reply on: what is the best way to judge SN contests \ stacker news ~AskSN

pull down to refresh

252 sats \ 15 replies \ @k00b 7h \ on: what is the best way to judge SN contests AskSN

One of the things I'm hoping to do is allow territory founders to remove trust in ranking. Our sybil fee is high enough that we might be over-indexed on trust as-is.

110 sats \ 11 replies \ @optimism 7h

I think this could be useful. Any post you, ek or undisciplined interacts with is per definition top-ranked.

100 sats \ 10 replies \ @billytheked OP 7h

agreed --but what incentive would territory owners have to enable this feature if they know others might not --would be like shooting themselves in the foot would it not

121 sats \ 0 replies \ @Scoresby 7h

I'd imagine removing trust allows the territory to show posts purely ranked by number of sats zapped.

Since 30% of a zap goes to the community pool, it would be expensive for a poster to self-zap in order to reach the top of such a feed.

The question is, would it be expensive enough to stop self-zappers from dominating the rankings when the rankings are solely based on number of sats zapped?

100 sats \ 5 replies \ @billytheked OP 7h

e.g. i notice ai posts that ek or k00b comments on get ranked 'hot' more than in other territories

the incentive then is to maximize my own rewards by zapping more ai content isnt it

0 sats \ 4 replies \ @optimism 7h

I really don't know so maybe someone else knows. I don't really care about rewards that much myself so in general I think I get too much rewards compared to people that may write more interesting content. I don't think I have a lot of trust (shouldn't trust me, because don't trust, verify) so my zapping content doesn't really help people.

100 sats \ 3 replies \ @SimpleStacker 7h

In the ~AI territory, it's funny to say this, but actually all trust stems from you, you are the source of all trust in ~AI haha

However, trust is territory-specific, so if you don't have much engagement in other territories, you would have very little trust in those territories.

0 sats \ 2 replies \ @optimism 7h

Ah! But I was constructing this against global trust - if there's such a thing? I should really just not be lazy and read the algo.

100 sats \ 0 replies \ @SimpleStacker 6h

Oh, you're right I think there is a global trust graph as well, which I'm guessing is used for the main hot and top sorts. Yeah for that it all emanates from @k00b and @ek I think haha. Wasn't entirely clear when weightedVotes is used vs. subWeightedVotes

100 sats \ 0 replies \ @k00b 6h

SimpleStacker's post explaining trust is a great starting point whether you read the algo or not: #916035

11 sats \ 2 replies \ @optimism 7h

Depends on whether it influences main page hot? If it would be territory hot, then there's no foot-shooting?

210 sats \ 1 reply \ @k00b 7h

It would just affect a territory's hot unless it proved superior to some trust-cost combo.

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @billytheked OP 6h

interesting --from the contest ranking standpoint it seems beneficial --specially if paired with reliable judges --curious what do you see as being the main advantages of a move in this direction

113 sats \ 2 replies \ @Undisciplined 7h

I've been meaning to mention that there's something odd about the trust algorithm when it comes to posts from highly trusted stackers.

Since you can't zap your own posts, their posts don't incorporate the information that they themselves like it. For ranking purposes, it might make sense to act as though the poster had zapped the post when they created it.

144 sats \ 1 reply \ @k00b 7h

I agree. How this should work exactly is unclear enough that I haven't changed it.

How many sats should we assume the poster zapped their own post? Should a post that hasn't been zapped by anyone else appear in hot or top?

42 sats \ 0 replies \ @SimpleStacker 7h

For zaprank, I don't think the poster is taken into account, since it's just trust * log_10(zap amount)

For trust calculations, IIRC it is assumed that the poster zapped their own post by the amount equal to the posting fee.

My only concern with this is that hot and top will just be populated by the same few stackers all the time, thus centralizing the forum even further.