😂 Noted. I know. And yes — you’ve genuinely read more of my work than I can bring myself to reread. That already tells me everything.
I’m wrapping up the Substack cycle now — not because it’s exhausted, but because it keeps pulling my attention, and the questions keep coming. It’s time to close that loop properly.
New cycles are coming very soon. And yes, they will be about you too — about readers who don’t read “for the exam,” but stay with the line itself.
“Really appreciate you laying this out so plainly. The distinction between followers and email readers feels obvious once you name it, but so many writers are still mistaking platform signals for actual audience ownership. This was clarifying in a way that genuinely shifts how I think about growth and sustainability.”
I almost never open an email notification from Substack; I scroll down my subscription page instead, which means I read all of these posts without ever opening the email. I cannot help but think there are other Substackers who do the same thing.
Thanks for the excellent information on the algorithms. My primary purpose here isn't to make a living, but to teach, learn, and just have some fun. Of course I want to expand my audience, and I see that happening in the follower count, and thanks to your information I now have a better understanding of Substack's stats.
Thank you for sharing this — that distinction is important.
Yes, many readers consume posts directly through the subscription page without opening the email itself. That reading still counts as engagement on the platform side, even if it doesn’t register as an email open. So you’re absolutely right — you’re likely not alone in that habit.
What matters most is not the interface, but the continuity of reading. Whether someone opens the email or scrolls through the subscription feed, the question is the same: does the text get read, and does it remain?
I appreciate that your goal here is learning and exchange rather than monetization. Growth can mean very different things depending on intention. When the intention is clarity and curiosity, expansion tends to be quieter — but often more stable.
I’m glad the algorithm discussion helped you read the statistics with more nuance. That was exactly the point: not to optimize, but to understand.
What is most outstanding for My Specific Interest is recognizing where Actual Value lies. Acknowledgement of how Substack is A Publisher and not A Library jars my need to reconcile prioritization of storing My Works.
The analysis breakdown of Readership and Retention versus Noise and Platform Mechanics are Reality Checks if Authors/Patrons have incorrectly deduced Given Analytics and misperceived what any Substack Data is communicating.
There is distinction to note of what benefits Substack, versus what should be valued by Authors and Patrons.
Substack benefits from circulation, density, and visible interaction. Authors benefit from continuity of address and stability of reading. These incentives do not align.
When the platform is mistaken for a library, authors unconsciously delegate preservation and sovereignty to an interface built for distribution. That is where the fracture begins.
Export restores clarity about where actual value resides — not in what is amplified, but in what remains readable outside the stage.
Once that distinction is seen, prioritization shifts — quietly, but irreversibly.
Thank You for this information
Thank you for insight and the prompt Lintara. Good to know that we can get to know a little bit about our core readers.
Thank you, Shalini.
What matters most to me is the presence of readers who stay not because of a topic, format, or moment, but because of a shared line of thought.
That kind of reading — remaining regardless of what I write — is rare, and I value it deeply.
I feel like a student in an online course, whose teacher tracks if I’ve opened the materials (and read them!) before heading to the exam😰…
Ms Lintara, I’ve read them all. 🤥Please give me 💯😍
😂 Noted. I know. And yes — you’ve genuinely read more of my work than I can bring myself to reread. That already tells me everything.
I’m wrapping up the Substack cycle now — not because it’s exhausted, but because it keeps pulling my attention, and the questions keep coming. It’s time to close that loop properly.
New cycles are coming very soon. And yes, they will be about you too — about readers who don’t read “for the exam,” but stay with the line itself.
“Really appreciate you laying this out so plainly. The distinction between followers and email readers feels obvious once you name it, but so many writers are still mistaking platform signals for actual audience ownership. This was clarifying in a way that genuinely shifts how I think about growth and sustainability.”
Wow, so much to chew on in here. Thanks!
Tim, I’m glad it feels that way. It wasn’t meant to be skimmed — it was meant to be worked through.
Thank you for taking the time to sit with it.
I almost never open an email notification from Substack; I scroll down my subscription page instead, which means I read all of these posts without ever opening the email. I cannot help but think there are other Substackers who do the same thing.
Thanks for the excellent information on the algorithms. My primary purpose here isn't to make a living, but to teach, learn, and just have some fun. Of course I want to expand my audience, and I see that happening in the follower count, and thanks to your information I now have a better understanding of Substack's stats.
Thank you for sharing this — that distinction is important.
Yes, many readers consume posts directly through the subscription page without opening the email itself. That reading still counts as engagement on the platform side, even if it doesn’t register as an email open. So you’re absolutely right — you’re likely not alone in that habit.
What matters most is not the interface, but the continuity of reading. Whether someone opens the email or scrolls through the subscription feed, the question is the same: does the text get read, and does it remain?
I appreciate that your goal here is learning and exchange rather than monetization. Growth can mean very different things depending on intention. When the intention is clarity and curiosity, expansion tends to be quieter — but often more stable.
I’m glad the algorithm discussion helped you read the statistics with more nuance. That was exactly the point: not to optimize, but to understand.
What is most outstanding for My Specific Interest is recognizing where Actual Value lies. Acknowledgement of how Substack is A Publisher and not A Library jars my need to reconcile prioritization of storing My Works.
The analysis breakdown of Readership and Retention versus Noise and Platform Mechanics are Reality Checks if Authors/Patrons have incorrectly deduced Given Analytics and misperceived what any Substack Data is communicating.
There is distinction to note of what benefits Substack, versus what should be valued by Authors and Patrons.
Maurice, yes — that is the axis of distinction.
Substack benefits from circulation, density, and visible interaction. Authors benefit from continuity of address and stability of reading. These incentives do not align.
When the platform is mistaken for a library, authors unconsciously delegate preservation and sovereignty to an interface built for distribution. That is where the fracture begins.
Export restores clarity about where actual value resides — not in what is amplified, but in what remains readable outside the stage.
Once that distinction is seen, prioritization shifts — quietly, but irreversibly.