reply on: Opinionated MSM Community Feedback Summary \ stacker news ~meta

108 sats \ 2 replies \ @ek OP 3 Apr \ parent \ on: Opinionated MSM Community Feedback Summary meta

using this reply to reply to multiple things in this thread

So if you were to use @anon to zap your own posts, it would only be beneficial if @anon had a good global trust score.

@anon zaps have no effect on ranking since they are excluded from the web of trust.

If you use @anon to zap your own posts, you only game the system psychologically since we do show your zap visually in the total sat amount but it's not relevant for ranking. So if someone scrolls through recent, this might have an effect on them.

Zaps from @anon also fund the reward pool since 10% go to it instead of the author (like any other zap). That's what is meant with "sybil resistant" in the FAQ:

To make this feature sybil resistant, SN now takes 10% of zaps and re-distributes them to the SN community as part of the daily rewards.

If you zap @anon, 100% go into the reward pool.

To post anonymously costs 100 sats. Maybe this could be raised to make sure if you really want to post anonymously then you have to pay big. 200 / 300 sats

I am not sure if the first sentence is a statement or a suggestion? If it's a suggestion, that's already the case: comments cost 100 sats. Posts cost 100x the normal fee so depending on the territory, this might be pretty high.

Example for ~bitcoin:

I thought for a long while that @anon is actually too expensive but I get corrected over and over again by all the existing usage of @anon, lol.

15 sats \ 0 replies \ @Scoresby 3 Apr

Thanks for the info, @ek! Cool to have it all in one place.

Clearly @anon isn't too expensive, but tbh I have never used it, so I'm not really speaking with skin in the game.

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @0b1CoinObi 3 Apr

Thanks, good to know that it can't be used to game the system