Be honest and non biased. We all know this is a cool concept and platform. However, do you think 100k a month to run a territory is expensive? At least to start?
Yes 52.2%
No 47.8%
90 votes \ poll ended
2122 sats \ 13 replies \ @benthecarman 20 Dec 2023
There's already too many territories
reply
686 sats \ 6 replies \ @kr 20 Dec 2023
what do you think the optimal number of territories is today?
curious to know if you think it’s a navigation/UX problem or something else.
reply
948 sats \ 5 replies \ @benthecarman 20 Dec 2023
I think it is just because the feature just launched so a bunch of people bought territories. It definitely feels like the amount of content in some of these is not worthy of its own, and thankfully that with the fee structure this is a self correcting problem.
I think the UX could use some work, having a single long list won't scale in the long run and already is pretty long. Adding a way to favorite some for now would be nice so I don't have to scroll through the list every time.
reply
131 sats \ 1 reply \ @kr 20 Dec 2023
makes sense, will be interesting to see how many territories get renewed next month, and whether other stackers are waiting on the sidelines to get their hands on one with some momentum.
reply
10 sats \ 0 replies \ @smuglydawg 20 Dec 2023
I am more in line with this thought, when you “buy” or invest in a territory there are two worlds hope for a ROI or it’s a personal interest that you care deeply about.
But if SN wants to be a Reddit-like they will need to have the sub cultures. But the pay to post will help keep the spam at bay.
reply
121 sats \ 0 replies \ @AR0w 20 Dec 2023
A territory explorer tab will fix this
reply
10 sats \ 0 replies \ @birdeye21 20 Dec 2023
am having to learn this the hard way. ~earth getting spammed, will see how raising fee cost helps.
reply
10 sats \ 0 replies \ @kepford 20 Dec 2023
I co-sign this message.
reply
20 sats \ 1 reply \ @faithandcredit 21 Dec 2023
I have a crazy idea. Maybe territories should be free, and the first poster/creater does not get to own it or receive portion of sats. Instead users nominate moderators? And moderation is transparent? This is a chance to experiment with governance. Everyone is opted in to become moderator by default. There are no specific election date. One day you will log in and find you reached the parameters for being a moderator and you and other moderators will be pinged if someone reports an item. Moderators can step down any time. And people can opt out of being moderators in the first place. Some people will probably run election campaigns. Maybe all it takes to be a moderator should be a cowboy hat. I mean let's experiment with governance.
reply
122 sats \ 0 replies \ @BitcoinOutdoors OP 21 Dec 2023
I don’t know about this one bud. Lol
reply
11 sats \ 3 replies \ @BitcoinOutdoors OP 20 Dec 2023
You think 60 is too much? Once they do updates to the user interface and make it more user friendly I don’t see an issue with unlimited amount of territories. Think of it like Reddit but better and you can earn bitcoin.
reply
91 sats \ 2 replies \ @benthecarman 20 Dec 2023
I agree but there's no where near enough content to warrant all the territories so far
reply
334 sats \ 1 reply \ @needcreations_ 20 Dec 2023
lower your time preference
reply
111 sats \ 0 replies \ @benthecarman 21 Dec 2023
im not the one spending my bitcoin!
reply
735 sats \ 10 replies \ @Undisciplined 20 Dec 2023
I had to debate how to answer this question.
Personally, I didn't buy a territory. While I was thinking about whether it was worth the 100k, someone else started the territory I was interested in. So, 100k was too expensive for me, but it didn't stop someone else from making the purchase.
Ultimately, I'd say the rapid proliferation of territories indicates that 100k/month (or 3mill one time) indicates that if anything territories were underpriced.
reply
486 sats \ 9 replies \ @BitcoinOutdoors OP 20 Dec 2023
Thanks for the perspective. Now that you believe they’re underpriced. Did you end up buying at all?
reply
152 sats \ 8 replies \ @Undisciplined 20 Dec 2023
"Underpriced" simply refers to the market clearing price. It has nothing to do with my own willingness to pay. That said, if @jeff ever falls behind on his mortgage payments for ~econ, I'll consider buying it at the foreclosure auction.
reply
496 sats \ 7 replies \ @BitcoinOutdoors OP 20 Dec 2023
Hahahaah love that. We’ll check out my territory ~Outdoors, I’m working on some better ideas for it. Everyone loves the great outdoors!
reply
20 sats \ 6 replies \ @Undisciplined 20 Dec 2023
I'll keep it in mind for the next time I do something interesting outdoors. I approve of your (relatively) high posting fee.
reply
496 sats \ 5 replies \ @BitcoinOutdoors OP 20 Dec 2023
I just changed it to 50 sats today lol.
That is actually much lower than others.
reply
10 sats \ 4 replies \ @Undisciplined 20 Dec 2023
I hadn't noticed that. I've seen one that is at 100 sats. Are any higher than that?
reply
496 sats \ 3 replies \ @BitcoinOutdoors OP 20 Dec 2023
I’ve seen 250. I may change it back. I’m trying to see if people think it’s fair or not.
view replies
436 sats \ 0 replies \ @sancristrader 20 Dec 2023
it's a lot, give your traffic right now. Perhaps they should cost 100 sats to create (to prevent spam), but have a revenue share. They should be ordered by revenue in the list, however.
I don't think at this stage @sn should view it as a monetization mechanism.
reply
93 sats \ 1 reply \ @kr 20 Dec 2023
it’s hard for me to be non-biased, but i do think territories can be a profitable venture for motivated stackers.
one other thing i’ve been thinking about recently is how new territories and archived territories could have different prices.
on the one hand, if a territory owner gives up their territory, SN has an incentive to get someone else to take care of it (possibly at a lower price).
on the other hand, if a territory owner gives up their territory, the next owner can build off the momentum of a past owner without needing to bootstrap a community from scratch (justifying a higher price).
reply
492 sats \ 0 replies \ @BitcoinOutdoors OP 20 Dec 2023
I do see the potential for sure. We need to get more people on here! Check out my ~Outdoors territory when you have a chance! Feel free to share your love for outdoors or any activity you’re doing outside. There is nothing better than the great outdoors!
reply
30 sats \ 1 reply \ @needcreations_ 20 Dec 2023
I'd be willing to wager that the majority of the people voting No do not own territories.
reply
10 sats \ 0 replies \ @OneOneSeven 20 Dec 2023
Yeah maybe 4 options would’ve been better, yes and no, and territory founder or not.
reply
60 sats \ 0 replies \ @lonestarr 21 Dec 2023
I voted YES, but the more I think about it NO might be the better vote.
Reason: 100K is a good price to confirm commitment to the Territory and keep SN from getting cluttered with poorly planned Territories.
Money doesn't guarantee this, but it helps. If I'm spending 100K to create a Territory I am going to give it a lot of thought before I click the button.
reply
30 sats \ 3 replies \ @erict875 21 Dec 2023
I'm ambivalent. A part of me wants to say yes, but another part of me recognises that it's necessary, and appropriate, in order to filter out the "cheap talk" and incentivise quality posts. IMHO, this is what sets SN apart.
If I'm not mistaken territory owners will soon have the possibility to create sub-territories and sell them to other admins. This makes it a very attractive feature tbh...
reply
10 sats \ 2 replies \ @BitcoinOutdoors OP 21 Dec 2023
Yes that is what I am hearing. If you’re interested in sub categories with my ~outdoors territory, let me know! There is so much we can do with the outdoor territory and I will need help! ✊🏼
reply
80 sats \ 1 reply \ @erict875 21 Dec 2023
Yeah, I very much like ~outdoors. If you're into hiking, I recommend you install komoot, it's a great app.
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @BitcoinOutdoors OP 22 Dec 2023
Ty I will check it out
reply
51 sats \ 0 replies \ @SatoshiNakanodo 20 Dec 2023
Yes. It should be zero, and SN should get a percentage of sats earned by the territory.
Charging a base rental fee to start a territory needlessly limits the growth of what could be an even more popular feature. Saying there are "too many territories" is like saying there are too many websites.
Do away with the rent and instead let the plebs decide (with their sats) which territories succeed and which ones die.
reply
20 sats \ 0 replies \ @phatom 21 Dec 2023
It's just an ok amount
reply
20 sats \ 0 replies \ @brave 21 Dec 2023
It is quite a lot but what do I know? I'm not the SN team
reply
20 sats \ 2 replies \ @garyKrause_ 20 Dec 2023
Incentives matter. Ive considered buying a territory but dont think I'd do it justice so haven't. I think the price point is great to incentivize people to put effort in or atleast be judicious with their claims.
reply
20 sats \ 0 replies \ @BitcoinOutdoors OP 20 Dec 2023
Very good point
reply
10 sats \ 0 replies \ @needcreations_ 20 Dec 2023
this is a good point. the high price point has made me engage more than normal on SN in order to recoup my investment
reply
20 sats \ 3 replies \ @kytt 20 Dec 2023
I do wonder if the cost may need to change over time as the value of sats increases, but for now, I think it's a fair price.
reply
10 sats \ 0 replies \ @nullama 20 Dec 2023
1sat=1vote here, so it's independent of the fiat value.
100k votes for a territory seem rather low actually.
reply
10 sats \ 1 reply \ @Eobard 20 Dec 2023
deleted by author
reply
11 sats \ 0 replies \ @kytt 20 Dec 2023
Except as sat value increases, it's possible that the average sat amount zapped will decrease.
reply
20 sats \ 2 replies \ @TNStacker 20 Dec 2023
Undecided. We are so early!
reply
10 sats \ 1 reply \ @BitcoinOutdoors OP 20 Dec 2023
It’s not too late to buy more bitcoin either 👀
reply
10 sats \ 0 replies \ @needcreations_ 20 Dec 2023
it's not too late
reply
20 sats \ 1 reply \ @needcreations_ 20 Dec 2023
Just spitballing but I think maybe it'd be a more fair/agreeable system if owning a territory was free/much cheaper but a percentage of the territory revenue went directly to the Stacker News team.
Although, when sub territories come out and the owners can sell those, I think my perspective could change.
reply
10 sats \ 0 replies \ @BitcoinOutdoors OP 20 Dec 2023
I could get behind your first idea. I just feel make the platform is new and doesn’t have much traction yet, 100K sats can be a lot. I will also say. If the traction becomes higher and more traffic that we should be grandfathered in. Unless stackernews had a formula to show you that the ROI makes it worth it.
reply
10 sats \ 1 reply \ @BitcoinOutdoors OP 21 Dec 2023
Lots of interesting ideas and interesting results so far. Thank you to everyone who participated. I believe we can all agree on one thing! That territories and what SN is doing is pretty damn cool and this is an amazing concept. I am excited to see where it goes and think we should have more discussions like this. Many people have been sharing cool ideas!
Also, check out my territory ~Outdoors. I plan to provide you with some fun content but also encourage you to share your outdoor activities and especially if it’s a Bitcoin outdoor event!
I also love to zap sats!
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @BitcoinOutdoors OP 21 Dec 2023
deleted by author
reply
10 sats \ 0 replies \ @faithandcredit 21 Dec 2023
From a personal standpoint: yes :)
To prevent camping etc: probably not.
reply
10 sats \ 2 replies \ @boisechampion 20 Dec 2023
I don't think so.
I just want more features for my territory as the owner.
Also, I would like to be able to block or mute entire territories from showing up in my home feed.
reply
10 sats \ 1 reply \ @BitcoinOutdoors OP 21 Dec 2023
Which ones would you mute currently? What if you miss something interesting or that you like?
reply
50 sats \ 0 replies \ @boisechampion 21 Dec 2023
Econ, Japan, probably at least half the territories. If I miss something than oh well. I’d rather be active and engaged with the content than just a passive observer
reply
10 sats \ 0 replies \ @nullama 20 Dec 2023
I see it as a business expense. Seems reasonable, maybe too cheap actually (there are too many territories already).
reply
10 sats \ 0 replies \ @Lost_dogz 20 Dec 2023
$40 a month (sorry for converting!) is not peanuts. Would it be an idea to split the rewards of a territory?
reply
10 sats \ 0 replies \ @spot 20 Dec 2023
The rate is fine, if you cant run it someone else would, and if no one is running it forward, it may not be worth it.
reply
10 sats \ 1 reply \ @Krv 20 Dec 2023
How about auctioning them? Some surely would be worth more than others.
reply
10 sats \ 0 replies \ @Krv 20 Dec 2023
...with some base cost to prevent frivilous territory creation
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @kristapsk 21 Dec 2023
I think it's too cheap.
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @0xIlmari 21 Dec 2023
Currently, clearly not expensive enough, as evidenced by the amount of trash ones that have been created.
Now, if Bitcoin continues to rip up throughout 2024, but the sat price stays the same, this question will have to be revisited.
reply
10 sats \ 0 replies \ @Eobard 20 Dec 2023
deleted by author
reply