Should the users get a lot? I'm certainly not here because I think it'll make me rich, I'm here because I think this is a valuable community whose insights and opinions matter to me. Our previous discussion about b-corps segues nicely with rob's insistence on open-sourcing. That Pando article about Digg v. Reddit also points out that Craigslist still exists because they never prioritized monetization. I think you guys are in an entirely different paradigm than Reddit in that you aren't interested in a sale and you aren't interested in getting a bunch of TED talks out of this - you want to build a lasting, worthwhile community that isn't a financial drain on you. That gives you a lot more leeway. I'm 100% sure Hubski can be operated at a profit such that it will provide for the livelihoods of those who devote their time to running it. Part of the reason is that I think it's a system with a great deal of extensibility and scalability; the other part is that because of how you've arranged it you just don't need a lot of staff. I'm equally 100% sure that Hubski will never be bought out for millions of dollars. If you're cool with that, the future is bright.
Of interest, Hubski is sitting at 45000 bits atm. However, there was one whale involved. What I am cool with is making something that lasts that wouldn't have otherwise existed. I'd really like to be able to pay the people that work on it too. I didn't expect that user revenue would ever be much more than the occasional sandwich, but that's because there just isn't that much to go around. It was intended as a gesture, and the ability to involve the users in an interesting way that stays alive. I don't want to beg like Jimmy Wales. It's funny, gaming Hubski for bits is just a terrible value proposition. I am also a fan of selective sharing pressure. IMO it is a important factor in the health of the site.