Post AWDFPDor9vbGp9w2jo by bella@cutie.city
 (DIR) More posts by bella@cutie.city
 (DIR) Post #AWDFPDor9vbGp9w2jo by bella@cutie.city
       2023-05-30T22:35:27Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       so I'm trying to avoid big Google as much as possible and thus decided to give #nebula a try with a yearly subscription. so far I'm disappointed... from what I've seen the platform is just liberals and their very tepid takes?? #nebula users, I hope I'm wrong and maybe you have some recs that will make me change my mind
       
 (DIR) Post #AWDFPETciMD4rb0bHU by rezzyreksya@snowdin.town
       2023-05-31T07:19:43.753835Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @bella I'm mostly still on there just for Jacob Geller's bonus content, I don't really like the interface and most of it is just media analysis video essays by channels I don't watch. I guess there are some good left type content creators on there (for example Philosophy Tube, Mia Mulder, Tom Nicholas), but there's not enough of them.
       
 (DIR) Post #AWDFPF5uQ0pomKvAxM by yassie_j@snowdin.town
       2023-05-31T11:30:27.105088Z
       
       1 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @rezzyreksya @bella the other problem with Nebula is that the platform isn’t actually owned by the creators. It’s 50% owned 100% the property of a holding company — which itself is privately-held. The other 50% is the creators, yes, but that is only if Nebula becomes a publicly-traded corporation. In any case, it means that the creators are the subordinate partner in the deal between the holding company and them. There’s nothing explicitly wrong with the arrangement itself, but the fact they bill it as creator-owned when the creators only have a promise of ownership is completely wrong.