• axtualdave@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    21
    ·
    1 year ago

    From the article, emphasis mine:

    “Will this undermine most of what makes IAmA special? Probably,” the moderators wrote. “But Reddit leadership has all the funds they need to hire people to perform those extra tasks we formerly undertook as volunteer moderators, and we’d be happy to collaborate with them if they choose to do so.”

    I think they’re wrong. I don’t think Reddit has the funds.

    • animist
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      They can just take it out of the c-suite salaries

    • Eclipciz@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      Yeah exactly — Reddit hasn’t been profitable ever. Probably explains why they fired the person who actually was hired to do celebrity AMAs and leaving it to volunteers. Celebrity AMAs are probably one of the better ways to attract attention, but of course are pretty expensive.

      • Boz (he/him)
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Personally, I would have thought AMAs made more (and more reliable) income for Reddit than they’re likely to get from the API. A lot of AMAs are associated with PR campaigns, which I think means Reddit gets paid for them.

    • Boz (he/him)
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      I think they were wrong on purpose, tbh. It’s the kind of thing that would be embarrassing for Reddit to admit when they’re going for an IPO.

      Also, it’s amazing how much money a large company can spend when it wants, even if its bank account is so far in the red it’s upsetting bulls. Small companies, on the other hand, can’t spend money they don’t have. There’s a lot wrong with this picture, but the net effect is that Reddit probably can hire full-time mods for r/IAmA if they want.