosted by Wavlake, you can’t play it on Wavlake. I mean they can do whatever they want, but I wouldn’t call them an open platform.
My main beef with musicians is hosting your own music is so easy. Like it’s as easy as importing a CD and cataloging in iTunes. If you want to use a host or Wavlake because you understand the process and still want some else to handle a server going down, I get it. But I grew up with punk rockers with a DIY spirit, and hosting your songs is easier than screen printing a shirt or ripping a CD. I don’t want musicians thinking Wavlake or any other platform is doing a bunch of heavy lifting that is too complicated for the musician to figure out. I want them to be able to make informed choices. And if they host out themselves, they can do it for a little more than $1 a month. If they’re already hosting a website for their band, they can add their music and a feed for no additional cost.
If they make $100 a month, they have to pay $10 for the service. If it’s $1000 they pay $100. Or they can host it themselves and pay $1 or no additional cost. I just want the musicians to know there’s alternatives and their choices aren’t limited to Spotify or Wavlake, and Wavlake isn’t providing anything they couldn’t provide for themselves.
My main beef with Wavlake (and for the record I think what WL does is good for a lot of people) is they are an exclusive platform. If your music isn’t hosted by Wavlake, you can’t play it on Wavlake. I mean they can do whatever they want, but I wouldn’t call them an open platform.
My main beef with musicians is hosting your own music is so easy. Like it’s as easy as importing a CD and cataloging in iTunes. If you want to use a host or Wavlake because you understand the process and still want some else to handle a server going down, I get it. But I grew up with punk rockers with a DIY spirit, and hosting your songs is easier than screen printing a shirt or ripping a CD. I don’t want musicians thinking Wavlake or any other platform is doing a bunch of heavy lifting that is too complicated for the musician to figure out. I want them to be able to make informed choices. And if they host out themselves, they can do it for a little more than $1 a month. If they’re already hosting a website for their band, they can add their music and a feed for no additional cost.
If they make $100 a month, they have to pay $10 for the service. If it’s $1000 they pay $100. Or they can host it themselves and pay $1 or no additional cost. I just want the musicians to know there’s alternatives and their choices aren’t limited to Spotify or Wavlake, and Wavlake isn’t providing anything they couldn’t provide for themselves.