pull down to refresh

The first round of our Million Sat Madness experiment came to an end last night (with 4.5 million sats rewarded to our top 64 stackers), and today we're starting another round with a few modifications.
To understand why, let's first reflect on some of the results from March:

The Good

  • The number of stackers earning for their posts and comments hit all-time highs (up 13% and 11% respectively in March)
  • The number of stackers spending sats hit an all-time high (up 4% in March)
  • The number of items created hit an all-time high (up 23% in March)
  • The number of comments/post hit an all-time high (up 29% in March)
  • The number of zaps hit an all-time high (up 26% in March)
  • We had our second biggest month of sats spent on zaps (up 25% in March)
Across the site, most of our important metrics either hit all-time highs, or saw sequential monthly improvements during March, even adjusting for the two extra days vs. February.

The Bad

One metric which remained flat in March is the number of new stackers signing up to SN. We have a few experiments planned to target this specifically, which we hope will incentivize more signups and help stackers earn more for their referrals.

Looking Forward

In April, we are making two notable changes to Million Sat Madness.
First, the top 100 contributors will earn Million Sat Madness rewards.
One fun element of Million Sat Madness is the competition and satisfaction of watching your profile rise up the leaderboard. While this is fun for the top participants, most stackers will entirely miss out on the experience if the leaderboard is too restrictive.
We think expanding Million Sat Madness to 100 stackers strikes a better balance of fun and competition for stackers.
Second, the Million Sat Madness rewards curve will be less top-heavy. First place will now earn a flat 1 million sats (first place earned 1.6 million sats in March), and every other position will get a percentage of the remaining rewards pool.
If the rewards pool in April is as large as it was in March, positions 1-3 will earn less, while positions 4-100 will earn more. Position 100 would even earn more than position 64 did in March.
One of our goals with Million Sat Madness was to help the top 100 SN contributors earn more rewards than they were prior to Million Sat Madness, and two tailwinds make this possible:
  • Limiting the total number of reward recipients to 100 stackers
  • Eliminating the SN team from Million Sat Madness
The total size of the rewards pool is roughly consistent, so with an improved rewards curve, the top 100 stackers should earn more rewards than they did under the previous daily rewards system.
Finally, Bitcoin++ will be the title sponsor of Million Sat Madness in April, and we plan on offering this sponsorship opportunity to companies across the Bitcoin ecosystem in future months.
Stacker News is quickly becoming the internet's home for Bitcoin content, and we believe an exclusive sponsorship placement can be both an incredible value for brands, while also contributing to the sustainability of Stacker News rewards.

One Final Note

The Stacker News team has been closely monitoring feedback and data from Million Sat Madness, and has been debating the right approach to rewards both internally and on SN.
While we decided to try another month in April, we also realized that the job of structuring a rewards system may be a task individual territory owners are better equipped to determine over time.
Just like territory owners have the ability to customize fees and post types, we plan to give territory owners more economic levers to experiment with (like rewards structure) over time.
Now that I successfully fed both my children, I’m back to offer a more considered response.
I think while all metrics are NGU, we shouldn’t neglect user satisfaction. More than one Stacker has openly expressed dismay at MSM. I think even though the leaderboard has expanded to 100 people, the problem still remains. Those small fry (for lack of a better word) would not gain anything extra for their posting efforts. As a newbie, what really kept me going was the anticipation of the Daily Rewards. Maybe I would get a few hundred sats today! I think to take that away in favour of MSM seems to contradict the objective of attracting new Stackers n making them stay.
I was a beneficiary of March’s MSM, and given my drive, would probably do well in this edition of MSM. But I cannot in all good conscience ignore the feelings of Stackers whom I now consider to be everyday shitposting buddies just because of sats.
My two sats’ worth
reply
My thinking about this is that if zapping is up, then people should be able to get started the same way I did, by commenting on posts and zapping what they earn from that.
reply
Getting a balance of sats on the platform is a hurdle for newcomers, but rewards are about keeping people around.
Attracting new users probably means reducing hurdles (although SN has done a pretty good job of this) and getting them to stick around.
I suspect MSM will not be particularly fruitful for either.
Zapping may be up, but new users may not benefit from it very much.
reply
Maybe, I think most people zap thoughtful comments on their posts.
I started with zero balance less than two years ago and damn near won MSM because I try to leave thoughtful comments and I zap a ton. I think that's a completely replicable strategy.
reply
Indeed it is. Posting thoughtful, interesting content will definitely get you sats.
But I think if you had started from zero during MSM, your climb to current heights would have been slower and more difficult.
MSM is an incumbents' game.
reply
I barely ever got rewards when I started, so I don't think it would have made much difference.
It's not that I think you don't have a point, btw. I just think people are overlooking that rewards aren't really the mechanism for new people to stack with. Rewards are designed to benefit the top users and those will tend to be incumbents.
reply
This a good point. But I'm curious why it should be the case that rewards are designed to benefit top users.
Rewards are a great way to get a light, infrequent user to turn into a more engaged community member. At least this is how it worked for me.
I only posted on SN occasionally for the last few years, but a few occasions of getting rewards got me to pay a lot more attention.
This is especially true with zapping others and commenting.
reply
Why do gold medals go to the top performer? Top-heavy rewards incentivize everyone to try harder.
I only posted on SN occasionally for the last few years, but a few occasions of getting rewards got me to pay a lot more attention.
I definitely relate to that. I would prefer if they reinstated some sort of daily rewards.
42 sats \ 0 replies \ @0fje0 1 Apr
MSM seems to contradict the objective of attracting new Stackers n making them stay
It not only seems that way, the published metric confirms it:
One metric which remained flat in March is the number of new stackers signing up to SN.
reply
You got paid out? I didn't get shit
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @kr 1 Apr
I cannot in all good conscience ignore the feelings of Stackers whom I now consider to be everyday shitposting buddies
if they are actually posting every day, i suspect they will have no problem being one of the top 100 stackers in April
some AMA guests managed to get into the top 64 from making a single post all month
reply
40k sat reward for me. Not bad, especially when I've not been very active this month. Less dopamine for "tipping top content early" which is usually what I get more rewards for previously. Divided out by 30 days, it's about what I would make on a normal good day with rewards alone, but I definitely didn't get that much every day so net positive for sure.
One stat that would be interesting, even if you had less signups, did you have more new user retention for the month? I would suspect that was down too, given there was less daily rewards.
reply
good feedback, and glad you’re earning more sats. this should be the outcome for everyone on the leaderboard (as compared to daily rewards).
signups were labeled “bad” because they were not up, but they weren’t down either. they have been stuck at roughly 800 stackers/month for a long time, will be focusing on this number specifically with other experiments.
the percentage of new stackers earning sats in their first week was up slightly in March, but there is a lot of variability and it’s in line with our long-term average.
reply
Are 1M sats per month the normal reward pool?
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @kr 2 Apr
SN funds 3M sats into the rewards pool each month, the remainder is from zap, post, job fees (the total rewards pool was ~4.5M in March)
reply
Lol Welcome to the second annual Sat Hunger Game, may the odds be ever in your favour
And to the plebs who don't make it onto the board
reply
Wah this is like playing Hunger Games version 2.
I haven’t had time to recover from my posting fatigue, but I’m in. Let’s do this.
May the odds be in your favour
reply
Well said... a rigged hunger games...
reply
38 sats \ 7 replies \ @anon 1 Apr
a million sadness
reply
In April the rewards will be in ETH or some MSTR shares
reply
17 sats \ 0 replies \ @anon 1 Apr
well that would be no surprise since who runs the @sn account is potentially a closet shitcoiner
reply
LOL who is zapping anon? 😂😂😂😂😂
reply
I always zap anon. Giving back and all that.
reply
sshhh I know, those sats goes to SN pool and back to you.
reply
17 sats \ 1 reply \ @anon 1 Apr
we zap anon
reply
We already know that we have 2 anons: Christine Lagarde and Janet Yellen - #488963
488 sats \ 3 replies \ @siggy47 1 Apr
April Fool's, right?
reply
Came here to say this lol
reply
I guess I should clarify. I don't necessarily hope this is an april fool's joke, but rather, be cautious of this announcement being made on april first lol
reply
I was about to say this too. 🤣
reply
First, the top 100 contributors will earn Million Sat Madness rewards.
We think expanding Million Sat Madness to 100 stackers strikes a better balance of fun and competition for stackers.
I think this is the correct choice.
I can also envision a leader board where you show all users but show the cutoff line for rewards. I found last month I didn't know how far outside the leader board I was. Was I 65th or 999th?
reply
Allowing "stacker is hidden" in the leaderboard is NOT a fair game!
reply
0 sats \ 1 reply \ @anon 1 Apr
not allowing anon in, is like not allowing irrational economic actors into the game :)
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @anon 1 Apr
max outrage mode initiated :) terms and conditions may apply
reply
Do rewards from March count toward April MSM zaprank? If so, it seems like it might be pretty difficult for anyone to catch the momentum of the top 5.
reply
17 sats \ 4 replies \ @kr 1 Apr
agree, will make sure they don’t count
reply
79 sats \ 3 replies \ @k00b 1 Apr
Receiving rewards has never increased one's chances of receiving future rewards and that's still true.
reply
112 sats \ 0 replies \ @anon 1 Apr
you must be new around here
reply
Good to know. It may be worth rethinking the total stacked field for each stacker on the leaderboard because it looks like it currently shows total stacked including rewards. This might lead to the assumption that rewards are included as a factor in zaprank.
reply
17 sats \ 0 replies \ @k00b 1 Apr
Good point. Appearances and all that
reply
83 sats \ 1 reply \ @davidw 1 Apr
Secretly hopes this is an April Fools.
Sounds like some solid improvements. Not sure I’ll hit it quite as hard this month, but great to see those numbers go up & you open to tweaking. Congrats on the sponsor.
Long-term if they contribute enough MSM could become titled too, e.g. bitcoin++ Sat Stacker.
reply
Did you get paid?
reply
Eliminating the SN team from Million Sat Madness
cc: @kr @ek
reply
this is a feature not a bug 😂
reply
16 sats \ 0 replies \ @kr 1 Apr
thanks, will fix
reply
Yeah IDK, I've been scouring the site trying to understand what happened... I was getting pretty excited as the end of March MSM was coming to an end. I was solidly between 22nd and 26th place. As the /rewards page already moved on to April, I'm not sure what my final place was. All I know is I didn't receive anything. It was roughly around 40-something thousand sats that I expected. I've got kind of an empty feeling as I contemplate the new month. I posted quite a few articles that represented quite a lot of hours of work. I think I may step back from contributing. Feel a bit rug-pulled. Lot of build up and hype, and yet I'm still not 100% WTF happened innit. Cheers fellow rugged stackers. Imma sit the next one out I think. Hopefully it's all just a sad April Fool's joke and the March MSM sats are being distributed tomorrow. I still haven't heard of one person who got paid. cc: @DarthCoin since you got me in here and because you've been posting some cryptic stuff about it
reply
I enjoy your posts a lot fwiw. I'll keep zapping 'em if you keep writing 'em.
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @k00b 1 Apr
We had a bug that rewarded people according to their Feb ranking. I will manually everyone who should've been paid today.
See #489749 for a post-mortem.
reply
Same here, I was somewhere at 47k sats last night before going to bed, should have made a printscreen.
reply
When Darth is raising a warning, usually people are just laughing.... because they consider Darth a crazy old man. They can ignore my warning, but they cannot ignore the consequences of my warnings. Darth is always talking when he knows something.
no worry... I heard that Janet Yellen and Christine Lagarde are airdropping sats on SN - see here #488963
WHEN STACKER NEWS YIELD ? A 4% yield on the stacker balance, every day. 😂😂😂😂😂
reply
Ouch!
reply
207 sats \ 2 replies \ @kepford 1 Apr
Overall I like MSM. Glad it is being adjusted. I have a suggestion. What if MSM was only once per quarter. It was pointed out by @gmd that MSM caters more to hard core stackers than new folks. If attracting and keeping new users is a goal for SN it might be good to move back to weekly or daily rewards and just do MSM 4 times a year.
Now, with that said maybe daily rewards attracts the kind of high time preference behavior we don't want for SN. I can see a case for that. I can see a case for rewarding the work of hard core stackers over new stackers. Just a thought.
These types of schemes are hard to create in a way that doesn't have negative consequences so good luck trying to tune it to be good for SN. Just try to keep that time preference balanced. What makes SN special to me is the community and thoughtfulness of most of the content here.
reply
I'm thinking it will actually be valuable to have this one come right after the previous. I think a lot of people got really excited for the big rewards and changed their behavior in unsustainable ways.
This month, I doubt the same irrational exuberance will possess us and we'll probably behave more like we would if monthly rewards were normal. This should give the team a better picture to draw conclusions from.
reply
That's a very good point.
I mean, its rigged.
reply
I pity the fool.
reply
This doesn't make sense to me. 100 is arbitrary and the algorithm didn't reward top contributors. There were people who only had one post get a reward? What if userbase doubles? You guys just vote on whether to reward 180 or 190 or 200 next time? Why not just simplify this and reward stackers with one sat per comment that got zapped, or one sat per post that didn't get outlawed, or at least do daily rewards as were done, while setting aside a million sats for games like this - not the whole rewards pool. Very disincentivizing. The last two weeks of the last month I had no chance so I just spent time elsewhere. I know I'm not the only one.
reply
The last two weeks of the last month I had no chance so I just spent time elsewhere.
Two weeks is plenty of time to change your standings, but I'm more curious about why the zaps you'd have gotten for posting and commenting weren't attractive enough on their own.
reply
Sort of. After two weeks I was at zero, and the prospect of going all in at the expense of the rest of life to maybe get 50th place and 10,000 sats was not worth it. Then again, somebody won a prize with only one post I heard, so who knows.
The rewards are more incentive. Without daily rewards, there is less incentive. It's not all or nothing. It isn't that regular zaps isn't enough, it's that when that's all there is, there is less incentive, therefore I spend more time elsewhere (such as fiat job).
Rewards are 10% of the regular zaps redistributed to some people. Daily rewards meant, therefore, more than 10% more sats than usual - I guess 30% more since it was the top 1/3. MSM meant 0% almost guaranteed.
reply
It's your gig, but I just won't take part in this, and I doubt I'm alone.
Those 100 people will be the only ones left using SN in the end.
If you can't see that then it's a shame, this could be really big.
reply
I just won't take part in this
Why? You can still get zaps for your posts and comments.
reply
I'm pretty new to this, but it seems to me that the posters and commenters are not the only group who keep things going.
There are a lot of people who perhaps only comment occasionally, and instead zap the posts/comments they find interesting or worthwhile.
I don't know what the proportion is, but a lot of people will mainly just read and zap, and they're the people who were previously rewarded with the daily rewards who will use the site less than they did before if only the top x number of posters/commenters are rewarded.
Yes, the posts and comments I think are more important generally - the content drives everything. But without people reading and zapping you run the risk of it ending up just the top x zapping each other.
Perhaps the drive is for the "zappers" to step up their funding of the wallets to fund the zaps, but really I think there are a large number of people who just hope things here are self-sustaining, they get zapped occasionally, they redistribute those sats to posts and comments that catch their eye.
I love this place, I think it's a great idea, and I'd be delighted if it grew exponentially, but the reward mechanisms in place are vital for that, and I don't think only rewarding the top x posters and commenters is the way to go to achieve that.
Just my two sats, as I say I'm new here so I may be completely wrong, but I can only be driven by my own motivation to be more or less involved, and I think that will mirror the same for others.
reply
a lot of people will mainly just read and zap, and they're the people who were previously rewarded with the daily rewards who will use the site less than they did before if only the top x number of posters/commenters are rewarded.
Some of them, but I'm one of the people who primarily gets rewards from zapping. All that's really changed is that the rewards come once a month instead of daily. That probably means people will have to ration a bit more, which is irritating and not ideal.
Perhaps the drive is for the "zappers" to step up their funding of the wallets to fund the zaps, but really I think there are a large number of people who just hope things here are self-sustaining
This is an interesting point. I've brought it up with k00b before. I agree with you, but then who is actually providing the funding for the site to operate off of?
reply
I don't think there are any rewards just for zapping now, are there? Or perhaps for larger amounts?
Yes it's fine to seek more user sat deposits to contribute to the site, and I will topup my wallet from time to time, but I don't think too many people will. It would be great to see more and more users and I think the rewards will drive that, though I have to confess I have no idea how it all really works, who funds the site etc.
I'm only drawing from my own motivations to participate which I expect are shared by others.
reply
70 sats \ 1 reply \ @kr 3 Apr
I don't think there are any rewards just for zapping now, are there?
yes, rewards are paid for both creating great content and zapping great content.
some stackers contribute with zaps more than original content, and some more with original content than zaps.
but both are weighted equally in rewards considerations.
reply
Chalk it up on the every-increasing list of things I didn't know.
reply
I's ti'ed, boss! Felt like SN was a slave driver and I needs me a rest!
reply
This was one of my issues. Month after month after month. This is turning into Instagram, where we have to feed the algo beast. Constant posting and looking at the leaderboard. I did this shit at primary school. It will appear like in moaning and true you'd be right but it's only because I believe this site could do better, but at the end of the day it's all about engagement and keeping you hooked and spending and isn't that what everyone on the internet is trying to do.
reply
I think they needed to do a second month to actually learn what we would do if rewards were always monthly.
Last month people got all weird about the competition and changed their habits, so it doesn't provide very good data for decision making.
If they do it a third month, then there's cause for concern.
reply
You're right, many many people who's engagement was below par coming in to March compared to regular commenters, suddenly came out of the shadows enticed by the big money sats and went crazy. We could see this evidenced by yesterdays whining, screaming and crying that they hadn't got their sats, because of the month bug issue rewarding people based on their February rankings in error. Yes I agree, I believe that peoples engagement will calm down and be less this month compared to March, this is a marathon, not a sprint and we should see more more normal behaviour going forward month by month, if MSM is to keep going that is.
reply
This isn't real. It's April 1. You can't trick us
reply
This experiment still needs a lot of changes. During this March month I was observing a lot the behavior of users and also I found some flaws. That's why I repeated over and over (but nobody wants to listen Darth) that the MSM was rigged.
reply
How is it rigged? Rigged to me implies that the system is designed to favor specific user. This would be contrasted with design which would favor certain behaviors and actions over others. Which is it or what do you mean by rigged?
reply
If I will tell you, I have to kill you... the secret is bigger than that. I decided to not tell anybody, just because nobody paid attention to my warnings.
Quite a few weren't listened to, including you. The sticker chart is here to stay.
reply
So I'm not seeing any info here about stackers who weren't paid for March (and I don't think I fell 40+ spots in the final four hours, which I guess is the other possibility). Is that still being worked on?
reply
0 sats \ 3 replies \ @k00b 1 Apr
I'm looking into it. If there was this big of discrepancy between estimates and results, we made a mistake and I will make it right.
reply
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @k00b 1 Apr
We all have meetings with each other Monday mornings. I'm sorry it took me so long to reply.
reply
And while I wasn't screenshotting, I was generally showing up in the 18-20 range, a few spots ahead of @hn, with about a ~50K estimate.
reply
@sn did the final payout complete from March? I looked at midnight and was 25th and only got paid out for 38th place I believe.
reply
I think the "estimated reward" was truly an estimate. Although maybe it's more accurate to say estimated rank.
A lot of people moved ranks when the final rewards were doled out. I'm not really sure why.
reply
I get “estimated” but from being in 25th place and estimated 42.2k sats at the end of the contest to getting a reward of 21k sats and 38th place is WAY off.
reply
Fair. I think my estimated was 10th and I dropped to 18th. It does seem that the estimator isn't particularly accurate.
reply
I wonder who managed to move up in such a short time?
reply
Makes no sense literally that was my rank at midnight. Very frustrating to say the least. Maybe there is something with April fools or that they didn’t make the payouts in full yet. Would be nice to get an update
reply
This is not funny at all.
reply
Agreed, if it stands I fell like I got rugged for site engagement. Won’t make that mistake again.
My assumption was just that the estimated rank wasn't particularly accurate.
reply
Even weather people are more accurate with their estimates than being 50% off
reply
If true, then this is ridiculous situation and… unacceptable. I mean, how is this even possible?
reply
glad it's all squared away now. Hopefully you are all set too!
The real question is - why the heck I didn't recieve my reward till now?
reply
I think nobody received it yet
reply
I got mine. Seems like I ended max 1 or 2 positions higher than the one I saw 10 minutes before the ending, that may just be some final weighing effects.
reply
Well that's good. Why haven't I recieved it yet?
reply
What position did you end up in? How long before the end of the event do you see your position?
reply
reply
Do you by any chance have screenshots of the entire ranking?
reply
#489759 This was in the morning, however it was of Feburary because of the bug #489749
No. I wish I had.
🤷🤷
I still haven't received it either so we are in the same situation.
Yeah, a bunch of us are still waiting. Not sure if there's rhyme or reason, but it looks like there's a delay. https://i.imgur.com/zAx6E6R.jpeg
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @anon 1 Apr
we took it we used it well we promise
reply
597 sats \ 0 replies \ @go 1 Apr
MSM IS SO FIAT It plays into a king-maker mindset It disincentivizes Why are mining pools popular? MSM is like lottery mining. Small consistent rewards are better.
reply
Limiting the total number of reward recipients to 100 stackers
Should be 2^7 (128) 🤠
reply
Proof of concept: Zap big, zap often, zap early, zap well.
reply
65 sats \ 1 reply \ @anon 1 Apr
it might have worked? :)
reply
nope, because:
  1. you must keep the balance
  2. the game is rigged
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @nout 2 Apr
I got paid quite a bit, it will help cover part of the monthly territory fee 😅
reply
Are rewards from MSM v1 going to MSM v2? Seems like it should reset, cc @sn
reply
Just like territory owners have the ability to customize fees and post types, we plan to give territory owners more economic levers to experiment with (like rewards structure) over time.
Looking forward to it.
reply
Better I'll reread it on the second of April
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @anon 1 Apr
rational action detected
reply
0 sats \ 1 reply \ @anon 1 Apr
Rise up against a million sadness plebs Opt out Mutiny! :)
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @anon 1 Apr
oh wait you cant, for the stacker news matrix has you, the architects of the simulation, fuckin with you, like taking a dog for a walk on a leash
reply
Well, one more month of partying doesn't hurt anyone, right?
By the way, were last month's rewards distributed? I don't even know if I was among the top 64 hahaha.
reply
Who said it would be one more month? I've got a feeling it's here too stay.
reply
You are probably right, after the update of the MSM results and the site metrics thanks to the event, it is surely here to stay.
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @go 1 Apr
How many weeks to slow the spread?
reply
I like the changes in MSM 2. The competition looks much more acceptable than in MSM 1. Looking at the April stats, there will probably be a lot more changes in the future. I don't know why or how, but I'm starting to like this "Madness".
185 sats \ 0 replies \ @Cowboy 1 Apr
Not even received a single sat from million sat madness march, MSM not for everyone
24 hrs settlement was good
reply