Re-Thinking Referrals \ stacker news ~meta

pull down to refresh

5819 sats \ 10 comments \ @kr 19 Sep 2023 meta

The current referral system doesn’t get much usage. Why?

Not all referrals are attributed, especially when logging in via Lightning (we’re working on a fix)
Referral codes aren’t added to URLs by default (most people don’t bother adding their code or clicking the share button)
“referrals” and “affiliates” are terms with shady connotations, people may feel uncomfortable about going out of their way to add their referral codes to earn sats

To fix these issues, we must improve attribution and eliminate barriers to participation. How?

By default, all SN URLs should have referral tags appended when stackers are logged in (an opt-out toggle could be made available in settings)
If a new stacker isn’t attributed to a referrer, the 2.1% of their earnings that would otherwise be directed to their referrer gets directed to the rewards pool (this is how it works today)
Once the new stacker has begun zapping content, 2.1% of their future earnings will be directed to the last person they zapped
Stackers will also have an option in their settings to direct their 2.1% fee to a specific stacker indefinitely (attributed referrals will work like this too, where the referrer is picked by default with an option to direct sats elsewhere)
This is kind of like a donation, but instead of donating your own sats, you’re donating a portion of the fee Stacker News takes on all zaps

Under this system, every stacker who has ever zapped will be paying 2.1% of their future earnings to another stacker behind the scenes.

This should significantly increase referral payments, and will enable seamless referral gifts that happen without stackers taking any action.

Would love to hear any feedback on this idea!

view all related items

1019 sats \ 2 replies \ @sorukumar 19 Sep 2023

If I'm understanding correctly, to address 'shady connotations' with referral, you are thinking of the feature of donation/or passing it to any stacker.

Referrer: Feel uncomfortable cuz they either dislike participating in such actions (or dislike being seen doing so) solely for sats. New signee: Finds it shady cuz someone else is making money off her. Is the referrer a fan of the platform or doing it for sats?

Only allowing the referrer to direct the earnings to donation or anyone else addresses half of the problem of the referrer. It doesn't address the 'dislike being seen doing so' part.

Furthermore, it doesn't ease the concerns of new signees at the moment they are making a decision to sign up.

One potential solution is to make it explicitly clear in the referral message that the additional revenue generated from new signees will be directed toward donations. A more formal version of work like #258853)

I know execution-wise, it is more work!

2nd, here is a link to building a referral program. https://www.lennysnewsletter.com/p/this-week-16-building-a-referrals. Seems basic, but further reading part of the write-up may be useful.

20 sats \ 1 reply \ @kr OP 19 Sep 2023

i think people feel uncomfortable going out of their way to add their referral links, so the solve for that part would just be to automatically attribute new stackers to referrers based on their zapping activity (assuming no referral link was used).

no action required for either party, just carry on with your normal zapping behavior and SN can use that info to direct referral rewards to the right person… and of course the option to set a referrer if one wants to dive into their settings and do so.

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @sorukumar 20 Sep 2023

Ah. Now, I think I'm able to make some sense of the thinking behind this: Once the new stacker has begun zapping content, 2.1% of their future earnings will be directed to the last person they zapped

Based on the current understanding of the SN referral product and proposed changes, I guess, in terms of metrics, the proposed change is directed more toward retention and engagement rather than acquisition.

742 sats \ 1 reply \ @DarthCoin 19 Sep 2023

I have 112 referrals and this is because I didn't want to abuse it too much. I used the invitation links only with specific people, after I tested a mass invitation and then stop it. In this way you can "control" a bit who is coming to SN, not all unknown assmilking shitcoiners finding your link in the wild.

This option with invitation links I like it a lot,. especially that you can set exactly the amount.

“referrals” and “affiliates” are terms with shady connotations,

Agreed. I use to invite others, not to be specifically my "referral" but to offer them a new way to communicate with other bitcoiners. I so not care too much about the sats I get from "my referrals", that is not so important. Important is that they bring new good content.

337 sats \ 0 replies \ @TheWildHustle 19 Sep 2023

Yeah, I have 105 after a blasting the referral link on twitter. I only have 2 which could be considered somewhat quality....

357 sats \ 0 replies \ @BBitcoinUSA 19 Sep 2023

I'd use referral links if my nym wasn't displayed anywhere in the URL, something that looks more like the invite link (but without my nym displayed on the landing page).

Also whenever I see "/r/" in a link someone sends me, I don't trust it as much and the recommendation seems a little contrived, even if it's an old friend

133 sats \ 0 replies \ @eduardopro 20 Sep 2023

After reading the second bullet point, I saw the share button for the first time in my life.

314 sats \ 0 replies \ @WeAreAllSatoshi 19 Sep 2023

I like these ideas. I have 0 referrals AFAIK, and I don’t have anyone I plan to refer, so I just made peace with not ever getting referral sats. I do like these ideas for more circular system.

552 sats \ 1 reply \ @nemo 19 Sep 2023

deleted by author

21 sats \ 0 replies \ @kr OP 19 Sep 2023

yeah, a daily basis makes sense given that rewards are distributed daily… but if the rewards cadence changes then so too could the last zapped stacker.