pull down to refresh

368 sats \ 5 replies \ @k00b 22 Jun 2023 \ parent \ on: @DiracDelta recent hit post on Swan meta
I replied there, but I'll repeat.
Poxohu has zero trust. So even though they are, apparently, the big spender, his spending would have zero effect on ranking.
The effect of an individual on ranking is as follows: trust*log10(total zap amount) ... so because their trust is 0 it had no impact on ranking.
What sent it to the top was
  1. 14 other stackers zapped it - some of whom do have trust
  2. no one flagged it (which is kind of like a downvote)
  3. BUT MOSTLY it's that people aren't zapping other stuff that might rank higher and push down "the hit piece"
    • all other "hot" posts today have zaps from an average of 5 people vs the 14 on the swan one
write
preview
10 sats \ 2 replies \ @siggy47 OP 22 Jun 2023
Got you. Thanks. I just had a depressing thought. If SN were around during the Blocksize Wars imagine the gaming that could have gone on? The situation that I guess that can't be defended against is a person who doesn't have much knowledge of an issue being influenced because a particular reply got 5k sats.
reply
10 sats \ 0 replies \ @mudbloodvonfrei 22 Jun 2023
I don't think that's a bad thing, as long as people are aware of the possibility. It's like advertising - people spend money to get your attention. SN, I believe, gets a percentage of each zap, no? This is a major improvement over traditional social media; at least here you know the algorithm.
Anyway, when I saw 90k sats or whatever that instantly raised a red flag.
reply
25 sats \ 0 replies \ @k00b 22 Jun 2023
Yes there's no helping someone distinguish spending from value creation if they suffer the Keynesian disease of confusing them
If you hover over the sats on any post/comment it will tell you the number of "zappers" but its obviously not very visible.
reply
0 sats \ 1 reply \ @birdeye21 22 Jun 2023
Thanks for clarifying k00b
You obviously know more about how all this works, so correct me if I'm wrong, but zapping yourself from an untrusted account could still essentially yield the same effect, no?
A recent post with over >90k zaps is probably going to attract more attention, making it easier for trusted accounts to then push it to the top.
Flagging works, but it can be hard to verify what's spam and what's not. I'll try to keep that feature in mind moving forward tho, wasn't aware I could flag.
reply
10 sats \ 0 replies \ @k00b 22 Jun 2023
Yes, if it leads people to trust content quality based on the amount zapped. But we should all know better.
reply