Gather sucks - that seems to be the sentiment that echoed around the blogosphere earlier today. The news site, which aims to pay writers revenue share based on the value of their work, has raised $7 million in funding ($6 million in the last round). Now there are definitely some big questions about this offering. Firstly, what the heck are they going to spend all that VC funding on? Beanbags for the office? Gold-plated iPods for every member of staff? Free pony for every customer? (Yes please!) Secondly, there's the feeling that this "bottom up" service is being launched to a fanfare of media hype, with marketing spin galore - it's not so much about helping the little guy, but helping the little guy to help the big guy. And third - well, the site is just plain fugly.
But I'm still a big fan of revenue sharing, so I'm trying to figure out why Gather received so much criticism while a virtually identical site - Newsvine (sorry if you wanted in, I've used up my invites) - was broadly welcomed. Is it because Newsvine is well-designed and seemingly more interactive than Gather? Or is it that Newsvine is modest and unhyped, while Gather is everything a bottom-up organization shouldn't be (ie. arrogant and over-funded)?. I sincerely hope that people aren't going off the idea of revenue sharing altogether, because I honestly think people should get paid if they work hard at something and do a good job. But maybe I'm out of sync here? Thoughts?