40 sats \ 4 replies \ @0xbitcoiner 9h \ on: Tiered Sybil Fee Idea meta
The idea is good. You could have paid them directly!
wallet > withdraw > lightning address
write
preview
147 sats \ 3 replies \ @grayruby OP 9h
Yes and that adds no value to SN rewards or territories. I am trying to solve to not have to do that.
reply
40 sats \ 1 reply \ @ek 9h
The fee is what adds value to rewards and territories but that’s what you’re trying to avoid. You can’t have both.
I guess this is about the space between fee and no fee?
reply
100 sats \ 0 replies \ @grayruby OP 9h
Yes but if people don't zap or start zapping outside of SN because the fee is to high it doesn't add any value to rewards or territories.
I gave an example today. Between coins and myself we zapped over 20k sats outside of SN. Previously we would have done that on SN generating 2k plus in fees to be split between rewards and territory but instead 0 sats were generated in this instance.
30% of 0 is not better than 10% of 20k.
I am not saying what you guys have done is wrong. Just trying to come up with ideas to balance the need for territories to earn revenue and the incentive to zap freely on SN.
reply
40 sats \ 0 replies \ @0xbitcoiner 9h
You're doing it the right way, that's valuable!
reply