>it would be insane to let a private company dictate who gets to use the platform
It would be absurdly easy for anyone who has problems with Patreon to set up an alternative place. Though you still have to deal with payment processors.
Patreon is less a platform, and more just a hosting service. Saying someone banned from Patreon is shut off from this sort of service might be a bit of a stretch IMO.
This is dismissing its mindshare model. People recognize patreon. Once they use it once, the friction to support more artists is minimal. This means if you are someone who wants patrons for your work, you have to use Patreon. Not because of technical merit, but because that is where people are.
It isn't that bad yet. It hasn't taken off massively and conquered the universe like Facebook. But it is currently on track to. The only saving grace is that the usual onboarding is content discovery -> patreon rather than patreon -> content, but if they ever become a content platform and creators stop releasing their work anywhere but on patreon it spells the death of competition.
It would be absurdly easy for anyone who has problems with Patreon to set up an alternative place. Though you still have to deal with payment processors.
Patreon is less a platform, and more just a hosting service. Saying someone banned from Patreon is shut off from this sort of service might be a bit of a stretch IMO.