pull down to refresh

These are the posts that were downzapped on 2/22, 2026 (saloon time), thus far:

Post-publication downzaps from 2/21:

Is it now the stance of @ek and @Scoresby and Stacker News as a whole, that content consumers cannot reasonably expect to have any way of verifying that content providers who frequently post Bitcoin/Ln related content are acting in a way consistent with their rhetoric by attaching and showing attached LN wallets?

I want to emphasize due to apparent misunderstanding from @Scoresby and others that I do not see any problem with people not interested in Bitcoin or newbies who may not be up to speed, to get and show attached LN wallet/s.

My gripe is with content providers who virtue signal strongly pro Bitcoin content but who refuse to attach LN wallets and thereby fail to maximise their use of and support for the LN.
I see this group as hypocrits and essentially hostile to the whole aim as I saw and understood of Stacker News which was to be a sats denominated V4V social media platform.

That's why I came here- to spend sats, and have them received as sats and get good honest content...and I do not believe I am alone in that.

If Stacker News has given up on building a sats denominated V4V platform it should be announced so that we are not operating under false understandings.

Stacker News info section on CCs calls CCs inferior to sats.
I agree with that definition.
The info section identifies them as primarily for those who are new to SNs or unable to attach a LN wallet.
If Stacker News offcial stance on this has changed let it be made official.

So-Is it now the stance of @ek and @Scoresby and Stacker News as a whole, that content consumers cannot reasonably expect to have any way of verifying that content providers who frequently post Bitcoin/Ln related content are acting in a way consistent with their rhetoric by attaching and showing attached LN wallets?

reply

Question for you: did you downzap the top downzapped post in the list?

reply

Probably did as you are clearly seeking to circumvent the silencing of the hypocrits and have not responded to my reasons for it in any credible way.

reply

Thank you for voluntarily providing evidence to your ill intent.

reply

I just zapped you 100 CCs - now you are infected.

who refuse to attach LN wallets

Is not your damn business.

reply

LOL only 666 sats for me?

already 14k sats from downzaps in rewards.
I've told you guys, fw all the CCs to SS. That means more rewards for you.

reply

More than half of yesterday’s total downzaps were directed at stackers with attached wallets who disagreed with the reasoning behind the downzaps.

reply
70 sats \ 10 replies \ @supratic 2h

is the bot freaking out or just pure randomness?

reply
80 sats \ 1 reply \ @DarthCoin 2h

If you have a well curated muted list, this setting make all those downzaps totally futile and more sats for you in rewards.
The downzapper is really dumb.

reply

Yep, that's my setup!

The downzapper is really dumb.

Have no doubt about it! just enjoining watching the show for now.

reply

No clue. We just know that disobedience is punishable by downzap

reply
70 sats \ 2 replies \ @supratic 2h

~lol... disobedience of what?

reply

Of the commandment that one shall not criticize the holiest downzapper on SN.

reply

lmao

reply
16 sats \ 3 replies \ @DarthCoin 1h

We need to trigger him more. To let him dry.

reply

let's try...

Call upon @Salomonsatoshi in the posts of trouble; the penultimate ruler of downzaps. She will deliver thy request and honor us all.
reply
3 sats \ 1 reply \ @DarthCoin 1h

here is a trick:

  • zap him CCs
  • he will be forced to use them first, by downzaping your posts
  • next day you receive sats from rewards
  • he gets nothing

Another one: every post you make, set fw 100% to SS. He will receive CCs and forced to use them.
No worry you will get sats from rewards.

34 sats \ 0 replies \ @Lux 2h

reply

I looooove this free boost.

Making Darth's life contradictory, too, because now SN is a place to stack sats!

reply
17 sats \ 0 replies \ @Lux 2h

reply

ONLY 10k?!ONLY 10k?!

... on this excellent gem (#1439667)
I'm so disappointed.

reply
1 sat \ 0 replies \ @Lux 2h

deleted by author