A couple weeks ago, we shared early thoughts on how we're hoping to expand the economy around creative work:

• Part 1: Rethinking How Writers Get Paid

• Part 2: Why Will Readers Buy Coins?

We got a lot of great feedback on how we're thinking about coins at FarCon & beyond. Below is the first in a series of posts that explores the best critiques on coins as a way to help writers get paid, and how that dovetails into some compelling opportunities and areas we'd love to experiment.

Let us know what you think — your feedback helps shape what we build and the kinds of experiments we run.

One of the most common (and fair) critiques of coins I heard at FarCon: if the goal is patronage, why not just let readers pay writers directly?

With early versions of coins, there are two primary levers in driving earnings for writers:

1. A small revenue share on each transaction (~1%).

2. The potential appreciation of the writer’s coin value over time.

The small revenue share is a very indirect way to support patronage. Further, the small revenue share will only generate meaningful earnings for coins that go viral. Echoing part 1, I don't think we want an internet where people have to go viral to earn a living. We'll likely see experimentation on the transaction revenue share, but the higher this revenue share goes, the more we'll bend away from the benefits of coins: liquidity & being easily tradable.

While the revenue share is direct, the other benefits are more abstract: buying coins can increase the value of the writer’s coins and boost the post’s visibility, both of which may help drive discovery.

These challenges present a valid question: for those motivated by patronage, wouldn’t it be more efficient to just pay the writer directly?

Our existing internet has no shortage of attempts at enabling patronage:

• Instagram, YouTube, X, and Twitch have tested various forms of tipping, paid subscriptions, and various forms of direct payments.

• Patronage is a driving force behind commerce on Patreon, Substack, and other creator platforms.

• Standalone apps like Buy Me a Coffee enable one-off tips for patrons.

These features & products have greatly expanded the creative economy, but it still feels like we’ve only unlocked a small fraction of what’s possible. And perhaps there are ways to leverage the benefits of being onchain to provide much more compelling experiences for people to support creative work.

Open edition NFTs are a great experiment at further enabling patronage, with the added benefit of also tapping into self-expression and community by being able to show off collectibles. But so far, open edition NFTs haven't really moved the needle on earnings for most writers, or brought waves of new people onchain.

While coins offer a new sandbox for experimentation and have distinct advantages over NFTs, in their current form, it's hard to argue how coins would be better at enabling pure patronage. I remain optimistic that we can test our way toward finding a way to use coins in new, compelling ways that enable patronage.

I don't have any answers, but below are threads we've discussed wanting to experiment with to create a differentiated, compelling experience relative to what's on the internet today:

• Experimenting with economics and incentives (e.g., increasing transaction rev share).

• Bending the product experience toward patronage & other more durable motivations.

• Designing incentives for long-term holding.

• Combining coins with limited-edition NFTs (or other monetization features).

• Finding the right relationship between coins at a post-, writer-/creator-, and/or project-level.