I find this logic quite interesting.

Why should Reddit not make money?

No one is saying they shouldn't make money. It is our right to gripe about it when they do so in an annoying or obnoxious manner. We might even abandon the platform if the advertising push becomes too obnoxious. If that happens and they fold, apparently they did not have a viable business model. There is no "should" about any of it.

Yup. See Digg.

> There is no "should" about any of it.

Of course there is. Objective functions can be utilitarian or deeply selfish, but "should" pushes them in someone's desired direction. Relativism is tautological and intentionally or not, condescending.

Ideally they would make money by making a better product, not neuter their existing good product to force users to use the worse but more lucrative product

There's just one robust metric for "better," and that's market cap, which is generally tied to current and future profits.

If you're an investor, sure. If you're a user there is unquestionably situations where a product gets worse as it gets more market cap

What do you see in the parent comment that says they _shouldn't_ do this? It's just laying out that they _are_ doing it, in direct response to a comment wondering why their site is so terrible.

Their method of making money has directly contributed to a nosedive in the quality of their products. I frankly consider this a kind of rarely documented market failure.

There's just one robust metric for "quality," and that's market cap, which is generally tied to current and future profits.

By what reasoning?

Brainwashed capitalism reasoning :D

(America at least) conditioned to think market caps and stock markets and GDP are the only meaningful metric.