if we want a no moderator, no kyc system, I don't think there can e such a thing as zapping for the wrong reasons.

I agree that the downzapping-fest is pretty wild right now (I've caught a bunch of downzaps and I'm still trying to figure out why), but at the same time, someone's downzaps are no less legitimate than someone else's normal zaps. People who routinely boost their own content (I'm one of them) or zap only certain kinds of content they like aren't so different than someone who's willing to heavily downzap things they don't like (for whatever reason).

Honestly, I expected this to happen with upzaps first. I thought there would be someone who tried to dominate the front page by boosting all their stuff. But it's not so different if someone is choosing to downzap in a way that changes how the whole site feels. It seems to be costing 10k - 20k sats a day. And a good portion of those sats are ending up with the people who are being downzapped.

the SN experiment (can money be the moderator for a social media site) is cool because we are pushing into uncharted waters. No one else has ever answered this question.