Discover Top Posts Tagged with #anonymous ad

read MORE carefully when you feel attacked, not less

I honestly wonder about the reading comprehension of some people because some of the reactions to my posts seem to go like this:

me: I think pancakes are better than waffles other person: WHAT THE FUCK, WHY DO YOU HATE WAFFLES

and... no, that isn't what I said?

I didn't say people don't deserve to be compensated for their work, I said that you can't be trying to pay people like it's a salaried job without having that kind of stable and consistent business income. that's literally how businesses go bankrupt all the time.

I also didn't say that you can't/shouldn't be able to make money in audio drama, I said that you need to do it SUSTAINABLY. off the top of my head I can name several shows that do just that (WOE.BEGONE and Malevolent being two I've mentioned in the past), not to mention people like Lauren Shippen. timing and luck have a lot to do with success, absolutely, so that isn't to say it is easy or guaranteed if you follow in those kinds of steps, but it does show that it can be done in ways that are self-sustaining rather than constantly asking for large cash drops to stay afloat.

speaking of, I didn't compare Harlan to JK Rowling, I pointed out how "death of the author" has been deployed by people who don't want to face HER hatefulness while still engaging with Harry Potter (I know many people like this as we all do I'm sure) as an example of why you have to be cautious when throwing it around as an excuse.

and I definitely didn't say that a Black woman was hoarding resources by having a crowdfunding campaign with a high goal??? very weird assumption for you to draw from what I actually WAS talking about, person on Bluesky. almost like you didn't actually read and understand that whole section before trying to jump down my throat about it.

I have found, both in writing this blog and generally in life, that the more people feel defensive the less they are able to engage with what is being said. anyone who has ever tried to argue for trans or gay rights with a right winger has experienced this, it's the reason that "debate bro" types are so successful. you pick out the parts that make you feel angry and you go on a tirade about them, rather than stepping back and trying to synthesize the whole message.

not once has one of the people defensive about the crowdfunding stuff addressed my key point of it being "unsustainable" in their responses to it. that is literally the thesis, sidestepping it does not make it go away. it just reinforces to me and others that you are not thinking long-term about what will and won't work for us as a community.

I should also say that none of what I post comes just from me. every single thing I've said on this blog has come from at least a few different people. it is not a one-person opinion party, something I'm not sure I've ever said outright. especially with the crowdfund stuff I have had conversations with at least a dozen showrunners who all think the current methods do not work, are not sustainable, and are only benefitting the same people over and over. I have these conversations with my "colleagues" (because I can't think of another word) in the space because I find it interesting and important and valuable. I am engaging with these conversations outside of this blog because I have an emotional investment in us as a community figuring this out so that we can thrive.

I still regret not making this blog when I first desperately wanted to to talk about The Magnus Protocol campaign. (I do have thoughts on the TMA ttrpg though, as a general thing that exists and also based in some basic understanding of how the selected system was a bad choice for what people will be hoping to get from this thing so people will likely be disappointed once they actually play it)

anyway, that's all I have to say on that right now.

tldr: I know my posts are long and there is a lot to get through sometimes. but if you are going to fixate on one sentence and ignore the larger context you are setting yourself up to misunderstand the actual point being made. and yes, there is usually a point, one that I find important enough to bother writing about in the first place.

actually, I should also say that I would be more than willing to have a conversation with Tal or someone else from that part of the community who believes that the current crowdfunding model is working and will continue to work in the long run. seriously, if I am missing something obvious then explain it to me so I can understand what about this is working. and I don't just mean working for you, I mean working for the community and creators as a whole. because I still see a lot of campaigns fail for much less, even when following the vague tips being handed out about how to run a successful campaign.

#anonymous ad #anonymous #crowdfund don'ts #media literacy #critical thinking #reading comprehension #this isn't a callout because how do you even callout people who are unwilling to engage with the full text #and I'm not kidding about being open to conversation because I am willing to admit when I am wrong if that is the case

Just learned about your blog, and I have been SO tired of keeping quiet about my issues with Harlan. I was in the Invictus server for about 2 years and I saw so much. I'm going to bullet point what I can remember:

-Harlan has repeatedly posted screenshots of negative reviews/critiques without redacting usernames, despite being advised that it could lead to fans dogpiling

-He has shared screenshots of emails from his family where they said negative things about him, which is wildly inappropriate for a creator to share with his fans

-Some of the perks to being an Invictus patreon member is getting weekly Malevolent episodes (which then get put together as a single longer public episode) and typically an episode ends with a choice and patreon members at certain tier and above can vote on which option is chosen, like a choise your own adventure story. Back in October someone voiced their disappointment in not getting to vote in the patreon poll because Harlan closed it on a Friday instead of a Sunday as normal, he went on an emotional spiral where he lashed out at fans, said "anyone who is unhappy being a patreon doesn't have to be a patreon", and tried to guilt trip people by bringing up his son.

-Other perks of higher patreon tiers include a personal message from a character of your choosing at the $25 tier and a personal thank you video from Harlan and Jo at the $50. I know of multiple people who paid at the $25 tier for months, a few who paid for a whole year at once, who didn't receive these rewards until they reached out and contacted Harlan themselves, months after they had paid for the tier. And they did have to be the ones to message Harlan, when it was brought to his attention that there were many people waiting for their rewards he didn't do any legwork himself to find out who's had never been fulfilled, which is extremely unprofessional.

-Everything up to now has just been the things I saw as a member of the server with access to the patreon channels. I'm friends with an ex-mod, and her getting kicked from the mod team was my sign to give up on the server and finally leave it. I hadn't posted anything in there in months, and I didn't make any sort of "im leaving" post, I just dipped. Apparently they keep track of who's left the server, because Harlan DM'd me saying he was sorry to see me go and he was there if I ever wanted to talk. When I didn't respond overnight, he followed up with "Well, if you ever want to hear my side of this thing with [former mod], I'll be here 🙂". I still don't understand what his intention was in messaging me, but I was curious so I engaged him in conversation and he sent me a screenshot of the message he had sent her explaining why she was being removed from the mod team. I just want to point out that I never asked to see any screenshot. When I asked if he had ever established mod expectations he tried to pass me off to another Invictus admin, despite the fact he was the one who contacted me and I was no longer a member of the server. I told him that he needed better boundaries in his interactions towards fans (or ex-fans in my case) and that there was no reason for him to have messaged me. Instead of apologizing or responding in any way, he simply blocked me.

I am aware of other things that have happened in the server since I left, but I don't want to share stories I haven't been given the ok to bring up or talk about things I've only heard about secondhand. I've been uncomfortable with the way Harlan publicly interacts with people for a long time now, and I kept quiet because I didn't want to start drama but at this point it feels irresponsible to not talk about it.

this anon says they saw a lot over the 2 years they were in the server, so I would like to say upfront that I don't know how much of that is things that have stopped and been addressed and how much has continued more recently.

some of these points seem more related to other aspects than the discord, like apparent issues with the Patreon supporter relationship side of things.

#anonymous ad #anonymous #malevolent discord #Malevolent patreon #again I want to state I don't know whether some of these points are or aren't still valid #so I guess it's your own discretion or experience on that aspect #as I said if things are addressed appropriately then I don't know how much good it does to bring them up over and over #if they aren't dealt with then you start getting into “pattern of behavior” kind of stuff

harlan guthrie sharing that he was having a baby is actually a pretty normal, non parasocial thing to do imo. i wouldn't call the number of children you have inappropriately intimate information to disclose.

inappropriately intimate information to disclose is more like sharing pictures of your real custody agreement paperwork, sending emotionally fraught screenshots from emails with your father with whom you have a strained relationship (and oversharing how this strained relationship informs your podcasts to people BRAND NEW to your server who just wanted to pay you a compliment), giving your personal home address to fans, and telling people about your kidney stones, including the symptoms you were experiencing.

here's where i'd joke "you know, as a hypothetical example", but being a one-off anon message, i'll be clear that yes, these are all real examples harlan guthrie shared publically in his very large discord server. he doesn't have a good grasp of boundaries or the general concept of parasociality, and the extremely weak and ill-enforced "rules" of his server both exemplify and contribute to this.

(he's also infamously fast and loose with the privacy of others, making a hobby of screenshotting and posting bad reviews of his shows without redacting usernames even after being told repeatedly that this was not cool. supposedly he really has stopped for good now, which would be good, but also he did give a child's real name and face in private conversation with two separate users in the recent 'nazi child' incident, so.)

first of the anonymous asks I got with stories/information on the whole Harlan Guthrie discord thing.

note: yeah I recognize the baby thing is probably just me, I don't like strangers knowing a lot about myself. so seeing others do it so freely and openly despite knowing they have thousands of fans is jarring and kind of scares me.

I'm not sure if I'm going to do more with each of these than just boost them and have them all gathered in one place, but depending on the kinds of correlating incidents that come in I may do something like a timeline of events or something showing patterns of behavior.

I will say that the last sentence of this ask DOES have context, which I learned from someone passing along this tumblr post:

Since I have seen more people speak up a bit about witnessing mismanagement in the Malevolent/Invictus server I’ve decided it might be helpf

let me know what people might find helpful. I know for some the goal of this kind of thing is going to have one place to point and start asking for accountability, it's nice to have stuff gathered.

#anonymous ad #anonymous #audiodrama #malevolent discord #parasocial behavior

crowdfund review: Shelterwood

Shelterwood has been on my radar for a while, since last year when they were casting (I think it was last year, but at this point we're over midway through this one so it may have been more recently). there have been rumblings about it for a while, lots of people intrigued by the initial pitch of "suburban gothic horror", so it's already gotten a bit of traction. I was unsurprised to see it announce a crowdfund. even more unsurprised to see certain aspects of it weren't up to snuff.

as usual, the link: https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/shelterwood-a-suburban-gothic

so let's start as we always do...

(Un)Realistic Goals

#anonymous ad #crowdfund don'ts #shelterwood crowdfund #I shouldn't have to keep saying some of these things #like c'mon #this took too long #oh my god and then I saw the updates and had to go back #obligatory magnus archives reference #the magnus protocol gets a mention too #and WOE.BEGONE #and Among the Stacks because I can't escape the only reason anyone cares about what I say #exploitative crowdfunding #“a rising tide lifts all boats” is bullshit #trust me because I pay attention to all this shit #even when I don't say anything about it #I am watching because I care about this community #go look up what small campaigns are running right now

Shelterwood: a follow-up and apology

someone reached out to me after publishing my Shelterwood crowdfunding post with some very valid stuff that I want to address. they mistakenly sent it non-anonymously (something I confirmed with them before just responding to the Ask), so in the spirit of keeping things unidentifiable around here I am going to screenshot the entire message (so you can know I'm not selectively cutting anything out) and then I'll respond to it in chunks:

A Genuine Apology

so let's start with the first chunk of text:

I'm going to be straight with you: while there were absolutely some points you made about the Shelterwood crowdfund that I agreed with, like how unreasonable the goal seemed for a show produced by a novice showrunner, something's really sticking out here. That thing is that Stephen Indrisano and Nigel McKeon are both young, white, non-binary novice showrunners who secured some high-billing talent and picked unreasonably high crowdfunding goals, but you treated one of them with a lot of grace and understanding... and then turned around and not only accused the other of essentially being the problem with the current state of podcasting, but also called them cis in the process despite having acknowledged their pronouns earlier in your write-up. That was... certainly something. It's almost like you had a specific point you wanted to make, so you just sort of conveniently forget that Stephen is non-binary to make it. That or you don't actually think Stephen is non-binary and were engaging in some passive-aggressive gatekeeping, which also sucks, just in a different way.

this is 100% something I fucked up on, I will readily admit that. my accidental erasure of Stephen's identity as a non-binary person is not okay, intentional or not.

I wrote the initial post gradually over the course of just over a week, top to bottom, and then did a quick skim of it at the end to make sure things were still up-to-date in accordance with any updates to the campaign itself. a result of this is that between when I started the post (where I included Stephen's pronouns of "he/they)" and when I was writing some of the later parts I had forgotten this. I think part of the reason is that the campaign is not really about Stephen, so it isn't like there are consistent references to him as an individual. in the few places there are, such as the intro section of the main text and the FAQ, "he" is used exclusively, which I think mistakenly put that in my mind as Stephen having a male gender identity because I hadn't seen a self-identification as being non-binary on their website or Twitter. but someone deciding to use a specific set of pronouns in the text of something like this (to avoid confusion or for any other reason) does NOT invalidate their use of other pronouns elsewhere. similarly you don't have to outwardly proclaim your gender identity for it to be respected and not assumed as cis.

I am genuinely very sorry about this, it was a mistake and I am in the process of editing the original post to reflect Stephen's proper gender identity.

now then.

let's talk about the difference between Nigel (Among the Stacks) and Stephen and the way I approached them, because you're right that there was a difference.

I think a key way that these two projects differ is that one of them was very clearly made by someone who didn't know what they were doing and was in over their head. Among the Stacks was a clear trainwreck from the moment they started revealing how bloated the cast and crew were. I had many conversations with other creators during that early time where we were all wondering how this thing could function with so many cooks in the kitchen, and how you could have a coherent story with that many characters. it was clearly a product of someone new and over-excited who didn't have a real idea of how to do what they were dreaming of.

in contrast, Shelterwood seems to be genuinely well-thought out and approached like it was created by someone who has done their research and been part of the community for a while. it has a full concept with a clearly outlined size and goals and is a very realistic sounding first project. if it weren't for the goal and the rewards we wouldn't be talking about it at all. as a pitch it is perfectly reasonable.

I went a bit easier on Nigel because just from looking a lot of us could tell that Among the Stacks was going to end in disaster. we didn't know when or how, just that there was no way a project like that could actually succeed. I also knew from interactions between Nigel and other people that she was not very good at taking critique or hearing other people out on stuff that they didn't agree with. I went into that post with the intention of being harsh but fair, because I wanted Nigel to hear what I had to say and LISTEN. not just brush it off as "someone is jealous of my amazing idea and so they are being mean". I was still a bit mean in that post at some parts, I will admit that. my tone can swing a bit far on the sarcastic side, especially the longer I spend on a given post digging into things.

Shelterwood is full of people who should know better, something that it makes a point to brag about. it isn't just one person's dream project that they don't know how to wrangle, Stephen is clearly a proficient showrunner to have pulled all of this together (and I do genuinely find the show's concept to be interesting, even if I didn't really communicate that in the post as much as I could have). Stephen has ALSO been around the block a few times in regards to working on audio dramas, whether or not they have helmed their own. this means that from the start my expectations for them were higher.

my goal was not to accuse Stephen of being "the problem", but I think that this campaign is INDICATIVE of a lot of the "the problems" going on right now with audio drama crowdfunding.

I did seriously think about pulling the last section into a completely separate post, but what I wrote applies to the context of this campaign and so I felt it was important to have that connection. if I had been able to fully communicate my thoughts on it before now, say for the Arden campaign, it would have been part of that post. but it took me a lot of time to get those words down in a way that actually communicated what I think the problem is.

I know having it as part of the Shelterwood post has an implication, and the implication is correct that this campaign is PART of the problem, but it isn't the whole problem.

It's also very weird that you lumped Shelterwood, Arden, Among the Stacks and Afflicted in with The Magnus Protocol, which was on an entirely different level. They're not comparable. Not a single one of those first four shows actually made their crowdfund goals. In Afflicted's case, the all or nothing state of the crowdfund means 100% of that money was returned to backers. The Among the Stacks crowdfund was cancelled. Which means that for 50% of your given examples, literally none of that money ended up tied up in those shows rather than being contributed to other, smaller shows. This is not comparable with The Magnus Protocol crowdfund situation, and I think you know that.

it's 100% true that The Magnus Protocol is on a whole other level than these other campaigns, I said as much in my write-up. it is not comparable and I wasn't attempting to compare nearly $1 million USD to $26,000.

what I was attempting (and may have failed) to do was to point out that what Rusty Quill did was change the playing field for the worse. when looking at those two numbers you can much more easily make attempts to justify the high goals being asked for here, because in comparison that's downright reasonable to what they raised.

as a note: TMP had a funding goal of £15,000 (approx. $19,500 USD). so they weren't actually asking for hundreds of thousands of dollars to make 3 seasons of a show. in fact, what they asked for is less than the campaigns I'm trying to call out here. that Kickstarter has a lot of things that were suspect about it and felt slimey and exploitative, but the asking price was not really one of them.

however.

just because they didn't ASK for that much money doesn't mean they didn't know it would happen (maybe not to that extent, but still). this still had the same impact, which from what I can tell is making some people think that audio drama crowdfunding is for making a profit.

as for the next point about none of the shows except for TMA 2 hitting their goals:

the amount they are walking away with isn't really the point.

at the end of the day, it's about the fact that the more stuff like this happens, the more it is NORMALIZED. and these kinds of goals getting normalized is harmful.

as an example, in the world of video games there is something called "microtransactions". for anyone who doesn't know, these are additional, small purchases you make in a game that you often have already paid upwards of $60-70 USD for. in the beginning, they were marketed as "just cosmetic" and not going to impact gameplay. and so people didn't fight back too hard when EVERY game started implementing them. but of course, what that did was move the bar. it normalized people paying extra money on top of their purchase for something that used to be included for free with a game. and so the companies started pushing the needle further. and further.

now, this isn't a direct parallel for a lot of reasons, but when greed is being put forward as normal again and again (even when it continues to result in failure) it starts to cement it as something "normal". something to be expected.

the larger problem here is that these are unsustainable amounts of money to be trying to get out of the community.

which connects to this next section:

Speaking of The Magnus Protocol, there's also an assumption being made here that someone deprived of the option of helping one of these shows reach their crowdfund goal is automatically going to donate to another show... and I need you to remember that The Magnus Protocol's final tally was something stupid like 4000% of their original goal. Lower crowdfunding goals don't stop people from contributing once that goal has been reached. People just keep donating to that project. None of those people were donating to make sure the thing got made- they were donating because they liked The Magnus Archives, and the hard to swallow pill here is that that doesn't mean they would've contributed to other crowdfunds otherwise. I have my own issues with The Magnus Protocol thing. But the statement that that crowdfund snatched money out of the pockets of smaller shows by having an unreasonably high goal just straight-up does not hold water. That's nothing. It's 4000% less than nothing. You're allowed to be mad that that campaign got such a ridiculous amount of funding when so many smaller shows are struggling. You don't need to couch it in pseudo-logic to justify feeling that way. We're all mad about it. It's okay.

this is definitely a good call-out, this person is right that someone not donating to one campaign does not mean that money will go to another. in a lot of cases, the only reason someone sees a campaign is because it is being promoted by the things they already like (in The Magnus Protocol's case that obviously being The Magnus Archives), and that means they probably aren't going to be choosing between every campaign that is out there and deciding where their $5 is going to go. they might just as easily pocket it and buy a nice coffee the next day.

and that absolutely sucks, because it would be nice for the love that some people have towards specific shows to be something that extends to the whole medium.

but I do think there's something to be said for feeling like even a small donation is making an impact. I would feel kind of bad to only be able to give $20 towards a $10k+ goal, it isn't even a drop in the bucket towards what is needed and if I care enough to donate to something I do want it to succeed. but that same $20 to a campaign only asking for $3000? that's a lot more tangible of an impact. enough so that I could feel good about splitting that $20 between two projects maybe.

that isn't 100% the point of what you were saying, I know that. the reality is that not everyone in this community has a general investment in the success of others.

I think where that becomes the biggest problem is when some people only seem to have an investment in themselves, and no one else. that's where these things become problems, when the larger needs of the community are ignored for the sake of a few who repeatedly succeed.

I'm kind of bleeding a bit into my response to the next part, so here that chunk is:

And do I agree that we as a community need to start talking about what is and is not realistic when it comes to crowdfunding? Yeah, absolutely. You have a point there. That's a valuable and timely observation and I'm glad somebody said it. Unfortunately, the value of that point was absolutely buried by the extremely obvious fact that this time, in this case, something about this project is personal for you. I don't know what it is specifically, but I do feel the need to ask: You are aware that Tal Minear is involved in the show as a graphic designer and minor actor, right? They have nothing to do with the crowdfund or the rest of production. Their name being attached doesn't mean they're secretly running the show. This is not Tal's show. They'd be credited as a producer if they were that involved. So why do you feel the need to keep bringing them up? Anyway, it's extremely difficult to take your analysis in good faith when it's so transparently motivated by some sort of personal distaste for somebody/the people in the project, and that's a shame, because some of the things you're saying have value.

I certainly didn't shy away from pointing a bit of a finger at Tal Minear for promoting this ideology, among others. their clear involvement in this project makes me immediately more suspicious, because Re: Dracula was a self-admitted cash grab. and that stain on their character is not going to go away for me.

it's less that it's "personal" for me, and more that this is a figure in the community that I have repeatedly seen presented as an expert that MUST be listened to. including by themself. ESPECIALLY when it comes to the matter of crowdfunding.

now, if I were friends with someone like that AND they were involved with my project that was about to have a campaign, would I not lean on that resource? even just for advice on how to put it together and what needs to be included. Tal just wrote a small little article for Descript that has some very generic crowdfunding tips, so they are arguably the most knowledgeable person involved in the campaign to go to for advice and feedback.

I know for a fact that Tal has given crowdfunding advice unsolicited to people running campaigns, usually in the form of asking why crew is not being paid appropriately (a valid question in most cases where actors tend to get a huge portion of the budget). so I can't imagine a world where they didn't give at least a little input to a friend for a show that they are actively involved in.

I don't think they are running anything behind the scenes, no, Tal is not part of some audio drama Illuminati. but I do recognize the high esteem to which they are held by MANY community members.

my goal was to call out the culture that has grown around audio drama crowdfunding, and the ways that I've seen it hurting most people who attempt to do it. I have noticed that Tal is a big part of what has normalized that.

as for the ways in which I brought them up, yeah I like to be a bit snide and I probably laid it on a bit thick. it's easy to get carried away in these things, especially towards someone that I am admittedly not a huge fan of.

that is the extent to which it could be considered "personal" for me, but I understand if you don't believe that or if that still had too much of an impact on taking the rest of what I said seriously. that is your choice and I respect it, it's just very difficult for me to separate out their involvement given what I know outside of this.

You're just completely undercutting that value by surrounding it with so much pointless nitpicking and snideness. What happened to "#but actually my intention is to be thoughtful and not mean"? You claim to be acting in the interest and defense of the community, but as the creator of a small podcast that nets me absolutely zero profit, I'm not feeling it. This feels like it's about you, not the rest of us.

this is absolutely fair.

I am just one person at the end of the day. I've talked to others, discussed the situation surrounding this campaign and others like it with them, but I am the one typing it down and inserting my voice and my take on it.

as such, I am not going to be a perfect mouthpiece for everyone's thoughts about this stuff.

I WANT to be one that is largely beneficial, however.

sometimes I lean a bit heavy into the snideness for the sake of keeping things interesting; these write-ups are LONG and as a writer I recognize you have to do something to keep people engaged so they actually absorb what you are saying.

is that the right approach? probably not for everyone, but it is part of a reflection of my own voice that it comes out like this.

"#but actually my intention is to be thoughtful and not mean" is something I wrote, something that I still want to keep in mind but sometimes I fail at that. in this case, I found it hard to stick to.

repeatedly seeing campaigns like this is disheartening to me, it wears me out. there is an amount of what a lot of people might see as "bitterness", but it's not really about any specific project or person.

I think my massive fucking rant at the end of that post about capitalism ruining audio dramas with the need to make money unsustainably says a lot about how I feel about the current financial state of the world. a lot of that "bitterness" is from this deep rage towards to the system, directed outwards where it can be. maybe the flow of it was a bit strong on this one, but it is still an accurate reflection of the way that I see things.

note, an accurate reflection to ME. it's okay if it isn't accurate to you, that's part of why the conversations need to happen.

part of why I do the math breakdowns for the budget is to help myself try and get a grasp on what those numbers mean. the human brain is not really formatted to understand large quantities of things, especially something that is usually intangible in those high amounts like money. I also do it because I want to give someone the opportunity to say "actually, you're wrong because this does add up. you are just missing part of the picture."

I know the way I approached this might come off as defensive, that's not my intention. I decided to break it down like this so that no one would think I'm trying to skip over feedback or ignore certain points that make me look bad.

everything that this person said to me is a valid response to what I wrote, including the things I pushed back on.

I am very grateful that they reached out to me, and I want to continue the conversation. ESPECIALLY if they feel that I did not hear them here.

my responses are just that. a response. they are not a claim of being right or these reactions being unjustified. we are all only in our own heads, and the conclusions we come to are usually based in rationality. my mind is open to being changed, I want to see as full a picture as possible.

if you disagree with what I've said, that is fine.

if you agree with what I've said, that is fine.

if you aren't sure, that is also fine.

we're talking about something complex and nuanced and just because I'm the one bringing these things up doesn't mean I have the RIGHT opinion or that I am the person who SHOULD be saying it.

there is a reason that I am anonymous here, and it's mostly because the conversation is more important than who is speaking.

as always, my inbox and Asks are open.

feedback welcome, I mean that.

#anonymous ad #crowdfund tips #shelterwood crowdfund #Stephen Indrisano #Tal Minear #among the stacks crowdfund #The Magnus Protocol crowdfund #“but actually my intention is to be thoughtful and not mean” is something I will do better to keep in mind #at the end of the day I do want this to make us a better community #sorry that capitalism ruins everything as per usual

are you aware of malevolent or the fandom at all? i stopped following harlan a while ago bc the way he interacted with fans gave me the ick and i forgot about it for a while but. now i'm seeing *dozens* of comments from people who say he treats his fans like shit on the official discord and like. i guess im just wondering if you or anyone else has some insight on this? it just sucks bc the fandom is really getting huge and it seems like harlan is really parasocially involved in it and i feel like i can't even post about it on my own blog bc i'm worried about the reaction.

I am definitely aware of Malevolent and Harlan, at this point I would be surprised to meet someone who isn't at least a little.

this however is new to me as someone who only has interacted in passing and only engaged with his content the way I would most audio dramas I listen to. which is to say I've listened to some and chatted offhand with others.

I haven't seen very much from the discord, but I think I like a lot of people only frequent a few servers and mostly ignore the rest so that stuff wouldn't ever cross my path unless it affected someone I know personally.

that isn't to say it isn't happening, and honestly I would be interested to dig into it more because a lot of content creators and their communities have collapsed from this type of behavior (maybe not in our space, but plenty on YouTube and Twitch and beyond).

there is definitely an important conversation to be had around the parasocial relationships that our community fosters, every creator is MUCH more accessible than any other type of media I have experienced. and while that can be a good thing it can also be a really really bad thing, especially if someone with power abuses it.

I know that Malevolent and Harlan's other projects do have quite a following and it keeps growing, so this is genuinely concerning to hear and I personally want to take it very seriously if it is happening.

if anyone has stories that they want to tell in an anonymous forum, they are welcome to send them and I will put it out there.

we can also just as a group try to start a larger conversation about the ways that creator accessibility might be dangerous (for BOTH sides) and how we can think about putting safety rails in place to make sure that things cannot get out of hand.

#anonymous ad #parasocial relationships #parasocial behavior #I would like to say that I personally am not the type of person who would advertise to fans such life events as having a baby #that level of intimacy and sharing my personal life does make me a bit uncomfortable and puts me on edge #especially given how readily accessible he is in comparison to other types of content creators who have a more obvious barrier #discord has definitely facilitated a little too much access in my opinion #which is great at small levels where we can network and bond #but really dangerous when someone starts to become a tent pole in a community

hey do you mind not putting your creator witch hunts in the audio drama tag? I'm just trying to enjoy media about the shows I like and it's super off putting to see this weird Harlan gossipy stuff in the tags.

(lowkey it's also kinda weird for you as a creator to anonymously gather info about another creator in the space like this. if you've got a problem, go talk to them like a normal person? Why do you get a veil of anonymity while you air out para-social grievances?)

honestly I find it a bit concerning that you are unwilling to engage with the community at more than a surface level.

this feels like one of those things where someone will point to death of the author and "separating the art from the artist", but that isn't what that concept means: it's about artistic intent and meaning behind a piece, and how your interpretation is valid regardless of what the artist would say it is SUPPOSED to mean.

it has very conveniently been used in recent years to try and excuse people's engagement with problematic media figures (JK Rowling being a very obvious one), but the entire essay is ONLY about interpretation and a piece of art's "ultimate meaning".

not holding people accountable because you like their work is how you get unchecked abuse, just look at Hollywood.

actively choosing not to engage with these factors is a point of privilege, the same way that "not being political" is. I understand that fiction is escapism, but fiction is also how unsafe and unhealthy ideas can be spread. fiction does not mean "completely divorced from reality".

as for the anonymity, I'm not sure if you've ever paid attention to what happens to people who do NOT speak anonymously? I've seen people who are just listeners and not creators get fucking dogpiled on for something that isn't even a harsh take. some people in the community have a lot of power and connections and willingly deploy them against the people they feel have "wronged" them.

I've seen people get blocked on Twitter by some of those people for daring to ask a non-attacking question about the journalistic approach taken for a certain RQ-related article.

everyone is shit talking in private and happy faces on the exterior. nothing stays between two people for long if one person feels like they are being "attacked" by some feedback, even if said feedback is something small.

#anonymous ad #anonymous #“witch hunt” is such a dog whistle #like seriously saying that phrase overrides any kind of point you were trying to make #but moving past that #death of the author is one of those things that I see constantly misused so I had to get on a little soapbox about it for a sec #even tho the anon didn't say those words it had the vibe

an unbiased review: the Among the Stacks crowdfund

if you would like to follow along, or if you for whatever reason do not trust my screenshots of the campaign: https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/among-the-stacks-season-1#/

this is going to be very long and I apologize. but when I thought about leaving out some parts to cut it down, it didn't feel like I was doing due diligence in communicating the full picture and providing constructive feedback and critique. I think I have some good notes in here for general things to keep in mind for anyone asking publicly for money to fund their passion project.

so. let's get into it.

The Campaign Video

this is the first thing you see on the page, displayed prominently at the top next to the title and goal.

but before it even starts, why is it a full 10 minutes long??? this is your elevator pitch opportunity, you need to get to the point and make your case before someone clicks away. because unless I already care I am not sticking around for 10 minutes to hear you say the same thing I can read for myself if I scrolled slightly down the page. (that's not even mentioning that any video which is exactly 10:01 long just makes me think of how youtubers pad video lengths to hit the time requirement for putting ads in the middle)

but anyway, let's talk about the video itself.

first up: the content

cut. it. down.

10 minutes is an egregious length for what is supposed to be a video that grabs attention and funnels people into taking the time to read the rest of the page. it is not meant to be a video version OF said page. even 5 minutes would be pushing it in most cases, and the most important information needs to be in the first 2. that means the elevator pitch for your story, ideally 1-2 sentences, and then an explanation of what you are asking for and why. it is fine to set the tone with an excerpt or thematic prose, but keep it BRIEF.

there is no need to spend nearly 3 minutes of the runtime playing samples of your most famous actors for clout. especially when you barely touch on the 12 people that are part of the crew .

touching on various perks of the different tiers is good, as is reiterating the goal amount, but it would be nice to have visuals to go along with the more interesting and complicated sounding ones. the visuals that are included are lackluster and the small amount of shown art is way too obscured by the "copyright" watermark.

finally: why the fuck is the last minute and forty just music. no, seriously. almost 2 minutes of time wasted for the sake of what? fade that shit out after 10 seconds and end the video, I'm not here to listen to your theme tune, I'm here to learn about the project.

also, don't use "Kickstarter" as a general synonym for "crowdfunder". it is confusing and will make people forget how to actually find your campaign.

second: the quality

you are making an audio drama, yes, so producing nice videos isn't your end goal. but it DOES still matter and is a reflection of the care you put into your work. if I like the video, then yeah maybe I go and check out the actual content you've released on the Among the Stacks feed. but your feed isn't embedded at the top of this page. your feed isn't the first impression I'm going to get of your production quality. this is.

we could nitpick how the transparent logo on the library background makes the text unreadable, or how the cast announcements aren't lined up properly with the visual transitions, or how more than one take was definitely needed because some of the stumbles are extremely noticeable. some of the issues are visual only, but there are plenty of problems with the audio itself in this video, which is especially suspect when what you are asking money for is an audio project.

so when the opening voiceover changes to a more informal description of the project, why does the quality go to shit. the first part sounds like it was recorded in a properly treated space with care for removing background noise and reducing echo and reverb. in the second, I can constantly hear birds and there was a fucking discord notification at the 1:45 mark. most bafflingly, it's the same exact voice (I assume showrunner Nigel's), so HOW can the quality be this inconsistent??? I'm not looking for fancy, I'm just looking for the bare minimum in quality for something like this.

all this tells me, is to expect inconsistency in your product. if I give you money am I going to get the treated professional approach or the slapdash one? this video is the way you are demonstrating your quality to prospective backers; you provide no other examples directly on this page so THIS is what you have presented as an acceptable representation of you and the project as a whole.

this shit matters, it really does. ESPECIALLY when you are asking for $21,000 dollars. which leads us to...

The $21k Goal

with names this prominent in the AD space attached, I did have an expectation of a somewhat higher goal than I've seen on recent smaller projects. but I was not expecting the actual goal to be this ridiculous.

let's compare this number to another high profile project that happened last year: Re:Dracula (https://seedandspark.com/fund/re-dracula)

off the bat, you can see that this project raised about $24k on it's own, but if you scroll down to the budget section it says "We estimate that this production will cost $22k. You'll note our goal is $12k - this is because we've received $10k of external funding outside of this campaign!" for a total of $34k

now you might see that and think "well anon, is that not basically the same thing? they actually raised more than that!"

there is as big difference between a project that is being spearheaded by a well-established and proven name in the audio drama space like Tal Minear and a project being driven by someone that most people haven't interacted with in any production capacity (I'm sure Tal would have their own interesting things to say about this crowdfunder, as they have quite a bit of experience themself in this realm). ADDITIONALLY, in the Re:Dracula campaign video (which is only 2 minutes if you were wondering) they state it is an "all or nothing project", meaning if they couldn't raise the necessary funds it wouldn't have happened. so when Re:Dracula asked for that money, there was an expectation built on past proven work and releases and the ask was made based on that.

(now do I also find that amount of money for Re:Dracula to be a bit ridiculous? honestly a bit yes, but as a production it is very much a professional venture within the space more than an indie project fueled by passion to tell a story. the whole thing exists to capitalize on Dracula Daily tho, so I think we all know that)

there is an expectation of quality and professionalism that is proportional to how much money you are asking people to entrust you with. it sounds shitty, and it is, but crowdfunding is about asking individuals to put faith in you and your vision, and it is your responsibility to do right by those people.

I should point out that there is no problem with a flexible goal, which means that money will still go to the project if not fully funded. but I do think it betrays that they know this goal is nonsense high.

but we will talk more in-depth about the budget breakdown in the next section.

The Donation Tiers

this is the bit that will be the most presumptive, as the nature of backer tiers is that you don't know what the goods will be like until a while after the campaign is over and stuff goes out. so this will be a more general look at the different levels, whether the perks seem to be fairly placed/distributed, etc.

my first question tho: why are nearly all of the tiers seemingly "discounted" right now (the day after launch)? is it a limited time first week of the campaign thing? if so, why aren't you using that to advertise and push people to pledge early to take advantage? in some industries this kind of thing is common practice (video games often launch with small discounts on digital platforms like Steam), but I have never seen it on any kind of crowdfunding campaign. I didn't even know it was a thing you could do.

I do like the visual cohesion with all the images used across the tiers. the yellow and purple thematically match with the show's website (which interestingly is not linked a single time on the page), though I'm unsure how legible it is when it comes to the text images within the main campaign body, definitely hides some the details of the pictures here against the parchment style background. the art styles themselves are exactly consistent, which is pretty obvious why once you realize they are all traced off other pictures or artwork (for example, this one is a clear base for this one and I was able to quickly find ). I was going to give the benefit of the doubt and assume this is a legal use of them since I can't hunt down every single one. but the hands holding a rosary image is from a site that says "attribution is required", and that sure wasn't done here so I don't know if any of the others were traced without permission or proper credit given. nowhere on the page is there a link to or mention of who created these images for the campaign. (unrelated, but alt text for images should be standard by now on sites like indiegogo, especially since so many campaigns utilize banner images instead of header text to differentiate sections)

okay let's actually look at these tiers (at the price before the discount):

there are 10 options total (plus the general donate without a perk) ranging from $6 to $267 USD. as a high and low these are good boundaries, with 6 of the options being below the $100 mark. honestly this is a really solid distribution in terms of offering options at the lower end while still giving variety at the middle and higher end.

the first four are restricted to digital content only, with the baseline offering discord access and a social media shout-out and then progressively adding digital annotated scripts, early access to episodes, and the digital "librarian guide".

the annotated scripts is an interesting perk considering it will apparently include both past and future episodes of the show. however that isn't particularly specific about whether it is even talking about season 1 scripts or if it means scripts for only the current "prologue season" as it is defined in the main text of the campaign (oh we will get there). it does has a general delivery timeframe of April 2023, but is this a one and done or will these backers continue to get new annotated scripts thru the creation of season 1? how many will that come out to? will they get all the scripts? these are not small questions when it comes to asking value, though at a price point of $12 I think most people would be satisfied with a few from throughout the first season.

similarly "early access to episodes" is too vague and needs to be more specific; when Red Valley crowdfunded last year they stated that backers would get access a full week before the public, but all the ATS campaign says is "ahead of the general public". it is worth noting that both campaigns asked $18 for this level, so we are in line there it seems.

the Librarian Guide is a neat bit of content to offer, though I wish there were mock-ups or even a little more information about the type of things that will be included aside from illustrations. "information" could mean star signs and the fact they hate cake, or it could be substantial like their background and how they came to be part of the story. the price has jumped to $33 at this tier, so sell me on why I should give another $15 for this.

from here we start bringing in physical goods, which can really drive people to giving more for that extra thing to show off.

at $44 we add a 5 count sticker pack. considering ordering minimums I think people often discount how much nice stickers can cost (assuming they go with nice ones), plus factoring in the postage from Ireland for even a regular letter envelope. so I think this is a fair jump up in price. the real question is, what are the designs? and actually, is it more than one design? because the wording is very non-specific to whether it is 5 of the same sticker you see a mock-up for in the video (which is just some black block text on a white background) or if it is 5 different designs that include actual artwork, or what. a sticker pack usually means multiple designs, but given we've only seen one thing that wasn't very impressive I don't know that that stuff is even prepared yet to send for printing. there is also nothing said about the quality of stickers in terms of vinyl, heavy duty, die cut, approx size, etc.

at $60 we add another digital reward of being thanked in the episode credits, a tier which does not have a limited number of slots, so I guess hope that it doesn't end up with 20+ names that have to be read out for every single release?

now we jump to the big leagues of pricing and physical production with the physical Librarian Guide at $128 USD. this is a pretty non-standard physical good which is an awesome thing to offer.

but here's where I feel something needs to be said about manufacturing, because that shit can go south fast. physical goods can be hard to produce on their own, and promising too much will lead down a road of stress and frustration and lots of time and money wasted if you don't know what you are doing. I know people who have goods manufactured as their entire business and it is a fucking gamble sometimes.

but also, what exactly does it mean for this to be a physical item? it is 24 pages, which is too short to be bound like a book (even an art book). is it a zine? what will the quality of the print be and will it adequately show off the artwork that you are all proud of? this is where mock-ups or a sample page would be really nice to see.

a big jump up to $171 for the addition of a t-shirt. an additional $43 is somewhat steep I think, but that's probably fine because we're factoring in a middle man and shipping costs. but on the mock-up... why is the artwork so obscured? I genuinely cannot figure out what it's supposed to look like, which is a pity because what I can see seems interesting. are you really that worried about someone stealing the design?

for only $213 there is the option to name a character. again, no limit on the number of slots for this strikes me as weird since there are only so many characters that can possible BE named? especially given that all the currently announced cast have character names, so are there more people that we don't know about and aren't named or are some of those names up for change or is this just a "in the transcript you'll see the name and maybe it will be said once" kind of deal?

another small nitpick on this one. here's the description for it:

just lose the last line. the two before it do a good job at saying "hey it will have to be approved, and we don't stand for hateful shit", so the last line comes across kind of weird? it feels somewhere between 'no fun allowed' and 'you're an idiot' and is wholly unnecessary to get across the restrictions you want.

last tier sits at $267 USD (or an even €250 EUR for those who like round numbers). this is the reward that I always fucking hate to see, and it's somehow more egregious for how it's framed here. for all that money, you can get an executive producer credit.

this is a note for everyone doing a podcast crowdfund campaign: STOP DOING THIS SHIT. do you know why this reward exists? vanity. that's literally it. it exists for someone to claim that they were part of a project they didn't do anything for to try and gain clout.

now, why specifically does THIS ONE enrage me? for one, it is literally the only addition at this highest tier. add a handwritten thank you note or a chance to talk with the writers or SOMETHING. this is wholly unsubstantial for being the ultimate backer reward. but back to the credit itself, do you know where you'll be able to find it? only on Podchaser and IMDb. no mention of being distinguished in the credits of each episode with this label, nothing about being recognized on the website. just those two places that mean nothing and will barely be seen by anyone. do you know how easy it is to get on IMDb? embarrassingly so, and nobody will ever look. this kind of title exists for putting on a resume and looking impressive, but then if someone where to ask any follow up question you're kind of screwed because you actually did nothing but pay for it. so unless your only goal is to have your name attached to a project that has some well-known actors in the tiny pond that is audio drama, this shit is worthless.

so overall, I think the tiers are reasonable theoretically (minus the last one), but the lack of mock-ups for the more interesting stuff is definitely hurting that assessment.

The Campaign Itself

"About Among the Stacks"

minor gripe right off the bat, why is everything in this section a bullet point? those are for things in a list, which this is not. just leave them as paragraphs, which is basically what you've done anyway.

sorry that was distracting me. but let's talk about the actual content and some general advice.

the first thing I expect to see here is your elevator pitch. I talked about this in the video section, but since not everyone will watch your video (especially in this case when they see it is 10 minutes) you have to put it here. tell me why I should keep reading past your first paragraph. if I only read this campaign I would have no idea what your show is about or trying to be about.

instead what we're given is the setting and framework of the project. honestly this is good to include when there is a driving idea like "[creating] an open and inclusive space for creators to tell the stories they want to tell within the framework of the Library", and I take no issue with the inclusion of this. it could be said a little tighter (something this whole campaign could have used was a bit more editing to be honest), but the core principle is communicated and it sets the tone for what this project is claiming to be.

the 4th bullet should come next as it is the first mention or hint at the podcast feed even existing already. this is your way to prove that you can and have made stuff for the project and it doesn't only exist in people's heads. also, why is there no link to it?

it is nice to get the framing of who this project is largely coming from more than just looking at the name "Nigel McKeon" (she/they according to the website) as who created the campaign. it would be nice to get links to stuff like the poetry or podcasts to get a sense of her work, especially as they are asking for this much for what is essentially blind faith based on what this page gives us.

it is worth noting that while Nigel definitely has experience as a "podcaster", they do NOT have experience making an audio drama. her projects to this point have largely been unscripted talk podcasts such as Archive Admirers or Hyperfixations, so there is no indication of the quality of writing to expect from the project, even with a team of writers working on it. speaking of...

very interesting that our last paragraph here and the only image of this section is about some of the cast. this point is devoted to bragging about 6 of the well-known actors who are already involved in the project and listing their recognizable credits. the image below shows of 20 of the actors (including those 6), and even that barely scratches the surface of the 51 actors listed on their website as cast.

yep, 51. it is unclear to me how many of those are for one-off parts or actually considered core cast, but they are are named characters and apparently listed as equals so this is what I have to work with here.

it just so happens that these listed and pictured actors are the biggest names involved. which I get to an extent, you want to attract people to the project and that's a good way to do it. but that shouldn't be the ONLY thing your success is counting on. there are SO MANY big names attached here that it's suspicious to be honest.

also. why the fuck do you only mention your crew in passing here?

I don't care how talented your cast are, they won't be able to save bad writing or editing. your crew is just as important and yet THEY get no more than a passing mention. there are some really great people attached to this project and you are giving them zero recognition for all the hard work they had to put in already. before you could record these well-known voices, people had to write the scripts and flesh out the characters. so treat them with some respect for that!

I cannot even begin to communicate how infuriating it is to see the lack of credit given to the whole creative team, because the way this is presented feels like it's just Nigel and maybe some guest writers. if that IS what it is, then fucking say that! it isn't hard to communicate this stuff, and it is your duty when asking for this much money. always err on the side of being verbose.

I do think that generally more care needs to be taken with word choice and what is being highlighted though, because as with the tier descriptions some stuff is too vague or implies something that maybe isn't true.

I don't want to make assumptions about the people involved, particularly Nigel (she/they) who's project this is, but when I look at the pictures on the website of all the cast and crew involved in the project, I see a lot of pale skin. some of this might speak generally to the problem we have in the audio drama community of being very white, and it should be recognized that there is an amount of privilege associated with having the time and money to take on these kinds of creative hobbies. even with the bar for entry being much more accessible, things are a bit homogenous. but if you are claiming to care about platforming diverse and marginalized people, you need to show that. "show don't tell" is kind of the backbone of a lot of my issues with this campaign when it comes down to it, but this is one of those places where it really fucking matters. performative activism is something that we see a lot of, and I don't want to get into it here, but just platforming queer and ND voices is not the same as being diverse. queer activism and racial activism and disability activism and economic activism are all connected when you get down to it.

don't say you have an "incredibly diverse writing team" when I can look at the website and see that everyone is pale and very young. this does not read as diverse, it reads as "I didn't realize other neurodiverse people existed until I got deep on the internet and now I understand we are a marginalized group too".

(don't get me wrong, neurodivergence is absolutely a marginalized thing; it is still incredibly difficult for many people to get accommodations and help with managing the different struggles they may have. but even in that realm, it includes more than being ADHD or autistic and I'm getting on my soapbox so I'll stop here)

aside from all of that there is a piece of incredibly important information that just isn't here. how many episodes are you trying to make with this.

saying this will fund "season 1" doesn't mean anything when a podcast season can be anywhere from 40 episodes (The Magnus Archives) to 15 episodes (Jar of Rebuke) to only 4 (Samite). what does "one season" mean to your project? this is particularly important when it comes to justifying your budget and the breakdown of that work, as I'm about to get to.

(in that vein, communicating information like approximate episode length is also helpful I think for giving people an idea of the actual scope of the project; 20 episodes at 30 minutes each is 10 hours of content, but at an hour each that's twice as much work for all involved parties)

fucking hell, onto the next section where things do not get better.

The Budget "Breakdown" and Rewards

did you even try to make a chart where the text didn't go outside of the boundary, mate? also I hate these colors, it hurts to look at.

this is the chart provided, which basically just mirrors was the first bulleted paragraph states in terms of project budgeting. obviously for this section the monetary amounts did not automatically convert for to USD, but since all money is basically worthless right now it's pretty close to a $1 = €1 conversation rate anyway.

the project budget is split into 3 big categories: cast, crew, and artists. and split no more granular than that, which is big problem #1.

especially when there is no transparency on this page about how many people are involved within each of these groups, this could mean vastly different things and send a poor message generally. some people will look at this and not understand whether it is a fair ratio or not without the context of numbers.

if I were to do some rough calculations based on the information readily available via the website, we have:

20% or €4,000 to be split among the artists, of which there only seems to be the one on the website (Claire) and the one who made the character designs pictured lower on the page (@qkayoo). so that is €2k going to each of them roughly, though I know that likely isn't the actual shake out because Claire is responsible for all the episode art in addition to any of the other work being done specifically to fully campaign rewards like the t-shirt design. I'm also guessing that promotional materials for social media are included in this, but that's unclear since there's never any mention of marketing as part of the budget or campaign overall.

30% or €6,000 to be used for crew wages, which includes writers, composers, and producers. again, no mention of how many people this is or what the breakdown of that larger percentage is to each of these groups. should I also assume that there is going to be adequate compensation for the directing even though it isn't mentioned here?

the website lists 3 people as either "music", "composer", or "original songwriter" (not sure what those distinctions mean though in this context) but are we talking about vocal tracks or ambient music or what? and how much unique content are they expected to produce? is it comparable to the expectations for the visual artists, and if so why aren't they receiving compensation that reflects that? these are the questions I ask myself when you give me this little information and don't even bother mentioning who is involved in this part of the process.

similarly we have 3 producers, most of whom wear additional crew hats. are they all working together on each episode or is the season going to be split between them to ease the workload? on that note, is there a head producer in charge of doing final mastering on all episodes to make sure they sound consistent, because that is a lot of additional work compared to the other two.

and then there are 9 writers, so I start to wonder what is the breakdown of that load. is everyone writing full episodes or are people just writing the stories and Nigel as showrunner is doing all the larger plot stuff?

basically I just want to know that people are being compensated appropriately for their time, particularly the people whose work is sometimes not thought about or invisible such as the dialog editors, mixers, quality check, etc. even if the person doing these things isn't asking to be paid for that, they deserves to be compensated for each part of the process they are devoting time to. paying yourself adequately is part of equitable pay, even when it's your passion.

50% or €10,000 for all the cast wages, which as I've pointed out is at least the 51 people credited on the website, though again there is no mention of that here. I won't assume this is to an equal extent, but even if you are listing folks who literally have just one line you still need to compensate them a base amount for the time and effort.

I'm not really gonna say much about fair wages, I think that without insight into a process you can't really pass much judgement on how much work is going in? for example, recording voice over for an audiobook is often compensated in terms of "finished hour", rather than factoring in the additional amount of time spent doing retakes and editing it all together. compared to a production that wants to pay actors for the time they spent total, including things like table reads, live-directed, and asynchronous sessions, that number is going to look very different. differently skilled actors may require more or less help and industry rates are also dependent on your level of experience in the field. some of these bigger names will have a set rate, some of them will not.

I think the largest issues with this section is just the complete lack of justification for ANY of these numbers. when you say "we have estimated it will cost this much", what got you to that number? are you using industry standard rates for general voice acting or did you consult with audio drama specific folks, because those amounts can be different. the more money you ask for, the more conscious you have to be of how it will come across. if I asked my mom to lend me a $20, she won't ask why. if I ask her for $100, she probably will. if I ask for $1000, she will definitely want to know what exactly I'm planning to spend that much on.

we're going to jump over the rewards paragraph for a second to hit the last bullet point since it really belongs up here will all this money information.

as I stated earlier, I have no issue with flexible goals. in fact, it's very nice that it is again addressed here, because I really don't think this campaign will hit that $21k USD goal.

however, what exactly does "paying equitably" mean in this context, because that phrase could be a couple different things. does it mean these same percentage breakdowns for every individually, meaning if I were going to have been paid $500 but it only gets 50% of the goal would I make $250? or does it mean that some people like the larger named actors will still make most of what they would have and people with only a few lines will make a few bucks?

the term "equitable" does not mean "equal", they are genuinely different things. so apart from the larger percentage breakdowns being the same, which were already too broad of categories, it doesn't really tell us anything.

additionally, if the project doesn't get fully funded will there be any money paid out of pocket by Nigel or other crew to cover any promised or guaranteed minimum pay? I would assume that for some people involved this is very much part of their contract/agreement, formal or informal.

also, normally I would like to see the stretch goals section up here rather than down near the bottom as it is for this campaign.

but that's all for the budget, there's not a lot of information to work with here and I've already covered pretty much everything I can think of.

okay, back up to that rewards paragraph we jumped over.

there isn't very much to say about the rewards in this section because the campaign itself says basically nothing. this is where I looked for further details on any of the items promised by the different tiers and the only thing I found was a brief paragraph, a t-shirt mockup (that you can't see the design on, this will never not baffle me), and two character designs for the Librarian Guide, which the caption mistakenly refers to as the "Library Guide". proofreading is important folks.

let's look at this one paragraph though, because there is something very incorrect about it. if this were Dora I'd ask you to point it out for me, so fucking say it at your phone if you spot it:

did you catch any of the issues/inconsistencies here?

the first one is small: "thanks on our social media pages and website". this is the first mention of the website existing anywhere in the body of the campaign, and there isn't even a hyperlink to it. the lack of links on this campaign is just generally baffling.

I'll come back to the middle ones because they are the same issue twice, and the last one is another small nitpick: if you executive producer reward is the highest tier, why are you not presenting it that way here? from reading this I would assume name a character is the top prize for backing, not the fancy vanity credit. like I said, I fucking hate it as a reward, but you are the one trying to sell it to me as such and not doing a good job of it.

okay, so the thing that actually made me stop in my tracks and scramble confused to see if I missed something is the inclusion of 2 rewards that don't seem to exist. why are you claiming that "perks for supporting the crowdfunding include" t-shirts (note this is plural), posters, and pins.

let's take a brief detour with "t-shirts" plural. if you think this sounds pedantic, it really isn't because saying "a t-shirt" was always on the table. there is no tier at which I can support and receive multiple t-shirts, there are not multiple t-shirt design options. no reason to use plural phrasing here when everywhere else it is clearly a singular, feels like a mistake or trying to sound more impressive than you are.

posters and pins however, are entirely fucking new to the conversation we're having. I will point out that the concept of a pin set is mentioned in the stretch goals section BELOW this one, so reading top to bottom as one would expect that isn't known about yet. but even if it were, this is the paragraph talking about your INCLUDED REWARDS, which DOES NOT include your stretch goals. these are the things that someone can explicitly receive for backing your campaign, not the things they might get if you make enough money.

also you can't even make the stretch goal argument for posters however, that shit is not mentioned once anywhere else on the page, not even as a digital reward.

my guess is that this section was written before stuff was finalized or scoped down to the one t-shirt and limited physical goods, and just not updated because no one read over the campaign before launch to point out that adjustments were needed.

"Other Things We'll Be Doing"

just one paragraph here, should be a quick section to review.

right?

RIGHT?

it feels incredibly strange to me that you are asking for this much money when you admit that you are new and not "established members of the AD scene". just very weird behavior generally.

but as for the actual content here.

why the fuck are you promising so much stuff that isn't part of making the show. all of these things take time and energy and people caring enough to make that worth it. if you stream yourself playing a video game for 12 hours total and no one watches, you've spent 12 hours not actually connecting with the community. streaming is work in and of itself with no guarantee of any kind of interaction. and even you do have folks in chat, it's still incredibly one-sided and the streamer's first priority is the game rather than that communication.

the same goes for all these other events, except maybe the hangouts if the entire purpose of those is to interact with chatters. but it's more likely that's just some cast and crew in a discord call that happens to be streamed rather than an interactive type of thing.

in fact, none of these events actually connect you with your fellow creators or prospective fans except, as I said, potentially the hangouts and readthroughs. where is the actual community engagement and outreach? how is any of this supposed to help the project?

this shit is some of the worst to me and it will do nothing but slow down the entire project, because ALL of this requires way more work than you think it will. work that doesn't serve any purpose as far as this campaign goes.

if you want to do these things outside of it, go right ahead. but don't pitch it as part of this or you are implicitly saying that this crowdfund is kind of also funding all of that rather than just making the show itself and fulfilling rewards. this is a lot of time commitment that people are either being paid for or being asked to do as free labor for the show.

also, we once again have issues with being vague here. how many events are you planning to do for each of these different things? who will be hosting/participating in them for the more casual ones like the gaming and TTRPG streams? are these things planned for during the crowdfund period, after the crowdfund but before season 1, during season 1, or a mix of all three?

oh yeah, and what do you mean by "a full cast readthrough of the prologue", because from what I could tell above you have 9 episodes of a "prologue season" out with however many more to go. so is this a full readthrough of this season 0 or is there a DIFFERENT prologue yet to come? and if there IS a different singular prologue episode, why should I even bother with the stuff you are releasing right now?

Milestones

I like this section, it's genuinely good stuff. enticing people to contribute for immediate bonus content is a great way to drive engagement and it can snowball as more funding means more sneak peeks means more eyes see your campaign.

WTF Are These Stretch Goals

not gonna lie, stretch goals is the first place I go when I check out a crowdfund campaign. it says a lot to me about the larger project priorities and reveals a bit more about what people deem as fair compensation for work.

first off: why did you attach a date for when you came up with the stretch goals? all this does is tell me that you potentially sat on launching this campaign for 9 days (launched March 1), which honestly doesn't matter to me but feels unnecessary for me to even wonder whether something was going wrong behind the scenes. just get rid of it, if for some reason you have to update or edit the goals you can make a note then with the date and change you made for transparency.

second: I think it's generally seen to be more effective to hide the majority of your stretch goals until the prior one is reached. this adds mystery and gets people excited dreaming up the "what-ifs". and it stops people like me from judging the feasibility of your numbers up front like this.

also, I do want to point out upfront that stretch goals are not necessarily meant to be seen as a value equivalent for what is being offered. it is an encouragement to get above and beyond and should theoretically be more about raising the overall wages of involved parties with only a small amount pulled aside for the perk.

but let's just go down the list:

"Stretch Goal 1: If we reach €22,500 we will write and perform a digital exclusive livestream of new Among the Stacks content"

so this is something that will happen for only €2,500 additional. which, to be honest, that number feels a bit off for the implied work required, but since "Among the Stacks content" could just mean one more short story, I'm not too concerned with it. just remember that a livestream also requires production work and organization to be done, especially when you are trying to plan around optimal times for your listeners and availability of actors from various timezones. the difference between GMT and PST is 8 hours fyi.

"Stretch Goal 2: If we reach €25,000, we will be able to bring out a small line of Among the Stacks related enamel pins."

yeah no. for a couple reason.

firstly, there is not even a single mockup of what these might look like so why should I care? all of the art we've been shown so far for the show would not translate well to an enamel pin because the level of details is wrong for that scale.

also, what does "a small line" mean? does that mean 3 or 5 or 10? making one pin is a lot of work, let along multiple designs that each have to go through their own proofing phase with the manufacturer.

speaking of.

I didn't really get into the manufacturing thing much when I talked about rewards earlier, but that kind of thing is a real risk. I see and know a lot of pin makers who wind up with more "B and C grade" pins than ones they feel comfortable selling for full price. so what are you going to do if you finish at €25k and there's a manufacturing issue? do you have a contingency built in? have you made selected a possible factory and made blanks with them? are you sure they aren't a scam, because that's also a real problem that goes on with places using photos from other people and then running off with your money. there's a reason this thing is an entire job to wrangle in itself, and at only €2,500 above the prior stretch goal that could be a really slim buffer to work with.

and all of that has to be done for every pin design. this isn't like stickers where you can see a mockup of the die-cut. this is hours of work and communication past just getting a design from your artist.

now, I should point out that this does not say anything about how these will be made available. with no mention about the tiers as part of this, I'm assuming it will not be something added to every tier above a certain level, which is the right choice I think. the implication to me is that this is basically the seed money to then offer it in their website store. this is not something talked about anywhere, so I am potentially making a big assumption there, but I do know they have one already. whatever the case, some people will get the wrong idea about what this goal means because it isn't being specified and maybe think that they will be getting pins in the mail for backing the campaign. clarity is important.

which, also. how much of this is going to pay the artist(s) and will your artists be getting any kind of royalties from sales of this or other store goods? I am full of questions and you aren't answering any of them anywhere.

"Stretch Goal 3: If we reach €50,000, we will be able to create physical books of our scripts featuring notes and commentary."

again, lets talk manufacturing and proofs.

there are a decent number of options for getting a book printed, but that number is cut down when you have specifications involved like "notes and commentary". what this means in practice is probably something like irregular margins to make room for these, the addition of annotations that then must be matched to the proper pages depending on book size (since no way will it be an 8"x11" sheet the way that your google doc scripts are, especially if it's a paperback).

this also means lots of time doing page layouts, checking over the whole book digitally, getting the proof to verify things are right when printed, getting cover art, etc. and which scripts are we talking about for this? prologue season and/or the whole of season 1? in that case, what's the time frame you think that kind of project would take and who is going to paid to do all that work and make sure it includes all the most updated notes and commentary?

speaking of commentary, that sounds like a lot of extra work too since that's not a normal byproduct of making a podcast. whose commentary will it be, Nigel or the writers or a mix of cast and crew?

yes, this is a full €25k above the prior goal, but that is not a lot.

also, again. where will this be available? is it another store good that anyone can buy? how much do you think you'll charge for it on top of this required stretch amount? I'm not necessarily saying you need to answer these questions now, but I need to feel like you have a plan to and I just don't.

"Stretch Goal 4: If we reach €75,000, we will be able to do some physical live shows."

this one is definitely bullshit.

first of all: "SOME"??? what does that even mean except for more than one? honestly with how spread apart some of the cast are in the world, I would be impressed if you could wrangle this amount of money into a single live show.

plus live shows are then further restricting the availability of people to attend, because whether you host it in Ireland where Nigel is from or elsewhere in the UK or Europe or US, there will be a lot of people who are disappointed that you aren't near them. you can livestream them too, but that's another layer of setup and coordination and we all know it's not really the same.

also, as a larger point we need to talk about the ableism of hosting live shows when the pandemic is still happening and killing people. you are excluding your listeners and your cast/crew who don't feel safe to travel to it, let alone be in an enclosed space for 30-60 minutes with people who likely won't be masking.

"Stretch Goal 5: If we reach €100,000, we'll reveal it if we reach Stretch Goal 4"

based on the other goals, I'm already sus what this could be. but the mystery of it is good, they should have done that for more of the goals.

"This is one suggested by Marguerite Kenner as a larger stretch goal, but if we reach €250,000, we can pay everyone involved, down to even one line performances, enough to qualify them for SAG recognition - which requires a person to have receive over £500 paid for work they have done."

this is naïve at best.

right off the bat, let's talk about what SAG is for a second. it stands for the Screen Actors Guild. SCREEN ACTORS.

let me tell you what this makes me think about your project:

you wish you were making a movie, but that's hard to break into so you settled for making a podcast.

podcasts are not for the screen, why are you trying to impress people as though they are. audio storytelling as a medium is an entirely different thing, and the best podcasts out there right now are the ones who are leaning into what makes audio unique. The Goblet Wire, The Moon Crown, and Human B-Gone are all great examples of using the medium for what it is rather than trying to turn it into something it isn't. we have awards in our space if you really care that much, there are some high profile ones too that you can submit for (tho some sure do cost a lot of money to even enter).

this drive by some audio drama creators to chase after tv and movies is a disservice to THIS medium. stop fucking doing it.

putting aside all of that, your project doesn't actually qualify for this.

the phrase "SAG recognition" isn't a real thing from what I can tell, the actual thing I think we're talking about is "SAG eligible".

one of two things needs to happen for a performer to actually be considered eligible:

proof you were employed in a position already covered by a SAG-AFTRA agreement and have worked at least one day in a speaking role

you are a paid-up member of an affiliated performers' union for a year and have worked and been paid for at least once in that union's jurisdiction

so what does that all mean? basically that this goal is pure bullshit.

also worth noting, in order to prove your eligibility to SAG-AFTRA itself, you must submit pay stubs. I don't think Among the Stacks has an official company or business registration that is being used to pay everyone? that means there is also no tax ID, and probably no formal contract which you also need. also I don't know what that looks like for anyone who ISN'T American, which a huge number of them aren't.

that's not even considering the fact that it's an application with them that needs to be approved. being eligible just means you can choose to submit. and they'll probably look at your 1 line in a random independent audio drama and say no anyway.

additionally did you know the base fee for a SAG card is $3000? and then when you have that you will need to report the ~$500 you made on your taxes, which just cuts into your earnings and gets you nothing.

I will say that it is a weirdly noble goal to be able to pay everyone a minimum of €500, even if they have a single line. but completely unnecessary and unreasonable and honestly the money could probably be better spent elsewhere.

but yeah that one made me fucking laugh.

one last more general thing: what will happen if the campaign hits €40k? will that €15k above the prior stretch goal be distributed along the same lines as the "equitable" budget split? will it go towards an emergency fund if your physical goods require more shipping than you thought or the pin manufacturer sends you largely duds?

"Alternative Ways You Can Help"

another section I have literally no problems with. it's always nice to acknowledge that not everyone who wants to support you will be financially able to. audio drama has a listener base that includes some surprisingly young people who may not have spare income, along with people paying for education, between jobs, otherwise financially strapped. especially right now.

I do think it would help these people if you had any links to your social media here though. literally any at all. even just mentioning the @ on twitter would be helpful.

The FAQ

an oft forgotten part of the campaign, the FAQ is actually super important and a great place to put information that didn't really fit anywhere else.

it is not where you should be making your show pitch.

it is for frequently asked questions about the campaign itself.

so let's look at what ATS has done with it. they only put two questions, so this will be quick.

the first question is: "What is Among the Stacks about?"

this should have been the first paragraph of your actual campaign, why is it tucked away here???

the second question is: "I haven't heard Among the Stacks - what podcasts is it similar to?"

again, this is fine information to put near the top of the main campaign page. but it's not a frequently asked question about the campaign itself.

also how have you STILL not linked the podcast feed, I am BAFFLED. also, you list a bunch of inspirations that I probably could have guessed based on your premise and pitch, but without saying anything about why or how you found these things to be impactful in the development of your idea. especially when one of your milestones is to release lists of things that inspired you, why did you include this at all?

so, what is ACTUALLY supposed to go in an FAQ?

the first thing you should talk about if you didn't cover it in the main text is when people should expect the project to start releasing the content. the "estimated shipping" dates that are on tiers are usually not a reflection of that, but more about the goods that are being offered. so it's important that you put somewhere when people should expect to hear the first episode of season 1.

it's also a good place to give people a sense for the scope of the project beyond the campaign, i.e. how many season total are you planning to make.

if you are shipping physical goods for any reward, it can also be helpful to address whether shipping costs have already been factored in or if that will be an additional fee on top of the listed prices.

tell people where to contact you if they have additional campaign specific questions. an email, twitter handle for dms, anything.

there are so many things that can go here for clarifying parts of the campaign, and you can add/edit it as actual ones do start to come in. but it is here to be about the campaign itself, and the questions should reflect that.

are we done yet? almost, I swear.

(I'm dying a little inside right now)

The Catchall

these are small general notes that don't fit anywhere in particular, but stood out to me as weird:

why is a link to the feed not within the first paragraph? on that note, why is there no link ANYWHERE in the campaign??? not to your podcast host or website or even social media. if someone stumbles across your campaign, how do they find you FROM it.

the repeated framing of this show in comparison to queer media that is distributed by larger streaming services (i.e. Netflix and Discovery) is very weird. the scale of those projects and therefore the monetary expectations are different because marketability and capitalism. anyone with a $30 microphone can create a podcast with enough work, this isn't a valuable comparison in the slightest. none of us in this space are pandering, why even draw the comparison as is done in the video.

as an added note to that last point, almost all audio drama is extremely queer, something I love. but it is not something that sets a project apart enough to stress it as much this and other productions do, especially when for many they are using the term to mean "there is a gay relationship" versus "we substantially have queerness as part of our characters and stories in ways that matter to it". both have value, but there is a difference between "this is a podcast about coffee" and "this is a podcast where people sometimes have a cup while chatting about something else"

maybe a petty one, but it's been bothering me: the logo generally looks bad in my opinion, but it looks even worse when blown up on a web page or in a youtube video because it was clearly not made with that kind of resolution in mind. I've had this issue with art I've done in the past and it sucks, but it just doesn't look good when you see those fuzzy edges. especially when the framing device of your whole story is a professional environment like a library, which would have very clean promotional material.

Closing Thoughts

this show feels like a disaster waiting to collapse in on itself. I could write a whole post about just that aspect and all the things that have made me generally suspicious of it, but from the point of view of this review of their campaign? it just feels like asking way too much for so little guarantee it will come together.

I'm not here to try and shit on a project that someone feels passionate about, I think that's a necessary part of making any good creative project and we have a staggering amount of that in the audio drama space. but people can get in over their heads or dream too big to handle if they aren't already prepared and experienced. I've talked with creators who set aside dream projects until they knew it was something they could handle. and there are so many cooks in the kitchen here, the level of coordination required to wrangle a production staff this large is not to be understated. I just don't see this turning out well for anyone involved and I think this kind of money should be spread broader in the community to help fund smaller more varied projects.

especially considering we are already for some reason getting TMA 2 and this feels like it's trying to be TMA 1.5

I really should have made this account back when that campaign was running, because wow did it have some terrible issues too