pull down to refresh
9 sats \ 13 replies \ @grayruby 14 Feb \ on: What percentage of SN posts are sat farming garbage? meta
How do you define sat farming garbage?
Good question!
Probably up for debate. Me personally, I'd say it's something posted to farm sats that doesn't have value.
And the moment I write that I dig myself a hole, because as I think of examples, I realize that even if it is JUST an AI prepared summary of a video or article, someone might ACTUALLY get benefit from consuming it...
I suppose it's easier to say what IS NOT and CANNOT be sat farming garbage, which is something that took real time and energy and care to prepare. Or as @DarthCoin likes to say, PoW posts...
reply
Search my old posts about some assmilkers on SN.
Now is better but just few months ago was a nightmare.
I still stand my ground with my proposals I did in the past:
- remove leaderboard and daily rewards.
- separate upvotes (CCs) from zaps (sats)
- separate ranking earned in a territory from the rest.
reply
wait, upvote? What's that? Oh, you mean, create the distinction, yet it's not distinct yet
reply
The best example for your question is in the comment made on your tutorial about GrapheneOS: #884967 he never contribute with something useful, just rambling around and assmilking, gambling, betting, posting mostly garbage (also with his sockpuppet accounts).
That assmilker is using multiple sockpuppet accounts on SN. He's a deranged shitcoiner (see examples on his bio #788785).
Like you said, it must be some PoW not just posting bullshit links and shitGPT text just to grab some sats.
Your guides for example, we all can see that you work on them and you know what are you talking about. Even that I do not agree with your position about monero, your guides are good and I appreciate them.
reply
Thanks I actually appreciate that
reply
I already told DarthCoin that when SN started, we did distinguish sats and upvotes and it sucked. It looked like this:
5 votes \ 10 sats \ 3 commentsOnly the first sat was an upvote and the rest were just appreciation (just like DarthCoin explains his proposal now). Then we realized it's actually very good for ranking if someone can pay more if they find something more valuable and that this distinction is confusing for stackers so we got rid of it.
I don't know how exactly DarthCoin imagines his proposal will look like in the UI, but if it's anything like the separate buttons for likes and zaps on nostr, I suspect it's going to be just as bad.
Btw, DarthCoin should know this, he has been here since #166.
reply
the idea seems good to me and you prevent this type of "sat-hunting" content, raising it to the top for votes and the Sats are like a tip from those who appreciated it even if they don't vote for it to be highlighted.
reply
I know and was a good visual in the beginning.
And now are even better to be distinguished upvotes from sats because we have CCs.
Who wants to upvote with more ranking points then could use more CCs. Nothing wrong with that.
I want the separation to show clearly the "appreciation" in sats and the ranks from upvoting. That will give a clearer view of what is going on.
Example:
- I read a post and I like a lot the PoW the OP did on it. But is not worth upvoting a lot to be pushed on top. But worth more sats from me, because I want to give him those sats.
- I read a post and is very important for the community, so I will push more upvotes (CCs) and just few sats...
I hope you get my point now.
Even this post of you, I don't know now how I can do it, sats or upvotes ?
reply
So if something is very important for the community, you rather give them upvotes than sats 🤔
Does this not sound wrong to you?
Btw, we want to allow you to zap (exclusively) sats in profiles outside of ranking (so without the 30% fee). Maybe that's enough for what you want to do.