1096 sats \ 4 replies \ @UCantDoThatDotRugged 16 Feb \ on: Stacker News Growth Deck meta
Incentives: I think they are currently well aligned. Adoption is pretty impressive, in comparison to Nostr and Bitcoin Lightning, for instance. Unless there's some really active posters with multiple accounts each :D I think growth will take care of itself, honestly - as each user has incentive to help. I would caution against sinking money into sales and marketing. I think the greatest advantage you have over others is that very little is needed. Awareness could be accelerated, but it will occur organically. I HATE the idea of paid advertising. I would look into trading advertising with other principled businesses in the space and avoid paying for advertising of potentially ambiguous benefit.
Anon Posting: Love it, along with anon zapping. Is there a way for a person to use existing auth apps / extensions without sharing their info with you? Or with the new browser based specs coming out? Randomized usernames for each post might be easier than throwaway nostr addresses, if the security profile is the same. I'm out of my league, but could be interesting. One thought, if anons can post, does it still cost sats to post? Or will filters be introduced..
AMAs: Perfect - this brings mutually beneficial scenarios at zero cost - this is the model I would prefer if I were you. In my mind, one of the great fallacies of modernity is the need for expenses to gain growth. Generally speaking, growth purchased is weak and expensive and temporary and disruptable, while growth earned is the opposite.
Cowboy hats: Still don't know what this is, I read the whole FAQ I think :D That might be ok - part of the culture could be figuring out what these, and easter eggs, even are. And there could be more of them. Could territories make their own? Kind of like badges I guess? Or even badges that are bots that have distribution capability? Could be a marketplace for these?
Thunderstorms etc: Sounds interesting. Could be a lottery, you rain down a thunderstorm on all who are posting right now, all you've previously zapped, all who've previously zapped you, up to your specified amount, including some to stacker - and you have a 1/5 chance to get double back what you sent.
Leaderboards: Muy statistico es bueno. Not just 'top' - list people who zapped the most times, least average per zap (the egalitarian award) - those who zapped the widest variety of vocabulary - those who zapped the most images - those who zapped the fewest images - those who zapped the most zapped posts - those who zapped otherwise unzapped posts - those who zapped soonest after post was made - will also help identify gamers of the system.
Paywalls / subscriptions: ugh. I mean I guess give the option. But also the option to crowdwall, where once anyone or group of people donate up to a certain threshold it's unlocked. And for subscriptions, lots of programmable options by territory owner for what subscribers get would be cool. Like everyone can read everything, but only subscribers can comment more often than once every x minutes. Or subscribers get zapshare to x%. etc
Competitions: love it. reminds me of Fark photoshop contests.
Amplifying top stackers: Sorry I'm too new to know (and see next paragraph). But is this easily gameable? Like I just zap myself from another account? And then get free advertising? Just want to make sure it isn't. In other words, want to make sure 'top stacker' is a valid proxy for 'most valued creator/curator.'
Formula / Algorithm Experiments: The way sats are divvied should be transparent and adhere to game theoretic and economically sound principles. For instance, there should never be someone who decides that zapping top posts gets rewarded - because what about the guy who is trying to find underrated posts that haven't been zapped yet but should be. And vice versa. I don't like the idea of a centralized org determining the distribution of wealth based on the theory du jour, but rather like the idea of something so simple and economically sound that it is an example to the entire community. I would ask the Austrians.
"attract advertisers to fund daily contests': "This contest brought to you by ____ + logo + two sentence description" - love it
reply
reply
I think in general it does not bring the return it advertises. Buying adspace directly from a website that is known to be a fair dealer would be different, or trading adspace here, for adspace there. But radio or TV or print advertising, where it is always guesswork how many people are reached and how many of them buy. Those numbers are always exagerrated by the seller, and therefore prices are inflated. These forms of advertising are typically only a good return for the established player who gains additional value (aside from purchases driven directly by the ad), such as helping to maintain market dominance, or control/ influence over the network/station/paper/publisher (Pfizer), or brand saturation (liberty, liberty, liberty). For an upstart competitor entering the market, falls on deaf ears IMO. Any service that provides 'impressions' in exchange for 'cost per clicks,' is as gameable as youtube views are. Buying podcast mentions is guesswork, but probably pretty good in this space, assuming you go directly with the bitcoin friendly podcasters, and not to some service.
reply
... and there's a ton of growth that can be had for $0 at this point for stacker.news - though as I said before, accelerating that growth is possible for $$
reply