417 sats \ 6 replies \ @elvismercury 10 Mar \ on: Do you zap people who don’t zap back? meta
I am apparently endlessly interested in this topic. Here's where it sits now:
-
I zap the initial example of a thing (post or comment) that I think somebody has put non-trivial effort into, a number of sats proportional to what I have in my wallet, usually 100-300.
-
I zap subsequent exchanges in a conversation a smaller amount, to say: I appreciate you engaging with me in a thoughtful way, whether we agree or not.
-
If someone has made a particular effort, or said something extra brave or important, I will do a higher amount, subject to a calculation that is more animal spirits than anything.
The main thing I've noticed, in a way that I can't quantify bc I'm too lazy, is that generosity begets generosity to a point; but past a point, it does not. I've also noticed that since my wallet has been much reduced, that my own generosity is less. I believe both these dynamics to be broadly applicable.
Oh, one other thing I've noticed, that's taken like 6 months of pretty heavy activity to detect:
Zapping and zapping-back in conversation has definitely affected how I feel about relationships on the site. This is notable because in many cases it's roughly neutral -- neither I, nor my conversation partners, have made any money, or at least, the imbalance is probably tiny after all these months. But the feeling that is established is incredibly meaningful. In some cases, it's changed from a modest hostility on my part, to a substantial feeling of goodwill, just through these zaps and counter-zaps.
It reminds me, in a way, of a potlatch of ritual gift-giving. In fact, in many ways I understand the latter much better, after having been in this zapping economy for a while.
This seems like a non-trivial observation, since SN is often discussed as a way to earn sats, which it technically is. But much more powerful, in my experience, has been the pro-sociality that zapping sats back and forth has produced. Outside of potlatch, it reminds me of when you get to a point with a friend where you barely keep track of who's being beer or lunch or coffee. So even though you need money to do it, the power is not at all dependent on how much money you actually walk away with.
I'd be interested in other perspectives on this one bc the implications are large -- another way that psychology comes into play in this space.
reply
Thanks for sharing about potlatch!
Just to make myself clear, I don’t expect people to zap me back. But I do feel compelled to zap people who respond to my post. After reading how many Stackers provide information freely and don’t expect any sats, I realised how much I’m a product of my cultural upbringing. In Chinese culture, we have a custom of giving back. Heck, we even have a phrase for reciprocality: 礼尚往来. I got married to a Japanese lady whose culture binds her to return back gifts even more strongly than I do.
I agree with what you said. I might have started zapping because I felt obliged to. Now I zap because I want to. I sometimes feel bad when I don’t have enough for zapping purposes, but well, pay myself first haha
reply
You've given me another idea for a post. There's something to be unpacked about why reciprocal zapping is so pro-social, in contrast to how empty gifting or receiving cash feels (after a certain age, of course).
I've heard of family secret santa exchanges that devolve into just passing the same gift cards around every year.
reply
That would be a great topic. The intersection of incentives and motivations gets very dicey when it comes to money and esp to social constructions. Most people have a hazy idea that there's a difference btwn 'intrinsic' and 'extrinsic' but that tells you basically nothing except that you should pay attention.
reply
Yes a great topic to explore the impacts and actions of!
reply
I’m aghast haha.
But wouldn’t someone have written inside the gift card already? How to pass them around and recycle them?
Good for reducing our carbon footprint though
reply