736 sats \ 19 replies \ @cryotosensei 1 Apr \ on: Million Sat Madness v2 meta
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
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.
reply
Top-heavy rewards incentivize everyone to try harder.
I don't know that this is true.
I can see gold medals incentivizing some people to try hard. But a lot of people don't think a gold medal is realistic for them, and they just ignore top-heavy rewards.
Top-heavy rewards might be good at incentivizing people to be the best stacker ever, but SN might be a better online forum if it incentivizes fewer all-stars and a more general "add something to the conversation when you have something useful to say."
reply
You got paid out? I didn't get shit
reply
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