I understand the problem you tried to solve in creating a value based system.
And I understand your point that for good content to be elevated it needs people willing to read it and zap it early.
I just find it odd that the system so heavily values early zapping alone as a metric that someone can do this.
I don’t think 100 stackers trying to do what they are doing would be good for SN.
Yes there is a cost to trying to do what they are doing but after it works once they are playing with house money because they zapped 400 sats and got 4800 in rewards. That gives them a lot of runway and every day they are in a net profit it further encourages the behaviour.
they zapped 400 sats and got 4800 in rewards.
That too on a daily basis! How can someone be so accurately zapping daily? Can you do it? I can't.
reply
I don’t think 100 stackers trying to do what they are doing would be good for SN.
I believe this would actually fix the problem and it's why I'm not too worried about it.
My understanding is that part of the outlandishly large return is that it's very important to be first. If many more people were attempting this strategy, they would eat into each other's winnings and all would be lower in rewards ranking. It also makes a big difference coming in as the top zapper vs the 2nd or 3rd, so more people trying this would rapidly make it less fruitful.
We saw this with a certain vampire character a few months ago and that fizzled out.
reply
It was an exaggeration. But in that case you are right if everyone was doing it it wouldn’t work. My broader point was if everyone was trying to optimize for sats rewards in the most efficient way it wouldn’t make for a very great SN experience
reply
No, I've tried it. It didn't work for me.
reply
I agree with that.
What I would say is that since this strategy doesn't scale, it isn't a big problem. At most, one person can make significant rewards this way, while everyone else gets rewarded for normal good behavior.
I'd argue that it's acceptable for the rewards system to have this minor vulnerability, if it works like we'd want it to otherwise.
reply
We all just need to downzap the behaviour. Once it is not longer profitable for him he will stop.
People are downzappimg and he is down to 10.
reply
What if the next malfeasor never posts or comments?
reply
They could hide. I guess at that point the community wouldn’t know and it would up to k00b if he wanted to deal with them.
reply
We'd still see them on the leaderboard.
I think I'm just missing something, because I wouldn't expect downzapping to work the way it seems to be.
reply
Maybe it doesn't and I misattributed his decline to downzapping. Possibly since he has not been active for many hours the posts he gained his value score on are waning in their weighting.
Downzapping top posts he zapped :) easy
reply
You solved it!
reply
Finally downzapping worked today! I've been downzapping him for 3 days. But, I still don't view it to be the result of downzapping. It's may be because he's just disappeared for some time now. No superfast zapping on Some big post.
reply
21 sats \ 4 replies \ @k00b 13 Sep
I just find it odd that the system so heavily values early zapping alone
For context: 50% of the rewards "score" comes from zapping. One person can earn a lot doing this not because it's disproportionately rewarded but because so few people do it. It's like winning a gold metal in a sport no one competes in.
Perhaps we can skew rewards to people spending more money, but the idea was to reward "good pickers" who might be poor.
reply
I sub to Siggy. He posts something I get a notification. I zap it immediately because it is Siggy and I support everything he posts. But then I go in and read it and probably comment and go back and forth with Siggy about it.
But that is less value than if I had zapped 2 minutes earlier and not said anything.
Sorry but that seems intuitively wrong to me.
This implies we should all just be playing a game to try to buzz in early like jeopardy but not actually provide an answer when we do.
reply
20 sats \ 2 replies \ @k00b 13 Sep
I'm not saying you're wrong.
reply
100 sats \ 1 reply \ @grayruby 13 Sep
I don’t even think the algo (value system) needs to be changed I just think the community needs to be able to step in and downzap enough to knock them out of profitability for a day or two so they change their behaviour and either go away or share more. And if they want to play the noble soul and just read and zap, then log in as anon and do it or donate all your rewards to the rewards pool. It’s very clear their motives aren’t solely noble (I want to find good content and zap it)
reply
There are a few bones I want to pick, too. But I was waiting for the private messaging to happens so I could talk to some individuals privately. But I do agree with grayruby.
reply