Maybe, but there is a lot of overlap between those topics. I guess the question is how specific do the subs need to be?
For now it might be fine, but I get the sense some people want a purer Bitcoin sub and there are a lot of posts in the Bitcoin sub that are far more in the weeds than I'm interested in.
The point isn't about how specific the subs need to be, it's about readers being able to see the content they're interested in quickly. Reddit has lots of very precise subs and lots of cross posting.
reply
Reddit is great but I just assumed that SN was going for an improved version of HN.
Either one is fine. The advantage of HN over Reddit is that there's a strong selection bias for smart people. The advantage of SN over both is that they created a much better incentive structure.
reply
I agree and would like to keep those advantages. I expect the minor costs associated with posting on SN will maintain the selection bias.
I found SN because of an ad on Fountain that was pitching it as a Reddit alternative that pays in Bitcoin.
reply
SN is currently more like HN but the end vision is to be more like Reddit.
See the pitch deck here: #44287
reply
Ah I see. Well I think my original comment still stands - if you have to choose which sub to create right now, it should be the one that is most dissimilar to the existing ones, to reach a wider audience.
reply
I think that's right, but I'm probably not the only one who makes fewer economics posts now than I would if there were a separate sub for it. I try to respect that the Bitcoin sub should be specifically relevant to Bitcoin, so my posts tend to be about central banking, inflation, or other broad macro issues.
There are many other cool things to talk about in economics, but I don't want to junk up the Bitcoin sub with posts most people just have to scroll past to find what they're interested in.
reply
if you have to choose which sub to create right now, it should be the one that is most dissimilar to the existing ones, to reach a wider audience.
I agree
reply
deleted by author
reply