pull down to refresh

1 sat \ 2 replies \ @Solomonsatoshi 4h -100 sats \ parent \ on: SN release: top/posts/<when>?by=downsats, partial not-custodial zap splits meta

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...

'downzaps no longer have 3x the power of zaps
boost=zaps=downzaps=cost in terms of ranking. h/t butthole'

write
preview
103 sats \ 1 reply \ @k00b OP 4h

When actions happen determines their impact on ranking now. As a result of lit ranking, a more recent zap/boost/downzap has more impact than an older one.

Sure you would never be rude...

I was trying to bring attention to how much of a jerk you are.

reply
1 sat \ 0 replies \ @Solomonsatoshi 4h -100 sats

That is your opinion.
In reality you have taken sides and adjusted settings to suit and enable the side you have chosen to enable...rather than enabling a contest of ideas you have sided with trolls.

My post and the boosts/zaps it received are less than 8 hours old.
https://stacker.news/items/1441579

It has a much higher net up score ~22000 than any other post on homepage and is newer than many of them.

Your ranking system does not appear to be impartial, but rather biased, if not corrupt.

Power corrupts.

You are a small power broker in a declining and failed project.

You have censored my analysis of what has happened to Stacker News rather than respond in a credible reasoned manner.