pull down to refresh

In light of what @k00b said in #1431816, I think that it makes more sense to remove downzaps than to give attention to the trolling.

It just means that territories must be moderated (maybe?)
And that boosts ought to be killed

101 sats \ 46 replies \ @DarthCoin 8h

Remove the rewards at all.
Right now most of SN users are zapping because they know will receive rewards every day.
SN rewards are exactly the same as gov subsidies. Is a vicious circle.

reply
122 sats \ 44 replies \ @optimism 8h

Just pass it to SN? I'd be fine with that.

reply
108 sats \ 41 replies \ @DarthCoin 8h

From 2024: #796213

reply
134 sats \ 40 replies \ @optimism 8h

Yes - with current rewards ignoring content creators, it's simply cashback for zappers, and that's a silly use-case.

reply

The purpose of rewards has always been to incentivize zapping good content.

Those zaps are the incentive to make good content.

People barely zap anything on nostr because there’s no incentive to do so.

reply
164 sats \ 34 replies \ @optimism 7h

If you're making back more from zapping than you zap, while only 9% of the total zap value goes to rewards, then the zaps can only come from:

  1. subsidy / donations
  2. downzaps
  3. other zappers zapping too late and learning that there is no point to zap unless you're the first in new.
reply
79 sats \ 14 replies \ @adlai 4h
  1. other zappers zapping too late and learning that there is no point to zap unless you're the first in new.

what else am I supposed to do with CCs though?

I don't comment [let alone post] quickly enough to spend the amount I do get.

I guess I could coalesce my zapping into fewer, larger, zaps, and bias towards only zapping sufficiently new items; however that'd mean I'd forego zapping most of the items that I liked.

reply
277 sats \ 10 replies \ @optimism 4h
what else am I supposed to do with CCs though?

Ideally? Just zap content that is valuable to you. Same with your sats. Someone writes something nice, be decent and zap them. No gamifications required for showing appreciation for content.

The problem is that for the zaps to carry signal and be a meaningful indicator of quality content during discovery, all these additional subsystems like sybil fees have been introduced. And rewards because no one likes 9% tax, and then boosts, and then downzapping, and so on and so on.

All I'm saying is that if the purpose of rewards are a discount to zappers, then every zapper should be rewarded equally. But that's not the case, as zaps are rewarded through artificial inequality. It's a discount to some zappers, which I believe is where Darth is coming from in the comparison to state subsidy.

In the end, those ignorant to the gaming of the system are paying a 9% tax to the benefit of a few that could be.

(edit: changed to 9% because that's the effective rate on zaps, the other 21% is actual tax)

Do you mainly sort by Lit or New?

You can boost your posts with CCs

  1. It doesn’t have to be from zapping too late. Zapping “bad” content is also a cause.
  2. You’re ignoring the portion of fees and boosts that go to rewards.
  3. It’s not necessary to get back more than is zapped. The rewards make zapping cheaper, which means we get more of it.
reply
188 sats \ 3 replies \ @optimism 7h
  1. "bad" content = content that is impopular. So you get rich when instead of zapping the content that you like when you see it, monitoring new and predicting what the most popular posts will be. Even easier, just subscribe to popular stackers and race to zap them first. This works because I have tested it. It means y'all don't need predyx, because you have SN for all your "financial gain for getting it right". Is that "the frontpage of bitcoin"? Or degen paradise?
  2. boosts are self-subsidy.
  3. That's purely psychological. If everyone optimizes for this system, then you get exactly the discount you paid for yourself, thus rewards are greater fool gainz. predatory?
101 sats \ 13 replies \ @DarthCoin 7h

By taking sats from a pool you are literally taking sats that WEREN'T destined to your content.

160 sats \ 2 replies \ @ek 6h

I'll just leave this here: #770966

reply

Really good post and several very interesting comments that I hadn’t seen.

Do you still like this solution? I’m probably more amenable to it than I was at the time.

reply
64 sats \ 0 replies \ @ek 6h

I’ll reply when I have more time.

Exactly like I said: gov subsidies.
You are promoting a bad behavior.
If something is really good it will be zapped. With the sats that deserve it. From users that like to see that content.

Rewards pool is exactly like gov taxes / subsidies.
In a true V4V market, only the good survive, not the gov employees and those subsidized.

By supporting the SN rewards you just show how statist you are and not as libertarian as you want to pose for. You just want to take from others what is not YOURS.

reply
101 sats \ 1 reply \ @sox 2h

reply
reply

I respectfully disagree. Zaps and rewards are one of the things that makes SN great. The ability to send sats and receive them and use LN... Is what makes SN unique.

I would 'make more' at MacDonald's that is not why most are here imo

reply

I don't think this is really a case of bad feedback!

reply
33 sats \ 14 replies \ @optimism 8h

You're saying that 99% of current downzaps are not bad feedback? If that is true, then why was this volume of downzaps never seen before?

reply

What I'm saying is, good content gets slept on for no reason. dZAPS aren't even about the content.

reply
75 sats \ 12 replies \ @optimism 8h

Exactly. The feature is being abused. The first thing you ask about features that are bad is: what does it fix?

Downzaps fix 2 things:

  1. Counteract self-importance through boosts
  2. Counteract scammers / slopbots

So the question is, is a simpler system possible where there are no downzaps? And the answer is yes. Slash boosts, moderate territories. Mute territories that aren't well maintained. Mute stackers that mess with your peace. And done.

reply

Yeah, people are kinda abusing this feature. Still don’t think we need mods stepping in. We just need a simple way to see what’s getting hate, just because some people don’t like it doesn’t mean everyone feels the same.

reply
33 sats \ 10 replies \ @optimism 8h

Not kinda, it's provably mostly abuse.

Fun fact: 🐎🔫 authors are downzapped hardest, so it's not even principled in nature, it's demagoguery. If a feature enables that, then it's a bad feature.

Still don’t think we need mods stepping in.

I don't like that either, but not doing it means that scammers will have a paradise - and moderation is a feature already.

reply
If a feature enables that, then it's a bad feature.

I don’t agree. Take war weapons for example, when someone gets killed with a gun, is it the manufacturer’s fault or the person who pulled the trigger?

reply
135 sats \ 8 replies \ @optimism 7h

I'm not assigning liability.

I'm observing that there has been a stream of feature upon feature to fine-tune something that now leads to a plutocratic community, where the rich control the entire experience of SN. While that may be a valid outcome of "money is the (only) moderator", I am not sure if that makes the reason why I am here (sharing great content with interesting people) still valid.