One per day is enough. Inboxes are too full as it is. 3,000 paid on 13,000 total subs? Congrats on having the highest conversion rate on substack, nothing suspicious at all ;)
As a paid subscriber I think you should do what you think is best for you, not us. If the title of the post looks interesting I will read it (which is 99% of the time). Like you said you are a prolific writer. I don’t think you will lose subscribers by writing too much. We are more than capable to filter what we think is relevant.
One long newsletter I would be less inclined to read through… I enjoy a quick read every once in a while during the day just to be in the loop. (And I do love the three highlights at the end of the day, though I wouldn’t want that to get much longer). But that’s my selfish side that looks forward to your thoughts/humour/reflections.
You could post 15 times a day and I'd enjoy reading every one of them, but I understand the time constraints for you. Nonetheless, two things I enjoy the most about your writing are its snarky wit and its brevity. Please don't turn this Substack into a long single newsletter. I get too many of those already. Thanks again for all you do.
I enjoy YouTube, and your channel in particular. Love seeing and hearing your animated being. But, I grew up skimming text, and it's hard to skim a video. And, if I'm to keep up with your output, I need to read it, not watch it (not to diss your videos...it's me, not you). There are days when your post is a welcome respite from a boring meeting (I work at home, so I can surreptitiously enjoy your post while pretending to pay attention to the meeting).
As for quantity, I find the length of your posts just about perfect. I look forward to reading you a few times a day. But it does me no good if you burn out with a pace that's unsustainable. So, if you opt for a once-a-day post cadence, I more than respect that. I want you once a day, rather than not all because you burned out.
But, for me, the optimal cadence might be twice a day (if that's sustainable for you): A morning/mid-day "here are my present thoughts" post, and the evening recap that you started a few weeks ago (I do like those).
I want sustainable value, not unsustainable high quantity.
Keep up the good work, Chris. (Just saw my account is due to renew in 6 days, and I made sure my payment details were up to date so I could renew)
Yeah, I also checked “whatever Chris wants” because a big part of the answer is “what you’re passionate about and feel needs to be told”. The WRONG approach would be “I feel I HAVE to post this to earn my subscribers, even though (any of these) I don’t care much about it, have time to research it, or feel like writing it”
If you enjoy your current rate of work and if it is not interfering with other aspects of your life in terms of focus and commitment, I see no reason why you should do less with this and your other online activities. But if you are doing it out of a sense of compulsion or in ways that don't really match your current needs and wants, it might be worthwhile to at least experiment with backing off a bit. It's a decision only you can make.
I am mostly interested in the political emails, but I also enjoy reading Chris's random thoughts. Truth be told, I wasn't sure that I wanted to be a paid subscriber, but Chris has won me over, as I feel that I understand him more as a person.
I speak only for myself, but I find it easier to read content that is in 1 email. I like the emails that pop in during the day - they are sometimes a welcome break - but I am not committed to them as much. If you had one email that had several different topics, I could skim and dig deeper on the ones I want. If you want good examples of this for me, look at the various newsletters The Bulwark sends - I can read some good thoughts, dig deeper for more information, or just skim and move on.
That said, the content is great and I enjoy reading. Happy subscriber here.
I love opening SubStack and seeing a post from you. It’s a great short break a few times a day. Your posts are pithy, to the point, and (while I don’t always agree with you) include opinions based on actual facts. I wonder if I’d be able to read a long post other than on weekends. But mostly, it’s just nice to get a ‘knock on the door” from a ‘friend’ a few times a day.
Something urgent and very newsworthy(i.e. DJT’s death or incarceration) would deserve a 2nd email, otherwise, one email per day is sufficient.
One per day is enough. Inboxes are too full as it is. 3,000 paid on 13,000 total subs? Congrats on having the highest conversion rate on substack, nothing suspicious at all ;)
I voted for whatever Chris wants works for me. It's your newsletter and you're talented enough I trust your instincts.
Personally, I enjoy the multiple posts. It gives me something to look forward to throughout the day and I would miss that.
In an election year, there's a lot to cover and I enjoy getting your takes on everything. But please don't burn yourself out.
I started reading for the political stories because I knew you were a source I could trust.
However, I have a folder labeled 'inspiration' and several of your posts have been saved there.
I just think you're a talented writer and I appreciate both the political and the personal (from the heart) pieces that you send out.
I'll continue to be a paid subscriber regardless of quantity.
I'm in for the quality.
As a paid subscriber I think you should do what you think is best for you, not us. If the title of the post looks interesting I will read it (which is 99% of the time). Like you said you are a prolific writer. I don’t think you will lose subscribers by writing too much. We are more than capable to filter what we think is relevant.
We are with you either way buddy.
One long newsletter I would be less inclined to read through… I enjoy a quick read every once in a while during the day just to be in the loop. (And I do love the three highlights at the end of the day, though I wouldn’t want that to get much longer). But that’s my selfish side that looks forward to your thoughts/humour/reflections.
You could post 15 times a day and I'd enjoy reading every one of them, but I understand the time constraints for you. Nonetheless, two things I enjoy the most about your writing are its snarky wit and its brevity. Please don't turn this Substack into a long single newsletter. I get too many of those already. Thanks again for all you do.
As a fellow writer, I think Chris should write as much as he wants to or is comfortable with. Let the readers decide how much of it they can consume.
A few thoughts:
I enjoy YouTube, and your channel in particular. Love seeing and hearing your animated being. But, I grew up skimming text, and it's hard to skim a video. And, if I'm to keep up with your output, I need to read it, not watch it (not to diss your videos...it's me, not you). There are days when your post is a welcome respite from a boring meeting (I work at home, so I can surreptitiously enjoy your post while pretending to pay attention to the meeting).
As for quantity, I find the length of your posts just about perfect. I look forward to reading you a few times a day. But it does me no good if you burn out with a pace that's unsustainable. So, if you opt for a once-a-day post cadence, I more than respect that. I want you once a day, rather than not all because you burned out.
But, for me, the optimal cadence might be twice a day (if that's sustainable for you): A morning/mid-day "here are my present thoughts" post, and the evening recap that you started a few weeks ago (I do like those).
I want sustainable value, not unsustainable high quantity.
Keep up the good work, Chris. (Just saw my account is due to renew in 6 days, and I made sure my payment details were up to date so I could renew)
What I enjoy most is your takes on DJTs long speeches. And away we go …..
Yeah, I also checked “whatever Chris wants” because a big part of the answer is “what you’re passionate about and feel needs to be told”. The WRONG approach would be “I feel I HAVE to post this to earn my subscribers, even though (any of these) I don’t care much about it, have time to research it, or feel like writing it”
If you had an option of "change nothing" i would have selected that. "Whatever Chris wants works for me" may be the same thing?
If you enjoy your current rate of work and if it is not interfering with other aspects of your life in terms of focus and commitment, I see no reason why you should do less with this and your other online activities. But if you are doing it out of a sense of compulsion or in ways that don't really match your current needs and wants, it might be worthwhile to at least experiment with backing off a bit. It's a decision only you can make.
I am mostly interested in the political emails, but I also enjoy reading Chris's random thoughts. Truth be told, I wasn't sure that I wanted to be a paid subscriber, but Chris has won me over, as I feel that I understand him more as a person.
I speak only for myself, but I find it easier to read content that is in 1 email. I like the emails that pop in during the day - they are sometimes a welcome break - but I am not committed to them as much. If you had one email that had several different topics, I could skim and dig deeper on the ones I want. If you want good examples of this for me, look at the various newsletters The Bulwark sends - I can read some good thoughts, dig deeper for more information, or just skim and move on.
That said, the content is great and I enjoy reading. Happy subscriber here.
I love opening SubStack and seeing a post from you. It’s a great short break a few times a day. Your posts are pithy, to the point, and (while I don’t always agree with you) include opinions based on actual facts. I wonder if I’d be able to read a long post other than on weekends. But mostly, it’s just nice to get a ‘knock on the door” from a ‘friend’ a few times a day.