It's like you read my mind on the 5 fixes. And I value them all equally. I'm glad you're being a squeaky wheel on this. Is there something other people can do to amplify or reinforce what you're asking for. And I'm glad you still have confidence in Medium for the most part.

Having worked for Apple for 5 years in their software business (and my brother at Adobe for even more years), my impression is these changes might not be as easy as they seem. The functionalities are fairly off-the-shelf, but the changes to make them a seamless part of the Medium experience could be a very long list. As it is, Medium has a significant number imho of fixes to make on their current system to bring it up to snuff.

The question at the higher levels is: if they make the 5 fixes you recommend, will revenue increase to pay the coders to make them?

Similarly, if they move to higher quality content, will they lose more less intellectual subscribers than they gain more intellectual subscribers ?

Personally, I'd pay approaching double the annual subscription amount for higher quality content and the 5 fixes.

I wonder if it would pay off for them to have a premium subscriber level, with premium subscribers paying more to access better quality and functionality (the 5 fixes). There are more than a few multi-tiered subscription-based models out there.

When a business like Medium talks about improvements but is slow to make them, that can mean they *want* to make them but are nervous about return on investment (don't want to tip the applecart), and want to make sure the revenue growth opportunity is there. Of course, there are overly cautious organizations (like our local symphony orchestra) who slash investments at the slightest tremble of uncertainty.

Just my modest 2 cents.