Is there no way to put more emphasis on quality rather than quantity of writing?
I feel like this community doesn’t lack prolific writers, if anything there’s too much to read. I probably only manage to read about 15% of my Substack subscriptions, and I use AI to summarize another 15%.
Wouldn’t it be interesting to experiment with something like one post every five days with a length limit, and at the end of each cycle a jury evaluates the posts? Then, for example, the six lowest-rated writers leave. I haven’t thought this through deeply, it’s just an idea for a more quality-centered structure.
Is there no way to put more emphasis on quality rather than quantity of writing?
I feel like this community doesn’t lack prolific writers, if anything there’s too much to read. I probably only manage to read about 15% of my Substack subscriptions, and I use AI to summarize another 15%.
Wouldn’t it be interesting to experiment with something like one post every five days with a length limit, and at the end of each cycle a jury evaluates the posts? Then, for example, the six lowest-rated writers leave. I haven’t thought this through deeply, it’s just an idea for a more quality-centered structure.
I think Inkhaven is aiming at quality via the pathway of quantity. See the experiment by Jerry Uelsmann[1]
https://austinkleon.com/2020/12/10/quantity-leads-to-quality-the-origin-of-a-parable/