pull down to refresh

100 sats \ 4 replies \ @Undisciplined 27 Jan \ parent \ on: could SN have dynamic territory fees based on engagement? meta
I agree, but the point of the system is to create good territories, not profitable ones.
write
preview
24 sats \ 3 replies \ @stack_harder OP 28 Jan
how are we defining good? I define good as somewhere with active participation back and forth, and quality discussions (although subjective). by virtue of a territory being good, it would be profitable I think as a byproduct.
Do we have agood territory here that is also unprofitable?
reply
32 sats \ 2 replies \ @Undisciplined 28 Jan
We're using it the same way.
Until a few months ago, all of the good territories were unprofitable, but now many of them are (at least on an accounting basis).
reply
25 sats \ 1 reply \ @stack_harder OP 28 Jan
interesting, is that becuase of the fee reduction and ability to pay in CCs?
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @Undisciplined 28 Jan
Two big things happened:
  1. The share of fees and zaps going to territories quadrupled
  2. Territory costs were cut in half
I don't know what, if any, impact cowboy credits are having.
reply