@Undisciplined231
2,636,372 sats stacked
stacking since: #88718longest cowboy streak: 231npub1t49ke...rm3srw4jj5
50 sats \ 1 reply \ @Undisciplined OP 34m \ parent \ on: Only Cowboys Get Rewards: and other ideas meta
0x brought that up in the saloon. What do you think is going on there?
11 sats \ 2 replies \ @Undisciplined OP 1h \ parent \ on: Only Cowboys Get Rewards: and other ideas meta
But I thought that a hat doesn't come until the next day, so after daily rewards?
Gotcha, in that case I need to amend my proposal to be that you become rewards eligible once you've earned a cowboy hat, whether or not you have one.
It's been a while, but I recall finding my cowboy hat during the middle of the day.
I don't love being required to accept your rewards same day, either. It was just a mechanism I've seen that encourages daily use.
Zap big. Zap often.
21 sats \ 4 replies \ @Undisciplined OP 1h \ parent \ on: Only Cowboys Get Rewards: and other ideas meta
@davidw made a similar content and it makes me think I might be missing something, or at least that I didn't explain my idea well.
If you aren't here one day, then you aren't getting rewards either way. If you come back and make a great post, and zap other people's stuff, then you'll have a new hat which will make you rewards eligible again.
The only scenario where this seems to matter is if you make good content, but don't zap other stackers. In that scenario, I'm perfectly happy with not getting daily rewards. That person still gets all the zaps from their posts.
I say low-engagement, because not having a hat specifically means you didn't zap people a meaningful amount that day. Since, zapping content creators is what drives SN, it strikes me as an odd choice.
Would love to see people thinking how to grow this community, rather than serving our own interests. We can make this the biggest onramp to bitcoin, if we think more about encouraging new users to form healthy habits.
We're completely aligned on this point.
I don't see how incentivizing low engagement is a useful strategy, but I'm all for trying stuff out.
50 sats \ 1 reply \ @Undisciplined OP 3h \ parent \ on: Only Cowboys Get Rewards: and other ideas meta
Maybe it should be that once you've found a cowboy hat, you only get rewards while wearing one. That way new users don't get punished for not having figured it out yet.
20 sats \ 0 replies \ @Undisciplined OP 3h \ parent \ on: Only Cowboys Get Rewards: and other ideas meta
Broadly, I like there being more elements that go into rewards, because I think that makes them harder to game.
Anything we want more of we should try to get into the rewards algorithm and I think we want more people who make contributions consistently.
48 sats \ 1 reply \ @Undisciplined OP 3h \ parent \ on: Only Cowboys Get Rewards: and other ideas meta
I'm imagining it working just like zapping top content works. You'd only get credit for downzapping content that other high trust people have downzapped.
It's basically a way to pay for community policing, which I think is an important element of organic content curation.
50 sats \ 3 replies \ @Undisciplined OP 3h \ parent \ on: Only Cowboys Get Rewards: and other ideas meta
That's a good point. They aren't likely to make the top 100 without a cowboy hat either, though.
21 sats \ 3 replies \ @Undisciplined OP 3h \ parent \ on: Only Cowboys Get Rewards: and other ideas meta
I'm not sure downzapping bad content is anymore manipulable than zapping good content and I think we need to incentivize it.
You're probably right about my specific suggestion regarding referrals, but there might be something in that vein that would work.
20 sats \ 2 replies \ @Undisciplined OP 3h \ parent \ on: Only Cowboys Get Rewards: and other ideas meta
It could be weighted to be a small contributor to total rewards. I like the idea of incentivizing people to build long-term social capital on here.