pull down to refresh
Yes, that's what I thought too, but not sure if that's what he meant, and I'm sure that Undisc has given a lifetime more thought to these things than I.
FWIW, it's not (and cannot be) that everyone needs to spend 100k per day. If I had to do that in January, I would have had to spend more than my gross income that month, lol.
100 stackers 1k per day. 1000 stackers 100 sats per day. 10,000 stackers 10 sats per day... I had that discussion a week and a bit ago too: at larger scale, the equilibrium that Undisc was speaking to the other day is easier to sustain than when the total system is small. Excesses are harder to deal with at small scale, and worse, plutocracies may be a likely equilibrium.
So if someone were to say that in hindsight, no trust november was done too early, I would probably agree with that, even though it is a painful conclusion for me to admit.
Yes, 100 stackers averaging 1k per day doesn't seem at all unreasonable. I doubt we're far from 10 stackers averaging 10k and 100 stackers averaging 1k and 1k stackers averaging 100.
I don't think it was too early for this experiment. We learned a lot from it already, even if some of the lessons won't matter much at scale.
I meant it in the sense of it wouldn't take much to get there, especially if we start zapping harder to elevate signal through this extra noise, which we can afford because the noise is filling our bags.
Aaah yes, if only there wasn't something in SN's recent past that, like, cut the growth into nothingness and made it that much harder to spread to new people
True, but I suspect the onboarding process can be massively streamlined.
I've understood this point to be the same point as the one you made in #1438612
If everyone zaps with as much conviction as SS, one Stacker's downzaps become less influential.
Unfortunately, I don't think most people want to spend 100k sats a day expressing their social media preferences.