A musing about terminology: SuperFans

[aldersprig]

So, when I was started Alder by Post, just about a year ago, I was playing around with the idea of some sort of term for donors who gave me more money/time/etc. than the average, and kept coming back to SuperUser... which I don't really like, because "user" suggests a different relationship than I really have with my readers.

(SuperReader?)

In looking at my 2012 finances, I think I need another term. Über-user, maybe?



That being said... Thank you. Thank all of you, who read, donated, boosted signals, prompted, commented, and generally helped me do this.

You're awesome people... and you're all super fans. <3

Comments

Thoughts

[ysabetwordsmith]

I call mine k-fans, from the idea of having 1,000 fans who each spend $100/year. That's out of "1,000 True Fans" by Kevin Kelly. I really disliked the term "true fans" because it implies that those with less money to spend are lesser fans. I don't see it that way. It's possible for someone to have a huge impact without spending lots of money, if they comment/prompt/link avidly.

However, the big donors also have a major impact because they influence so much of what gets published. I had 11 k-fans last year. When I started the Poetry Fishbowl project, I wasn't expected to have ANY, although I did believe I could sell stuff direct to fans. What surprised me even more is that people went OVER that level, some of them by quite a lot.

The really avid supporters are a vital part of crowdfunding, and well worth discussing.