I'd like to pitch a not-so-new but oh-so-thrilling format into SN, namely a recurring lottery.
I've gave this some quick split-second thoughts and came up with the following;
RulesRules
One can enter the lottery (which is a simple post one can zap x-amount to) each Monday (00:01) until Friday (23:59).
One "ticket" costs 100 Sats, e.g;
500 Sats zapped are equal to 5 "tickets", thus 5 chances of winning for that particular nym.
Minimum amount to enter: 100 Sats.
Each Saturday a winner will be picked through the following method; https://namepicker.net/
Tying back to the example above;
Nym "A" zapped 500 Sats, obtained 5 tickets and thus the respective nym is entered five times in the list, enabling five chances of winning the pot.
Each zapper has to provide a comment (pic) displaying the amount zapped.
- That's the only way I could come up with which ensures that nobody cheats.
100% of Satoshis are paid out to the winner, what's in it for me? Possible Rewards.
I'm also excluded from the lottery, thus I can't "pick" myself as the "winner".
Possible changesPossible changes
Increase / decrease "ticket" costs. (Comment).
Change the duration of the lottery, making it run 3 days, 14 days or 28 days instead, as an example. (Comment).
I think it'd be a nice addition, but since it's my idea, this should not come as a surprise. 🤫
Other inspirations have their home in the comments.
I really think this is not advisable. It is not good for anyone to have Stacker News become a gambling site.
Agreed. This brings all the wrong sort of attention to SN. I have no idea of the regulatory risk with regard to geography of users and I really don’t want to have to find out.
It's not thought of as an implementation to SN directly, more something i'd organize myself.
Well, there are enough low-effort posts on SN which are solely featuring a link to some article or blog, with which the OP also "gamble's" for Satoshis, to some extent at least.
Maybe this would reduce some of those types of posts, featuring a clear place to pursue Satoshis.
I can sort of see your point, though I think it's a stretch.
More importantly, this would put Stacker News in legal jeopardy, IMO.
I'm fine with it. You do you, buyer beware, etc...
Would you be taking a chance too?
Probably, but I prefer the Stacker Sports contests that aren't just entirely random chance.
Oh, any links?
Here's the last one: #394059
I'm sure there will be another one posted soon.
Cool!
Sports betting ain't my thing though, but cool.
You could just randomly pick an answer though. That would make it just as meaningful as a randomized lottery. That's what I do for the sports I don't follow. ;)
That's true.
Focus on providing value, not gambling.
No. Hurts my feelings? No. It hurts SN. But you do you etc etc…
Calm down, Tiger.
I like it the idea but I think we are treading in murky waters. I would suggest you discuss with @k00b and ensure he is ok with the legality of it.
Go ahead, slap me (metaphorically speaking) across my face if need be!
@k00b
Nah... *check votes* frickn' degens!
😉
It would be organized by me, it's not ment as a full-fledged implementation to SN.It would be organized by me, it's not ment as a full-fledged implementation to SN.
Nostr probably more appropriate for this but you'd need a more robust implementation.
Sounds like fun
“The Lottery, with its weekly pay-out of enormous prizes, was the one public event to which the proles paid serious attention. It was probable that there were some millions of proles for whom the Lottery was the principal if not the only reason for remaining alive. It was their delight, their folly, their anodyne, their intellectual stimulant. Where the Lottery was concerned, even people who could barely read and write seemed capable of intricate calculations and staggering feats of memory. There was a whole tribe of men who made their living simply by selling systems, forecasts, and lucky amulets.”
George Orwell said all you need to know about lotteries. They are in their true form just fiat BS undermining proof-of-work.
We are stackers. You are lucky Darthcoin is not around 😅
The above doesn't change a thing to that.
Providing a picture isn’t sufficient evidence of voting. they could be fabricated.