Fringe Fiction discussion

Fringe Fiction General Chat > Marketing: Buying Followers?

Comments Showing 1-50 of 94 (94 new)    post a comment »
« previous 1

message 1: by [deleted user] (new)

HEY! Gimme $10 and I’ll Guarantee You 5000 Followers!

What happens when you give your dollars to a marketer who guarantees you 5000 Twitter followers? They can toss in a guarantee of 5000 Facebook likes, a massive and immediate presence on Pinterest, and a major footprint wherever else you might want your social presence grown, and do it all for a nickel—but HOW do they do it?

Thesis: if I intended to take easy money from people, I would charge cheap and grab a large clientele. My promise to each one of my, say, 5000 clients, would be the same: I will give you 5000 Twitter followers, 5000 Facebook likes, etc. All I would require from you is that you, my client, establish each of those accounts, then I would deliver on my promise. That’s all. Then you would experience a quantum leap from your dismal, low-orbit, hard-to-gain 115 followers to voila! That high-energy 5000-follower orbit that I promised. Did I say promised? I meant that I GUARANTEE it!

Magic. Sheer marketing magic.

How did I do it? Is HOW I did it important to you? How did I quickly connect you and each of my other 5000 clients to 5000 followers? As you read this, are you seeing what I’m seeing? Is this reality? Is the Twitter trick simply connecting each of my 5000 clients to each of my other 5000 clients, each of whom has paid me their $10, each of them now wearing one follower hat and 4999 following hats? If so, bam. Mission accomplished. You have bought and paid for an immediate increase from 115 to 5000 followers. Piece of cake.

But disregarding this alleged cake (I get an end slice!), what VALUE have I, the broker who got you your 5000 followers, provided? Is the answer “None?” Or am I missing something? Those 5000 followers you just bought—cheap—probably have zero interest in your product or service—say, just as an out-there example, a book you’ve written—but more importantly, your 5000 followers have the same 5000 followers YOU have, minus one. And even should one of them want to buy your book/flowers/handmade bong, how on Earth will they FIND your book among their 5000 followers?

More importantly, why should they even look?

Modified thesis: I intended to take easy money from you. I charged cheap and gained a large clientele. $10 each. And those 5000 followers? They have no more value to you than you have to them. You’re not interested in buying a garage door opener, a tax preparation software, a Commemorative Candle Stick, a portrait of my cat. Those 5000 aren’t interested in buying your book. Your value to them: zero. Their value to you: zero. Your value plus their value to me, the unscrupulous marketer? 5000 x $10.

That’s more nickels than I can count on my fingers AND on my toes.

Crazy, huh.

Paying an unscrupulous broker $10 because you don’t know the game, would be crazier than some crazy editor charging, say, 300 crazy dollars per crazy page.
Modification to my modified thesis: I don’t want to take anybody’s easy money. Without sounding too silly, I believe in human beings. I believe that people happily pay for services and goods in proportion to their value. And each human being is valuable (Except my neighbor, Bob. He’s a creep.) As authors, we fail miserably at the marketing game.
So a modification to the other modification to my modified thesis: Let’s play Marketing. If that seems reasonable, then first, who are WE? Who will be the players of The Marketing Game? Isn’t that pretty much the same as asking: Who are The Fringe? What if… what if we work together to create value? What if there is a Guiding Principle: Everything We Believe About Marketing Our Books Is Wrong? And what if we follow that principle? What if we forget about the 5000 Twitter followers? Where can such audacious thinking lead?

I suspect that everyone here is every bit as busy as I am (I barely ever get more than 16 hours of sleep!), meaning that working as a single group is likely too difficult. Remember, however, that I am commonly wrong… But what about small groups? What about small independent groups that work toward outlandish, independent goals under the aegis of The Guiding Principle, each of us knowing that we have the support of other Fringers?

If there is to be a revolution of self-published writers—if we dare to think that big—why would it not start here? Among The Fringe? Why would it not start here, among caring and fearing and able and honest and confused and lonely people who have already come together, with the best of intentions—but maybe without a clear idea of what to do?

I am absurdly comfortable with the notion that I will not fail. Whatever I do to succeed, why would it not work for others?

Again: What is the specific reason that a revolution of self-publishing authors would not start here? Among The Fringe?

So. I’m thinking about again modifying my thesis. I’m beginning by looking at The Standard Brand-New Marketing Strategy, which is to get a whole buncha followers a whole buncha Facebook likes and, dudes, we all gonna be rich! RICH, I say! I’m beginning by looking at that Brand New Strategy and determining if the holes that I see in it are not real holes at all, in which case my apologies for wasting your time, or if I can drive my car through the holes without so much as scratching the hubcaps.

Am I missing something? How valid is The Standard Brand-New Marketing Strategy? Has anyone proof that I’m missing something? Or even evidence that I’m wrong? Has anyone’s experience proved another thesis?

Marketing. The difference—the ONLY difference—between Patterson and The Fringe.

Patterson is yesterday. We, the authors of Goodreads, focused here in the womb of The Fringe, awaiting birth… why on Earth would we not be tomorrow?


Am I wrong?

Lemme know.

message 2: by Lily (new)

Lily Vagabond (lilyauthor) *smiles*

One of the things I talked to Courtney about in a PM is using Amazon's algorithms to work for the author. Customers who viewed this, also bought that, etc. It was a theory of mine for a long time but never had the chance to test the theory.

Well, recently, both CG and I have found we're now connected on Amazon, because both out books were chosen for a group read, so customers most definitely viewed Eden Fell or Old Souls then bought the other.

That's what I call digital word of mouth :)

So, instead of paying for fake marketing, why not just buy and review each others books? That's money well-spent and the marketing is just a bonus.

message 3: by Dina (new)

Dina Roberts I don't fully understand your plan, but it sounds like some kind of exciting revolution, and I probably want to be a part of it.

I think both of you are saying we should skip paying for marketing "experts" and just market each other instead.

If that's what you guys are saying, I definitely agree.

message 4: by Courtney (new)

Courtney Wells | 1890 comments Mod
Our group seems to be doing a great job of promoting one another through reviews, social media and recs. Good will is generating and I'm sure we'll keep coming up with ways to help one another :)

message 5: by Lily (new)

Lily Vagabond (lilyauthor) Dina, yeah that's the gist of it. It would be revolutionary to be our own marketers without really having to market. I think the thing that would substantiate the idea is simply building a strong community. Which we seem to have right here in this group, so we might as well go for it.

message 6: by Courtney (new)

Courtney Wells | 1890 comments Mod
A favor for a favor is never a bad policy.

message 7: by Dina (new)

Dina Roberts Courtney wrote: "A favor for a favor is never a bad policy."

Yes! I think we should pay each other back as much as possible. If not that, then at least pay it forward.

message 8: by Courtney (new)

Courtney Wells | 1890 comments Mod
I know! Okay so we ALL can't read every last book written by a member of the group because time doesn't allow, genre preferences and such BUT if some of us grab a copy or recommend to people who might appreciate such a story then everyone benefits :)

message 9: by Lily (new)

Lily Vagabond (lilyauthor) Exactly :)

But when I do finally connect with an agent, and move ahead with publishing, all of you are buying a copy of my book.

Just kidding. It'll probably never happen. Back to supporting indies...

message 10: by Courtney (new)

Courtney Wells | 1890 comments Mod
Shut your fool mouth, I'll buy your book.

But, yeah, we plenty of love to go around :)

message 11: by Lily (new)

Lily Vagabond (lilyauthor) Yay, one sale lol

message 12: by Justin (new)

Justin (justinbienvenue) | 1398 comments Mod
I once clicked on this woman's link of how to gain followers on Twitter. I thought it was advice or tips on how, turned out to be a crappy auto add. I clicked on it and had like 250 new followers all from other countries some kids who not only would have no interest in my book or any book for that matter. Half the pages weren't even in English! Seeing as I made a very bad boo boo, I sat there for 30 minutes unfollowing every single person that I had just followed. I then unfollowed that woman whose link I clicked on and told everyone to not click on it.

Morale here folks? Don't click on a link to get new followers!

message 13: by Tiger (new)

Tiger Gray (tiger_gray) | 291 comments I'm not sure what you're proposing here. Can you boil it down for me?

Of course I don't agree with buying reviews or even an overly favorable R&R policy. I want people to be honest about my book, and I'm honest in return. Of course, I might also be quite naive, seeing as how shamelessly paying for favorable attention does seem to help those who are willing.

If what you're getting at is that instead of paying for attention/promotion, we should all make an effort to buy indie books and promote the ones we love, well definitely! Think how exciting it is to receive a review out of the blue. I love making other authors feel that excitement. And even if I didn't like their book, I felt it was worth my time. That has to feel good, at least a little!

message 14: by [deleted user] (new)

i'm drowning! so many significant comments. the group's recognition of the road-signs i'm attempting to focus on is so obvious and so heartwarming that i'm unsure where to point. i know i'm less terse than most here, blabbing on and on, so where can i most effectively point?

on the thread i intro'd this thread on, courtney made the comment about 'until i get an agent.' and that is part of what i'm talking about. agents are patterson, are yesterday. as we authors no longer require prominent publishers yet desire prominent publishers, so too we assume that yesterday's business form (using agents) is necessary today. we desire what we no longer require. literary agents are corpses who refuse to see their own caskets. they can refuse to see their caskets because we create and maintain their anachronistic self-importance. we desire them; we don't require them.

i think that's a necessary first step. to kill all the past models that we've outgrown but refuse to leave behind. we fail to the degree that we don't free ourselves from yesterday.

agents had and continue to have a single major value: connections to the big publishing houses, the movie studios. i want to kill that model. dead. because it is yesterday. and tomorrow the kids down the street aren't going to know any more about agents than they know about walkmans. walkmans were significant in their time. they are no longer. nor are agents. (business managers? yeah. i think so. but maybe just for me. definitely not agents.)

anyway, a second sally.

message 15: by Lily (new)

Lily Vagabond (lilyauthor) Agents were never needed to get published and they still aren't, that's always been a myth. Agents are business partners willing to make an investment into an author's writing career. Getting published is one tiny aspect of being a respresented author.

If anything, I really believe it's the myths surrounding traditional publishing that needs to be killed. I read in an interview with an agent that they receive 50 queries a day on average. That's way too much. I guarantee at least 99% of those 50 queries are from authors believing in the myth that no one can possibly a book themselves and have to get an agent to do it for you, when agents in fact do not publish books for you.

It would be better all around to dispell myths. Of course you can publish yourself, and we're here to support your independent efforts.

message 16: by [deleted user] (new)

from your responses, i would say nobody sees a flaw in my assertion that buying followers is a waste. (followers are basically a waste, too, but that's for later.) so until i'm shown otherwise, i'll let that aspect of reinventing marketing lay a'mouldering.

lily, warm lily, you're spot-on (my cliche for the week). i'd like to know more about what you know more about: amazon algorithms. intriguing. mine-able. requiring no agents, no publishers. (i'll get back to digital word of mouth.)

dina, you and tiger (#13) get to the grist. specifically what am i proposing? so here's the specific: there's nothing specific. the plan is to create a plan. right now there is an impetus. one dragon is dead--paying for followers, which millions of people do. that we are free of that illusion (chosen at random--there are lots of illusions) means that we can next dismantle another illusion.

so here's another dragon, to be killed or fed: digital word of mouth. lily authored the phrase, but others alluded to the same concept. consider it, however, in terms of old-think: if we think of digital word of mouth as the phoenix version of a chain letter, what happens?

i'll explain one possibility, but note the central factor here: i'm listening to Fringers. i'm using what is in this thread to create a new model to replace the failed models of the past. THAT IS WHAT IS IMPORTANT, not the specific example. but. one version of a chain letter said 'i wrote to 7 people and you're one of them. send this letter forward to 7 people who will forward it to 7 people and have each write back to the person who wrote to me--and win a chance to [get a free book, a new kindle, that commemorative candlestick you've been desiring. whatever.)' the sevens are geometric, not arithmetic. not 7+7+7+7+... but 7*7*7*7*... arithmetically, 7 7s is 49. but even given the chain breakages, 7 raised to the 7th is... uh, lemme see. seben times seben am 49, times seben... [he quickly grabs his abacus, does the math] compounds to 823,543.

that's a lot of 'followers,' and the model is unique to our current generation; is unique to this 'study group.' it is, again, the specific first-solution option of THIS thread. of Fringers working together.

am i making sense?

as concerns the chain letter, let's go! somebody kill the dragon now or let's start feeding that baby. but, again, this specific dragon isn't the point. the point is... us.


not the agents. not the publishers.

let's beat the kids down the street.

message 17: by [deleted user] (new)

i was busy writing while lily trumped me. well stated.

message 18: by Lily (new)

Lily Vagabond (lilyauthor) I adore your enthusiasm :D

message 19: by [deleted user] (new)

courtney, in your messages 4 and 6 you do an admirable job of showing why i hold you in esteem (which has to be the most wooden phrase i could come up with to state the obvious). you exude compassion and intelligence and are a pregnant cause of my being here, on The Fringe. pregnant causes hold so much promise, and i mean to add to your effort, not to take from it. i hope that's clear.

justin, i believe your experience is common. everywhere i went on twitter were people with 1000s of followers. facebook had likers up the wazoo.

to put that in perspective, when i google something, say, a book title--and i'll just pick one at random--let's say OLD SOULS.
in 0.39 seconds i get 86,700,000 hits. so i can believe that google is that awesome or i can assume that their algorithm is a MARKETING TOOL. they aren't giving a 'real' result. they return all instances of old souls, but also any reference to old and souls within, say 10 words of each other. perhaps they even return all instances of old OR souls in any title or heading 1.
likewise, the number of likes and followers has nothing to do with value to the user. it is all about MARKETING the website. they--google and twitter and facebook--have been smarter than us and i'm sick of it.

how do we use that? how do fringers turn such simple marketing maneuvers to our favor?

so. back to answering dina and tiger. am i clearer now?

message 20: by Lily (new)

Lily Vagabond (lilyauthor) I believe you're referring to SEO (search engine optimization). There isn't much of a secret to it. Just use the right keywords. And by "right" I mean the popular keywords, which is easy to look up using google.

Titles, since you brought that up as an example. Eden Fell, my little novella, might be the best title for the story, but it sucks for SEO. Eden Fell is a location in the UK. Eden is the name of schools and sport teams. "Eden fell behind by 5 points." That's the kind of thing that comes along with a book title of Eden Fell. In traditional publishing, this wouldn't make the slightest difference. In online publishing, it makes all the difference in the world, adding to that feeling of being lost at sea.

Granted, at the time I wrote Eden Fell about 11 years ago, I didn't even know that online publishing existed. Live and learn.

In essence, I believe if we're going to survive and come on top of this digital revolution, we need to start thinking digitally and within the virtual world of the internet.

message 21: by [deleted user] (new)

tiger, #13.
consider. when google advertises their ridiculous search results (note the salient: advertise) where are their ethics? they fool 99.9% of all users into believing that there is some reality in their numbers. they intentionally manipulate their customers subconsciously. how is that ethical?

twitter. 50,000 followers, zero value--except to twitter.

facebook. 5 million likes (honest! i've seen likes in the millions!) and zero value to the customers. but a marketing value to facebook? massive. BECAUSE they work on the unconscious mind. where are their ethics?

here. here are their ethics: they aren't lying. they're just using marketing magic. as do the people who advertise that they'll sell you followers without telling you that the purchase has no value.

dragons. everywhere.

where are our dragons?

tiger, i'm not asking you to do anything unethical. i'm asking you to be google, to be twitter. work at the unconscious level. do no harm, but sell your books. how do we, you and i, do that?

remember what you wrote, what most struck me among your many messages: I love making other authors feel that excitement.

let's create excitement.

if we refuse to see the dragons, how will we know which to kill (buying popularity) and which to feed?

message 22: by Dina (new)

Dina Roberts You're getting clearer. Maybe.

Are you wanting a new type of marketing that doesn't rely on having an excessive amount of Twitter followers and Facebook friends?

I could be totally misunderstanding you. Sorry if I am!

I'm not sure if I told this story before or not....

A self-publishing marketing company followed me on Twitter. I was desperate and lost, so I followed them back. Their price wasn't astronomical. I think it's around $60 a year. I didn't pay up and join, but I was considering it.

Every time I checked Twitter, the Tweets from this company dominated my feed. Over and over, they gave tiny little promos of books from authors who had paid them. Often it was the same books over and over; because I don't think they have that many clients.

The company has a lot of followers and they frequently make shout outs about all these books. So it's great. Right?

But then I started getting the feeling that the followers of this account were mostly other writers. This is fine if these writers are also willing to be readers. And I WAS. I bought two books and also tweeted about them (multiple times). The self-publishing marketing company retweeted my tweets. I didn't see them retweeting other tweets from people who were promoting a book not their own.

So what I got from all this is you can shout out a promotion to a huge amount of people, but if they're not interested, they're just going to ignore you.

I'd rather promote my book to three people who love reading and are interested in supporting self-published writers than 5000 people who couldn't care less.

message 23: by [deleted user] (new)

lily, SEO is yesterday. as soon as the 11th book is written about a subject, the subject is yesterday. SEO has value, but no more to you than to the other millions of authors.

back to the chain letter example, what if we implement a test case? what if 7 of us send out 7 emails each such that whoever meets the terms of the letter wins a copy of eden fell? quick, easy, and potentially beneficial. if it doesn't work, who cares? what is lost?

again, i'm saying to kill all the meaningless dragons and to birth our own brood of dragons, a brood that we'll nurture until, someday, somebody says of our dragons: those are so yesterday!

message 24: by Justin (new)

Justin (justinbienvenue) | 1398 comments Mod
I'm not confused, Tony. Was this thread to point out phony and fake marketing schemes of how people get your money and don't truly help or care if they follow you or not?

Or are you suggesting a new way for this idea to actually have a new way for people to pay where it was actually matter and count?

My apologies if I didn't get the just at first, lot's of paragraphs and after a while it seemed as though you were talking in riddles.

message 25: by Justin (new)

Justin (justinbienvenue) | 1398 comments Mod
*a bit confused

message 26: by Lily (new)

Lily Vagabond (lilyauthor) Tony wrote: "lily, SEO is yesterday. as soon as the 11th book is written about a subject, the subject is yesterday. SEO has value, but no more to you than to the other millions of authors.

back to the chain le..."

SEO is very much alive and real. The google giant wouldn't exist without it. You're veering off into reinventing the wheel. Revolution means adapting to what tools you already have and taken it a step further.

message 27: by [deleted user] (new)

dina, if my perceptions are valid then your experience is common. ALL of the old tools are overused and their value, through overuse, has been diminished to irrelevance. $60/y is a pittance, but should i pay a pittance and gain no value? so i agree with your caution and with your conclusions. shout outs to chinese peasants, no matter the number of millions who hear the call, are useless. better the incisive marketing to the 3 you're suggesting.

dina, your humor should gain you readers all by itself. is that your experience? how do you gain readers? if you do what the repetitive self-help books suggest then you're doing what millions of others are doing. how does immersion in the masses of replications help you? i mean to help, not to harm. i wish to dig up no trees that provide shade, but i'd like to cut down some of the dead trees and use them for firewood. keep the babies warm on winter nights. is that a better analogy than the dragons?

i would, however, point out a potential poison therein. are chain letters too diffused to gain their senders buyers? if that is true generally, then are focused chain letters possible? the answers to those 2 questions, suggested by your comment, likely specify the value of the tool.

justin, your first paragraph is accurate in that i'm trying to lance the boil of perception, but i'm not saying that those who fool us are devious or cruel; they're just being smarter than i've been so far. i'm trying to change that. no, not quite accurate. i have changed that. i'm hoping that i'm not alone in experiencing the change. i'm hoping that the several people here are also undergoing a conversion into a more profitable but equally ethical new mindset. so, justin, i don't want you to pay anybody anything. i want you to create products (stories) that have value, then to profit from your productions in exact equity with the value you've created. does that clear it up?

i am talking in riddles, and intentionally so. giving answers is less important than is asking questions. i hope to ask the questions that work, that turn barren deserts of attempt into lush gardens of success. the more you question my theses, the more i can try to clarify my vision, but my intent is to slay the unnecessary dragons of unprofitable, outdated beliefs and to encourage fringers to be, if they so choose, millionaires.

and lily, seo is alive. and it is tremendously valuable to google's users, although far more valuable to google. google makes zabillions because they work under the surface. seo is under the surface to most people, i agree, but it is a tool better servicing pepsi and honda than tony and lily. so yes. revolutions are less about reinventing the wheel and more about doing away with wheels. case in point: the only wheels on any jet fighter built in the last 50 years are the wheels that touch the ground. jet engineering is based on throwing out the wheel.

message 28: by Lily (new)

Lily Vagabond (lilyauthor) There has to be a replacement for wheels, using the term figuratively.

The car is the evolution of the horse and cart. Planes are the evolution of cars. Space shuttles are the evolution of planes.

But none of these evolutions would have happened, if humans hadn't learned how to ride a horse. You can't have revolution without evolution.

message 29: by Justin (new)

Justin (justinbienvenue) | 1398 comments Mod
Thank, that clears it up for me.Absolutely an author should profit for themselves and if paying gives only the recipiant value then one should take a step back and re-evaluate their ideas.

message 30: by G.G. (new)

G.G. (ggatcheson) | 506 comments Tony, your chain letter scheme is quite contemporary, however, I'm not quite sure about the idea either. For the longest time my friends have been sending me chain letters, different kind I admit but still, some threatened to make me lose my job or worse, my life, if I didn't find 6, 7 or 10 other people to whom to send the letters back.

It's not that they threatened me of some stupid bad luck if I didn't follow the lemmies, but it's more that a) I didn't want to bug my friends with these letters, nor did I want to bug internet friends.

I may not be superstitious, but some people are and I respect their choice. Sending a letter saying that if you don't send that angel back to 7 people in the name of God, you will die in the next year is BS. If God wants you dead, He doesn't need you breaking a chain letter to do it, but that's a totally different story here. :p

To go back to those so call friends (who must have wanted me dead because even though I would tell them I didn't have 10 people to send the letter back they were still afraid enough to choose to send it back to me), I ended up having to mark them as spammers and/or often deleted their messages without even reading them.

So my point is, yes, since it's so popular, it may very well work, however, like any other pyramidal letters, people will start sending them to friends and families who are not interested, just to get the count. That is inevitable.

message 31: by Courtney (new)

Courtney Wells | 1890 comments Mod
I'm so foggy here - authors should send out chain letters advertise their book. Is this figurative or actually preying upon people's superstition?

message 32: by Lily (new)

Lily Vagabond (lilyauthor) I'm pretty sure everything on this thread is figurative... Tony wants us to think.

message 33: by G.G. (new)

G.G. (ggatcheson) | 506 comments Lily wrote: "I'm pretty sure everything on this thread is figurative... Tony wants us to think."

Yep Yep, I'm sure of that too. He wants us to start using those brain cells, that's for sure. :)

message 34: by Lily (new)

Lily Vagabond (lilyauthor) Not sure how many cells I'll have left after this thread... trying to keep up...

message 35: by Courtney (new)

Courtney Wells | 1890 comments Mod

message 36: by [deleted user] (new)

g.g., in #31: 'If God wants you dead, He doesn't need you breaking a chain letter to do it, but that's a totally different story. :p'

that is too funny! i'm calling the Handicap General and asking that you be thrown into ePrison until your level of humor better matches the rest of us.

but your comments on the chain letter, as far as i'm concerned, kill the idea. i didn't know it was still active and i think your concerns put to death any chance that i'll consider it further.

but what else is there? idea one is dead, long live idea one.

courtney, i know far less about chain letters than you and g.g. i thought they were historical relics, not active annoyances. as above, i've retracted the option.

but what next? as g.g. and lily observe, how do we think up a new model?

going back to the garden metaphor, courtney and lily have created a perfect garden--fringe fiction--and are already growing great crops with the support and, uh, manure, of us who come to harvest.

twitter followers. google searchers. facebook likers. in a world where we all have the same tools serving us in the same manner, how do we sell books? i don't disagree with any of the many, many ideas courtney has freely distributed in her (your) many postings, but...

i created a website, as required, to sell my novel. i think the content there is funny. the very few people who have visited it have concurred. but why should anyone visit it rather than the sony site or the iPhone site? first they need to know it exists. so the website remains useless without 'it.' i suggested a chain letter as a candidate for 'it.' bad idea.

next idea?

message 37: by [deleted user] (new)

s.r., in message 19: thank you for your support. if you have an idea to toss in, please do. as you may have noticed, you cannot possibly bring up an idea worse than mine.

chain letters? geez. what was i thinking?

message 38: by [deleted user] (new)

another idea #1 to shoot at:

in a thread focused on editing, amy led a barrage of excellent comments. so, in line with lily's idea of building off of what is already there, would there be value in centering a marketing effort around an editor? amy's expression within that thread certainly shows that she's well spoken and comfortable within the field, so i would vote for her as an 'editor pro tem.' (no need to get amy's acceptance yet. g.g. will probably dash this option too. :') and no, i've no idea what that emoticon is supposed to convey.)

we are members of an agent's stable of professional authors. can that be marketed? of course. successfully? geez, i dunno. let's ask g.g.


p.s. i hope i'm not the only one having fun.

message 39: by Lily (new)

Lily Vagabond (lilyauthor) Well, this is kinda a wild thought and strictly from my perspective. I totally and completely blame my generation for the following.

Waaaaay back, during the internet stone age, we shared music with friends online. It was never illegal, because all knew each other, and it was no different than dropping off a casette tape at a friend's house. It's sharing, nothing more. Sharing is free and perfectly legal, all a part of freedom of speech. We continued this, because freedom of speech is, well, free.

It was also took forever. To share and download a whole album would take at least a week, if not a whole month.

Torrents came along, and all of a sudden billions of complete strangers were sharing music online. The lines have severely blurred. No one can tell who's sharing or stealing anymore. The line that was drawn in the sand just... vanished.

I have a point! Bear with me...

My point is, this idea that everything internet-related is still strong to this day. So many people assume if it's online is should be free. But it's a misinterpreatation, you see. Because way back with, the internet wasn't capable of being a virtual reality. It was just exchanging a bunch of computer bytes, in other words, sharing.

I feel that's at least half the uphill battle for online indie authors. Bebunking myths, building a virtual reality, emphasizing the difference between sharing and stealing, last but not least, showing that this virtual reality is very much real.

And... introducing an idea I've had for a while but lacked the resources to pull it off myself. Wait for it...

A virtual cafe, where customers can view books on shelves (flash animation, perhaps?), sign up for author readings (video chat), all kinds of things. Rather than hitting people over the head with, pleeeease buy my book, virtually show potential readers the experience of buying your book.

message 40: by [deleted user] (new)

in keeping with lame message 39, how about an institute of accreditation? we, its principles, would set the agenda, the criteria, and we would be formally sanctioned. is there value in that? i've been a member in a writer's authority and a valuation authority. both were merely marketing tools for their members, very similar to the b.b.b.

again, let's ask g.g.


message 41: by [deleted user] (new)

lily, you've once again upstaged me, but i'll point out to you that unless you've run your idea past g.g., uh...

but i get it. you knew before you wrote anything that i would absolutely LOVE the idea of debunking nearly everything. have you thought about how you would design it? how you would draw in visitors?

message 42: by Lily (new)

Lily Vagabond (lilyauthor) On an SEO level, hidden keywords in every section, every layer, every pixel. Chances of getting double hit return would be high, if not triple.

we're targetting people want to buy books. No need to convince anyone to be a consumer. Just make it available and accessible. Within reach, no further than reaching for a book on a shelf.

And if GG can actually do Flash programming which I'm unable to do, then I would happily hand over the whole idea to her.

message 43: by G.G. (new)

G.G. (ggatcheson) | 506 comments @ Tony No, I won't try to destroy every possibilities!
I only stated my opinion on pyramidal letters because I got sick of receiving them and I'm sure I'm not the only one. :(

@Lily I wish I knew any kind of programming, but it's not the case. Sorry.

message 44: by Lily (new)

Lily Vagabond (lilyauthor) Me neither, but tons of ideas lol

message 45: by Dina (new)

Dina Roberts Lily wrote: A virtual cafe, where customers can view books on shelves (flash animation, perhaps?), sign up for author readings (video chat), all kinds of things. Rather than hitting people over the head with, pleeeease buy my book, virtually show potential readers the experience of buying your book.

That sounds so fun!

message 46: by Courtney (new)

Courtney Wells | 1890 comments Mod
Well guys keep me posted cause ya'll are plotting worse than authors and I love working with reputable villains

message 47: by Lily (new)

Lily Vagabond (lilyauthor) Just need a flash programmer lol

message 48: by Amber (new)

Amber Foxx (amberfoxx) | 287 comments I dropped in here because I cannot find the Read It Forward Thread. Had a question about that. Someone help me find it?

message 49: by Lily (new)

Lily Vagabond (lilyauthor) Do you mean Pay it Forward?

message 50: by Amber (new)

Amber Foxx (amberfoxx) | 287 comments Maybe. It was a buying and reviewing each other's books.

« previous 1
back to top