pull down to refresh

110 sats \ 4 replies \ @k00b 21 Oct \ parent \ on: Darthcoin journey on Stacker News bitcoin
Unless we trust the content producer, or whoever is asking us to pay (curator, distributor, publisher), we won't be willing to make upfront payments. I think paywalls are less effective in places where there are low barriers to publishing and pseudonymity is encouraged.
For strong identities, including pseudonyms, paywalls can work. It lets the reader know what you'd like to be paid, makes it inconvenient for them to get the content otherwise, and they can't "forget" to zap at the end.
write
preview
195 sats \ 3 replies \ @Scoresby 21 Oct
Yes, I find paywalls annoying and must be highly motivated to overcome them.
But this leaves us with no incentive beyond wanting to reward an poster/commenter and "generally encourage more content of this type." This sounds to me like an externality, a lot like a factory dumping effluent into a river without regard for people downstream.
Rewards are a way of bringing the externality back into the market.
reply
27 sats \ 1 reply \ @k00b 21 Oct
I'm with you on rewards. It doesn't yet solve the problem for exceptionally high value content, like some of the short stories that have been shared here, but it's better than nothing. It might just be a matter of improving rewards though.
reply
27 sats \ 0 replies \ @DarthCoin OP 21 Oct
Rewards system was good until now. That's how you attracted stackers. But is time to move on and find better ways to keep stackers posting on SN.
reply
10 sats \ 0 replies \ @DarthCoin OP 21 Oct
Let's see how SN will deal with rewards after 5th of Nov... I doubt that will be able to have a proper p2p system that could work. Otherwise is going back to cowboy credits.
I stand my ground: separate v4v p2p zaps from SN upvotes (CC) and let the free market do its thing.
reply