I agree, but some people who post links are not necessarily the authors and often have no idea about the subject. So I think it's better if they don't reply instead of spreading nonsense, or even better if they start learning about these topics instead of sharing a lot of (cheap) links.

This could be solved by raising the cost of posting. Not viable at the moment probably because SN is still kind of a PoC (not in terms of the tech stack and implementation, but in the sense that the concept of value-for-value on the interwebs is cutting edge) and scaring away users would slow momentum significantly, but I do think that down the line the cost of getting my attention should be more than 1 sat. Or maybe this can be implemented in custom feeds - have people "bid" by deciding how much they pay to post, and people can set a filter to only show posts that put down more than x sats, or have been zapped more than y sats, etc. What do you think @k00b?

I agree in general -- the comments are what make SN interesting, way more than the links. But some of the issue is, I think, that SN is sort of a hybrid: Twitter-like (e.g., transient links and comments) and blog-like (e.g., evergreen pieces and discussions). It will be interesting to see how it evolves when there's 10x, 100x the number of users, and how different sorts of incentives will tilt it in one direction or the other.

make zaps only apply to comments and they'll stop.

Agree.

Of course I can't (bother to) prove this, but it's probably fair to assume that a good portion of such links haven't even been read by their posters.

That doesn't imply these links are all useless, though. I've found interesting stuff among them.

I seem to recall that it's been debated here before that simply posting a link without any comment/summary should be disabled?

I feel like this behavior is worse on nostr than here, but I agree it's annoying.

Even if you're cynically spamming content to get zaps, it'll be better in the long-term to make people want to engage with you.

Ironically, no OP answers in this post comments 😅

I've discovered a bunch of new information clicking through the links (hacker news style) and really enjoy when a poster also provides an evidence of understanding we'll call it, which is just a short tl;dr, and maybe their own take on the linked material.

We are deeply sorry for "cluttering your feed".. lol. Maybe they just have nothing to say... They probably better off not saying anything. I agree, it is polite to answer or add something of value (don't just post for posting, have something to say/add) but people stopped being polite long time ago, so there is that... Other than that , let them be...

I think some of those people are just hoping to earn some sats by curating content they find that has not yet been posted and don't really have the chops to engage in discussion.

Also if you're going to post an opinion on SN, get ready to be made to look like an ass when SN'rs tip apart your argument, its not for the faint hearted

Or just sat harvesting by reposting others’ content without anything to add lol

Agree. Spamming links is poor form. Hands up I am guilty of posting links to articles I found either relevant or interesting. What I had noticed is these links are usually my lowest engagement generating posts. I may find them interesting but clearly others don't. As a user further down states there's a lot of people taking "the Nostr approach" could also be referred to as the "r/cc" approach. Where you throw enough shit at the walls and see how much of it sticks. I'm unsure I fully back the notion of making it more expensive to post as the solution to this problem. So far my understanding of how SN works is that the community decide what they want to see by zapping that content. Content with zero zaps should be telling the writer, they're wasting their time flogging that horse.

I do wonder if perhaps we have a bot problem? Bots crossposting? Could explain why they don't respond to any engagement as their only job is scour "crypto new site" copy link, paste link. Move on. Is there a way we can test for/identify bot accounts?

Call it whatever you want but I don't like to repeat myself over and over and that's why I answer with my guides links. Those guides have more than enough the answer. If more newbs will read my guides their lufe will be much easier.

I am sure you didn't read all my guides. You will understand why.

Why don't you answer with long posts over and over the same thing? Let me know when you are tired.

I mostly post links and don't reply to most unproductive comments.

There are a few users that comment on stuff while obviously not having watched/listened/read what I posted. Bonus points for just saying they don't like it or don't have a productive solution or original thought for presented problem/topic.

It's similar to how r/CryptoCurrency became (even more) unreadable once they launched the MOON tokens. It's a classic case of perverse incentives leading to a degradation in quality.

People were basically spamming the subreddit with tons of copypasta low-quality links from aggregators like Crypto Panic; they would dump these crappy links to collect MOON but not engage in any way.

I realised that there is little point in bothering to check it any more.

I've noticed the same on X and nostr with a slightly different take: people posting questions but then never responding to any comments.

Don't tip them

I like how you are pissed of for my links to my bitcoin guides but you are not so pissed of for all the shit load of bullshit crap links posted from twitter or other crap sites. You are pathetic.