reply on: SN Million Sats Madness: Scarcity or Abundance Mindset \ stacker news ~meta

107 sats \ 7 replies \ @oliverweiss 1 Mar \ on: SN Million Sats Madness: Scarcity or Abundance Mindset meta

64 Stackers only? Really?

It incentivizes us to turn on each other. Divide and conquer. It's a good way to discourage new stackers.

97 sats \ 3 replies \ @cryotosensei OP 2 Mar

I agree with all the points you mention. It takes some time to get used to the vibes of the sub; new stackers may leave because of the lack of the pull factor offered by the Daily rewards. I also think that if it’s meant to be, some of them will find their way home. I joined SN in Dec 2022, but it wasn’t until Nov last year that I really put in the labour of love required to understand the sub and its eccentric ways xP.

I’n with Atreus. It’s a month-long experiment (I thoughtfully omitted the way ‘just’ even though that’s how it goes in my mind haha). I feel that it will bring about more posts since people don’t want to lose out. It’s like how diamonds are formed. Put them under pressure and they showcase their ability to preserve their grace and strength. It’s also like how I promptly posted on ~Bitcoinbeginners after you announced your new initiative.

Let’s have fun. I promise to cheer you on even if you beat me left right n centre

264 sats \ 2 replies \ @siggy47 2 Mar

I just think it screws up incentives, which are so important to Stacker News. Truth be told, I didn't like the random rewards that just ended either. I felt like it encouraged attempts at gaming the system and I never heard a good argument in favor of it. This is much worse, in my opinion. I see no benefit. It's human nature to try to win. This contest is easy to game. I like to think I wouldn't do that. I don't think you would either, or the other stackers I have gotten to know here. That's not the point. We're bitcoiners, seeking trustless systems, and now this contest requires a good deal of trust. It also pits stackers against each other. It excludes less successful stackers. It screws up stacker cash flows that some here count on. Rent is coming up for most territory owners in four days and a source of income has been arbitrarily removed without warning. I know people disagree with me, but I think it's a terrible idea. I don't see any upside.

109 sats \ 1 reply \ @cryotosensei OP 2 Mar

Thank you for your reply. Now I understand that you are upset (?) because the competition runs counter to what you believe should be the differentiating feature of a BTC-related platform: trustlessness. Hence, if we were to follow strictly the ethos of BTC, we would not have let this experiment have a place.

I agree and I also think differently. Now that SN is flourishing better than ever, I think it’s a good idea to run a stress test to determine how Stackers were to respond if certain structures were gone. Of course, there is the saying “if it isn’t broken, don’t fix it”, but let’s say there comes a point in time where Daily rewards have to be sacrificed to pay for operational costs, will we Stackers adapt well to it?

My two sats’ worth

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @siggy47 2 Mar

Stacker News is a great place, and it runs better because it's not entirely trustless. We all accept this. I wouldn't single that out as the main reason I don't like this experiment. I said my peace. I'll deal with it. I still love this place.

76 sats \ 0 replies \ @oliverweiss 3 Mar

This. And also you would need to be here all the time and add content, comment, whatnot. Let’s see how this goes.

76 sats \ 0 replies \ @0xbitcoiner 3 Mar

I see your point. If a stacker doesn't have a chance of making it to the top 64, they won't be motivated to zap.