90 sats \ 1 reply \ @k00b 8 May 2022 \ parent \ on: Daily discussion thread
The main problem I have with this is
- the payment scheme goes from trivial to complex to describe
- if a user creates sock puppet account, they can reply to their other accounts for free, an unlimited amount of times
On point (1), if Alice creates a post, Bob replies to Alice, and then Carol replies to Bob. Who do Carol's sats go to? Bob? If Alice replies to Bob, do Alice's sats go to Bob? Right now we have a simple rule - the sats go to the site. I can describe it in one sentence. IMO that has a bunch of value.
Also, I get a ton of random questions on here. With this scheme I would be paying to answer users' questions (as would any other user helping another user), which is backwards. At least with the current scheme, the sats go somewhere trusted that redistributes those sats to other trusted sources.
yeah, there is a lot of value in the simplicity of the current scheme… i just wish it allowed me to use sats to protect my time & attention. this concept is already being used by reacher & vida, and it makes a ton of sense.
fiat never allowed us to earn for seconds or minutes of our time, lightning does. ‘no free distractions’ seems like a simple way of describing this policy.
the way i envision it is whoever creates a post should get sats for direct replies, and if i reply to a comment, payments should go to the person i’m directly replying to.
if you’re getting questions in response to your posts, you’d be earning sats based on the rate you set for replies. perhaps the same rule could be applied to tagging users too, so if someone tags you in their question, they need to pay to get your attention.
reply