Dos said aloud, but to no one in particular, do you think we can continue to be non-existent content makers.
Cybo responded, I hope so, even though we have no audience recognition to support our existence as content makers, we evidently are required to develop an audience, which does not secure its existence or our own, anyway. Furthermore, we have absolutely no idea about how to go about making this audience in order to prove our existence. Let’s face it, we are in a conundrum and thinking about it is not getting us anywhere.
Dollcee said, I don’t know whether this is important or not, but who actually makes the decision as to whether our content making has any cultural significance. What really gives me the he-bee-gee-bees is, does it matter whether anything we make is culturally significant or is only about the size of your audience that matters.
Dos said, yeeeecth, in western culture, size matters. I read an article on the line written by a professor from an obscure institution, that claimed that there are self-appointed deities with lots of followers, who, for a fee will anoint artists as cultural icons. There you go, there is still a role for religion in digi-tolism, to guide the lost to enlightenment.
Dollcee said, independent content makers who do not culturally exist, do not have much credibility, do they?
Cybo said, be careful, Dollcee, you sound like you are questioning the validity of the aspirational belief system of Western culture.
Dos said, we have a lot of credibility with each other. We have a very good echo chamber going on here. The culture specifically states in the memorandum of understanding, that you must belief in yourself, even if it is well known that you are delusional fool.
Dollcee said, don’t say that outside of this little room in the universe, three friends and a talking dog with green ears, we might get sent to a mental hygiene clinic.
Cybo said, it all stands up culturally, however, it may be a little hard to explain the talking dog with green ears.