8/ This scares the crap out of bad writers because they KNOW most buyers read only a fraction.
Conversation
Replying to
9/ I've seen people make up bullshit scenarios like "what if I dip and browse? Doesn't author deserve full price?"
2
Replying to
10/ No s/he does not. Corner cases make for bad rules. If somebody reads 10% chances are overwhelmingly that they didn't want to read more
1
1
Replying to
11/ It's the same unbundling logic that killed the practice of bundling bad songs with hits and charging more. Just technically more complex
1
1
Replying to
12/ Yes you can game this in various ways, but overall it's good. More information, lower prices, more readers, bigger market
1
2
Replying to
13/ But why not try something utterly radical: if you want to write a 100,000 word tome, try to *retain the reader's attention* all the way
3
4
6
Replying to
what I'm concerned about is the incentives it could create for "cliff hanger" chapters, like "hooold on some more awesome stuff coming"
1
Replying to
Always been true. We're just blind to old incentives of books, alive to new "clickbait" incentives of blogs. This is just new.
1
Replying to
how did it use to be true? What incentive did the author use to have to make his book as long and the info as distributed as possible?
2

