Welcome • User Guide
ToS • Privacy • Canary
Donate • Bugs • License

©2025 Poal.co

1.3K

All the features you need to make it legitimately useful are behind a 7 buck per month pay wall. Without paying up, it has little if any value IMHO. They got greedy. Had a decent amount of features been free, it would interest me and I might even subscribe ... but as it stands it's a total turn off.

All the features you need to make it legitimately useful are behind a 7 buck per month pay wall. Without paying up, it has little if any value IMHO. They got greedy. Had a decent amount of features been free, it would interest me and I might even subscribe ... but as it stands it's a total turn off.

(post is archived)

[–] • 8 pts

Agreed, and the fact that their platform is not open source only hurts their cause.

[–] • 6 pts

Yeah, first, 6.99 a month is a bit stiff to start with. Add to that that without paying up, all the features you need to actually make it useful are disabled. I don't see it having any future the way it's set up.

[–] • 6 pts

OP is right. Gab will fail because they have their staff plugging the site on several forums and social media. When people get to the Gab site they find out after registering that it is pretty lame without paying the $7 per month.

[–] • 5 pts

7 is way too high to ask.

That's more than Hulu costs for instance.

[–] • 5 pts

Well, lets be fair: Even though Poal or Voat might be the free speech platform Gab should be, we still have to self censor due to downvoting

[–] • 7 pts

I'm not against paying ... I just think Gab is asking too much, too soon. It's a bad business model. Since it's basically unusable for it's intended purpose without getting premium service, it doesn't allow a user base to grow to where it's actually worth it to pay up. Most people will walk away when they discover you can't really do the majority of it's functions and no user base means no point in existing.

[–] • 5 pts

I mean, do we really have to self-censor? Correct me if I'm wrong, but from what I understand the downvotes don't matter.

[–] • 2 pts

Suppose I began posting porn, or furry art, or other stuff that the natives considered "degenerate". The downvotes will flow. Poal at least doesn't stop your posting and upvoting ability for it, but still. respond to you also

[–] • 3 pts

Yeah, but my question is who cares about downvotes when they have little to no consequences?

I mean, fuck it. There are some cool people here but I generally don't fucking care what strangers on the internet think of me. If I post something on poal that people find genuinely objectionable and I get a metric fuckton of downvotes, that's rough. But no one would stop me, assuming it's not CP or the like.

[–] • 2 pts

Downvotes are for what people consider spam. I intentionally decided I did not want a system where something got hidden based on votes or restricted based on votes. Sorted okay. So I'm not sure that qualifies as censorship. Just my 2 cents

[–] • 4 pts

I'm curious what you mean by that? How do downvotes mean you have to self censor?

[–] [deleted] • 3 pts

The web-wide chat system thing is a really great idea.

Charging people for a twitter clone is a bad idea.

[–] • 2 pts

Gab doesn't use ad revenue. They rely off money from donations and Gab Pro

[–] • 3 pts

Yup ... you can't do a startup unless you have a user base ... and you'll never get a reasonable user base because you have all the functions that make it a credible platform disabled unless you sign up for a large fee.

[–] • 3 pts

Which is my point, I suppose. And if it's features are disabled unless you pay that fee, it will never get a strong following and is a pointless place to waste time and effort.

[–] • 2 pts

They can't use ad revenue. It would cause them to have to cave to advertisers on what the advertisers want.

But restricted access to stuff on the site, that could hurt user growth

[–] • 3 pts

Which makes it useless to the new user and gives zero incentive to sign on and pay up.

[–] • 2 pts

It is not worthless if it is helps someone, somewhere express views the mainstream will not allow. Worthless to you maybe. I'd leave it be and not attack folks who are fighting the same fight we are.

[–] • 2 pts

I'm trying to say that it's a bad business model and unless they open it up, as a million startups have done, it'll fail. Which BTW helps no one. As it stands, unless you pay them, it's useless, so any ideas expressed will get minimal, if any views/

[–] [deleted] • 1 pt

I find Gab pretty great and I haven't payed for anything