pull down to refresh
13 sats \ 1 reply \ @Majjin 21 Mar 2022 \ on: Is “Value for Value” fatally flawed? bitcoin
I don't think that value for value is a flawed concept. I just think that we haven't found optimal implementations of it yet. Explicit prices could very well be an important part of this model.
Take the Humble Indie Bundle for example. It has "send us whatever you think" model. However there are set price tiers. Depending on the tier you choose, you get a certain amount of content.
To make it more compatible with the value for value idea, content creators could simply have a floor price that the audience must give if they so choose. For example, I write an article and at the end I have an invoice for a minimum of 100 sats. The audience is free to ignore the ask and consume the content for free. Those that want more content in the future can pay 100 sats or more to sponsor the creator. 100 sats is effectively the price. The content creator can play with the amount to optimize the amount of sats he or she receives for each piece of content.
I agree with this but I don't think it is how Adam Curry conceives of Value for Value.
reply