51 sats \ 4 replies \ @Undisciplined 1 Apr \ parent \ on: Million Sat Madness v2 meta
I love the word "rather". Let it fly!
I don't have a great feel for what the range of moderator power is like. Are there only a few all-star zappers? I don't think there's any technical reason why that has to be the case.
I'm sure there are valuable tweaks that can be made to all this stuff. The devs always seem interested in thoughtful suggestions.
The question is whether a top-heavy reward scheme like MSM1 (March) incentivized a few stackers to zap content or a lot of stackers.
I think the OP says that they had more stackers earning, but doesn't say anything about unique stackers zapping.
The expansion of the leaderboard for MSM2 from 64 to 100 implies that SN wants reward incentives to be more broadly spread across stackers.
If we think that the main purpose of rewards is to provide an incentive for stackers to zap good content, it would seem that top-heavy rewards did create an all-star zapper incentive.
It should be pretty easy to test though: if we do MSM for a few months and # of unique zappers decreases, it might mean that MSM is not incentivizing stackers to zap unless they think they will be on the leaderboard.
reply
MSM is not incentivizing stackers to zap unless they think they will be on the leaderboard.
I think we agree on this statement. People should interpret this point the other way, though: i.e. "If I zap big, often, early, and well, then I will be on the leaderboard."
reply
For a non-SN-addict user who maybe doesn't come every day but jumps into the conversation when they are here, the zap big, often, early, and well advice may not be so good during MSM months. Whereas during daily rewards, it was pretty awesome advice for every SN user.
reply
I agree that it's easier to get in on the party with daily rewards.
reply