We've added /top/posts/day?by=downsats for anyone interested in joining the fight against aggressive downzappers. This should satiate calls for a new sort.
We've also made it so that when zaps are split, aka forwarded, on posts, the recipient of the largest share that is able to receive sats via a not-custodial zap, will receive sats.
To declutter things, I've moved the extra cowboy badges (gun and horse) to profile pages.
There are few other minor things too but they aren't worth mentioning.
Please remove the rewards pool.
Then all this trouble will go away.
But where will all my loving downzaps go?
Are you going to share your thoughts about the aggressive downzapping?
I don't like it and found it incredibly frustrating yet interesting. We don't have immediate plans to deviate from the
money is the moderatorexperiment.The problem is one of outliers. Mods and trust are the usual way forums deal with outliers, which we can always introduce. For now, we want to deal with problems as surgically as we can. Stackers can see when there are aggressive upzaps but aggressive downzaps hide their effects so this new sort is aimed at helping that.
I'd be happy to answer any specific questions if you have them.
but now I can find all the downzaps:
https://stacker.news/top/posts/day?by=downsats
https://stacker.news/top/comments/day?by=downsats
This is excellent!
also your own stuff: https://stacker.news/Scoresby/all?by=downsats
This is awesome, but also reminds me of something that (mildly) annoys me when looking at my (or anyone's) history. For posts, I can mouseover and see the breakdown of sats, but for comments, mouseover won't do it, and I have to click, go to the comment in the post, and then mouseover to see the breakdown. Is there a reason for the different behaviors?
It's something I overlooked. I'll write myself a note to add it.
You are now actively censoring my content/posts?
My post
#1441579
Has net 22000 sats boost+zaps over downzaps but has been removed from homepage.
Are you now operating direct censorship or changed the way boosts/up and downzaps work?
I am not censoring you. That would be rude. You may have missed this update: #1434202
No I saw that update where you reduced the leverage of downzaps to provide ~300% advantage to sybil upzaps by content providers...
But that does not explain why my post which has net 22000 positive value is completely removed from homepage where the top post has net less than 8000 positive value.
Sure you would never be rude, or censor content...
'downzaps no longer have 3x the power of zaps
boost=zaps=downzaps=cost in terms of ranking. h/t butthole'
The last X items didn’t get any downzaps. But they still show up.
Hmmm I wonder what I messed up.
This filter’s gotta be broken… or there are downzaps of like, milli-sats or something!
by === 'downsats' && '"Item"."downMsats" > 0',Just a guess, it’s probably something else. ahah
I'm supportive of continuing the experiment, and believe in the idea at a conceptual level.
The solution to trolls should be more tools to tailor your own experience, and sorting by downsats is a good step.
I suppose some decisions need to get made about what the
defaultexperience will look like, esp for new and not logged in users. But that's a lot of money for a troll to spend to influence the experience of non-commital users only. And every bad-faith downzap is actually a net resource contribution to other stackers, so while we may dislike the effect it has on rankings, we can't complain about big reward pools.Ideally the larger reward pool will elicit more zaps and offset the downzaps.
One of the problems with that is we know the targets of the downzaps, which makes the Keynesian Beauty Contest dynamic more problematic.
Very Keynesian beauty.
I've also wondered what incentives the pool split on zapping only provides. No point making much content, better just zap everyone else's... Universalized, there won't be any content
The incentive is to be the recipient of those zaps
Does it matter for the rewards pot...?
No, but if there’s a larger supply of zaps and you’re capable of making top posts, then doing so will get you a bunch of sats.
If it’s only content that earns rewards, then there’s no incentive to zap it at all. That leaves you with neither zaps nor rewards.
Do you expect the corrective mechanisms that already exist to be sufficient for this or do we need some new tools?
A little bit of trust is sufficient to solve the problem. It solved this problem before.
I know I could probably tag and ask @k00b but it would be great if there was some sn bot that I can ask something like: "give me the context on the aggressive downzapping?" - haven't followed it
It’s fairly straightforward, although also confusing.
One account, likely a bot, has been aggressively downzapping posts from stackers who don’t have both sending and receiving wallets attached.
ty!
Thanks for the sats forwards. Awesome.
I'll be making an update to bounties this week that I think ~Stacker_Sports will very much appreciate.
Awesome!
i thought the effect of downzaps was growing logarithmically anyway? 🙈
Everything is linear now. The log stuff requires us being able to say one person = one account which requires trust. We removed trust.
Do not trust - verify.
Power law, bruh
Thank you!
We are pleased that built-in and ongoing sorting mechanisms are rendering our snapshot-based post mechanism obsolete. Snapshots are a suboptimal solution, and while we had developed additional contingency measures, we are satisfied to retain these in reserve. Should a future discoverability crisis arise, these resources remain available for our deployment. We hope this proves unnecessary indefinitely, though.
Serving as a
downzap rodto ~meta was a satisfying side effect. We hope that these daily posts did not cause undue inconvenience or frustration to the team."aggressive downzappers?"
I wouldn't have expected it to be a plural.
I'm aggressively downzapping too.
Call me Piggy the CCP bot if it makes you feel better.
You have a strong need to belong to the group.
If a person vote against a content he must pay money like pay 30 sats so 9 satoshis to the territory and 21 satoshis against content so owner lose 21 satoshis debited from his wallet attached or 21 CC so there will no be anymore aggressive downzapping becausse people think 10 times before downzap a content unlike downzap for free.
All my downzaps are funded 100% with sats (real money) and there is no monetary return to me.
Content providers can Sybil upzap their own content boosting its prominence and get 70% back- so there is already a 300% advantage for Sybil upzaps advantaging content providers over downzaps.
CCs are not money, they are inhouse shitcoin-tokens with zero value outside of the closed centralised SNs database.
Out of curiosity: What makes a downzap aggressive?
Opposes a consensus of stackers in magnitude and is motivated by something other than the content.
That is your viewpoint and assertion.
Content sullied by hypocrisy is mine.
You are all rarara , free market rules moderation with money, until it doesn't suit your narrative and then you change the rules to suit.
I have been down zapping content providers who post content heavy on Bitcoin/LN adoption and use, but who do not attach and show LN wallets- in protest against their hypocrisy.
@koob and SNs devs have abandoned content neutrality and adopted policies, stance and algorithm changes that side with and support the content providers who do not attach LN wallets and/or conceal them. Wallet status is now concealed by default.
The biggest downzaps in SNs today and probably in SNs history are today of my posts- the first of which explains some of my reasoning.
https://stacker.news/items/1441579
https://stacker.news/items/1441544