reply on: Request for comments: improving our referral system \ stacker news ~meta

69 sats \ 4 replies \ @k00b OP 28 Jun \ parent \ on: Request for comments: improving our referral system meta

I dug it up: #506806

I was overthinking in my response. All a stacker needs to know is "I share links and get sats."

Your idea prevents gaming the timing of someone clicking on referral link too.

Here's another post from kr a few months earlier: #259322

@sorukumar shared an article that I missed.

0 sats \ 3 replies \ @Undisciplined 28 Jun

I forgot about @kr's suggestion to use "last person zapped". I like that, too.

42 sats \ 2 replies \ @k00b OP 28 Jun

We could even make it compatible with your idea and @ek's idea.

Any action/appreciation you inspired in another stacker, earns you a share of their referrals.

100 sats \ 1 reply \ @Undisciplined 29 Jun

From the article, it sounds like maybe SN referrals are working about as well as they can be expected to.

Expect less than 10% of your users to convert a successful referral.

Also, they recommend having a data scientist involved in the planning, although they don't say why exactly. If you figure out why you should have one, I volunteer my services.

42 sats \ 0 replies \ @k00b OP 29 Jun

Given how little time we've put into referrals, if we're already achieving 10%, we should be able to do a lot better.

I don't know why we'd need a data scientist yet but I volunteer to let you volunteer.