pull down to refresh
42 sats \ 3 replies \ @SimpleStacker 18 Oct \ on: Are Stacker News Rewards Too Salient or Are They Not Too Salient Enough? meta
I wonder if you've ever thought of rewards as a negative externality tax / positive externality dividend. Tax negative externalities (in this case, taxing spam through sybil fees), and redistribute those proceeds in a way so as to subsidize positive externalities (good behavior on SN, producing and zapping good content)
No, I hadn't thought of them that way, at least not in those terms. I suppose that is sort of how I was thinking about it, though.
The rewards pool has mostly come from donations, so it wasn't exactly balancing positive and negative externalities. There's also no particular reason those two things should balance.
Oof, you've wrinkled my brain a bit here.
reply
I mainly brought it up because I think in the long run, the idea would be that rewards would be sustained without donations. Also, the sybil fee of 30% can be considered quite high, but the justification would be "we're not greedy, this is a legitimate tax, and it goes back to the community"
reply
The way I thought about it is more like how Workit functions for their steps challenges. The participants all put some amount in the pot and then it gets divvied up based how well people perform. It's a commitment device to be better than you might otherwise be.
reply