140 sats \ 2 replies \ @UCantDoThatDotNet 1 Apr \ on: Million Sat Madness v2 meta
This doesn't make sense to me. 100 is arbitrary and the algorithm didn't reward top contributors. There were people who only had one post get a reward? What if userbase doubles? You guys just vote on whether to reward 180 or 190 or 200 next time? Why not just simplify this and reward stackers with one sat per comment that got zapped, or one sat per post that didn't get outlawed, or at least do daily rewards as were done, while setting aside a million sats for games like this - not the whole rewards pool. Very disincentivizing. The last two weeks of the last month I had no chance so I just spent time elsewhere. I know I'm not the only one.
The last two weeks of the last month I had no chance so I just spent time elsewhere.
Two weeks is plenty of time to change your standings, but I'm more curious about why the zaps you'd have gotten for posting and commenting weren't attractive enough on their own.
reply
Sort of. After two weeks I was at zero, and the prospect of going all in at the expense of the rest of life to maybe get 50th place and 10,000 sats was not worth it. Then again, somebody won a prize with only one post I heard, so who knows.
The rewards are more incentive. Without daily rewards, there is less incentive. It's not all or nothing. It isn't that regular zaps isn't enough, it's that when that's all there is, there is less incentive, therefore I spend more time elsewhere (such as fiat job).
Rewards are 10% of the regular zaps redistributed to some people. Daily rewards meant, therefore, more than 10% more sats than usual - I guess 30% more since it was the top 1/3. MSM meant 0% almost guaranteed.
reply