pull down to refresh

Got it. Thank you for making me not read the code from an uber <3
100 sats \ 21 replies \ @k00b 20 Aug
Looks like it's outlawed now, but top boost doesn't consider outlaw status I guess.
I'll ship a fix.
reply
reply
387 sats \ 1 reply \ @k00b 20 Aug
reply
Memes
maketh
man
reply
LOL good one! I love instant memes.
reply
reply
110 sats \ 13 replies \ @k00b 20 Aug
Fixed. It's still the top boost in Wild West Mode but that's as intended.
I remember thinking about outlaws as I made the top boost mvp. I prefer demand response I guess.
reply
Thought about the top boost demand-response theory. It would be a great way to maximize territory revenue to have scammer sats try to outbid honest boosts.
Morally, I think the downzap is better - because do we really want to make money off scammers trying to get victims?
I was pondering something else: Do downzaps go 70/30 to territory and rewards like fees? Would be better if these go 100% to rewards IMHO, because 70% is a huge incentive for territory owners to encourage crap content.
reply
200 sats \ 1 reply \ @Scoresby 20 Aug
In the case of downzaps versus boosts, it seems that erring on the side of allowing visibility is better than erring the other way.
What I mean is: it's better to allow a scammer to boost and get visibility, than it is to allow a strong downzapper to hide content.
Reason: the tool we use to banish scammers can also be used by scammers to banish valuable content they don't want others to see.
Imagine a scenario where someone posts about a flaw in a project or bad behavior, if the owner of the project can banish such a post by heavily downzapping.
Don't we run greater risk to the community by allowing a strong power to hide information than we do by allowing a strong power to boost information?
reply
This only works with brigades. So having an unpopular opinion against a mob of fanbois with high trust score will mess you up. But nothing prevents you from posting again? But what's the point if there is a non-receptive majority?
Information wins, just boosts don't?
reply
100 sats \ 2 replies \ @k00b 20 Aug
Downzaps go 70/30 to territory revenue/rewards.
There's no incentive to downzap currently, so I don't think it's likely to be pathological. We have plans to incentivize them which might require a rethink.
reply
202 sats \ 1 reply \ @optimism 20 Aug
If they would go 100% to rewards, it may already carry better incentive?
reply
100 sats \ 0 replies \ @k00b 20 Aug
Good point!
reply
I don't know if I've seen three labels on a post before...is this a record?
reply
imagine if it was a "freebie" too and posted by a "bot"
But can a boost be a freebie?
reply
chills
reply
I've seen the outlawed label before when in wild west mode and on posts and comments I replied to.
reply
but have you seen it with the top boost label?
reply
Ah! Nope.
reply
Thank you!
reply
Now 35 zappers. Feels like a Sybil attack. Scammers be scamming. But shall anti scammers be anti scamming too?
reply
100 sats \ 0 replies \ @k00b 20 Aug
The number of zappers is only part of it.
It's sum(zapper_trust*log10(zap_amount)) and sybils will have zapper_trust equal to zero.
reply