I read this and immediately think: why go through that trouble when you can just have this as a feature that is an optional part of curating a playlist. Like, if you make a playlist, there is a WYSIWYG editor where the curator can optionally write about the selections they chose, the overarching theme of the playlist, how they discovered these artists, etc. Make it clear it is optional. This lives on platform as something tied to this listener’s profile. It also could be tied back to an artist to show “playlists they appear on” somewhere on the artist’s profile.
IMO, this also starts to kick the tires at other unique ways listeners can approach music discovery within resonate. If they find a playlist because they came across it somewhere on the site, they might add a song or two from it to their own playlists, follow other artists they have discovered, and they also might choose to follow the listener/curator that created it. Using Community Credentials, you could even show how compatible each listener’s taste is to one another based on the songs they each respectively verifiably own. This simultaneously builds a more robust social network for the platform, which further encourages participation from all parties.
As far as making this clear in the UI/UX, maybe upon submission of the playlist and the filled out write-up, there is a checkbox that the curator can choose to tick that says like “by checking this box, i allow resonate to feature my playlist” with a little “?” tooltip after that to provide more info that outlines how that process works. this elevates curators and incentivizes sharing. it elevates and highlights artist work on the platform. and it does both of these things in community-centric ways. this is basically what people are already doing on massively popular sites like rate your music. This marks an important distinction in that it’s highlighting fan’s and curator’s voices, rather than having a top down “gatekeep-y” editorial component (lol, and listen, I knooowww I advocated for that in my initial post above lol, BUT, i think this would be easier to bootstrap and get off the ground and would also allow users to talk in their own voices, rather than having to worry about resonate publishing this stuff adhering to an editorial standard which the common layperson is gonna miss more often than they hit). Plus I think these are mutually exclusive ideas and they could exist side-by-side eventually.
to take this a step further, if a curator’s/listener’s write-up is featured on the platform in some way, then maybe this ties into point 6 in my OP:
Just riffin’ here!