2 sats \ 1 reply \ @nice 9 Jul 2022 \ on: Ross Ulbricht creates a little turn-based pen-and-paper game called ORB bitcoin
It's good that he's keeping himself busy inside. Still hoping that someday he gets out.
I think. She's still figuring out how everything works but she has her own stack that she tops up whenever she has extra cash lying around.
I think the current system is alright. I've suggested this somewhere else but I think one way to reduce the amount of spam and lower quality content is to just make the site invite-only. I don't think SN is at that point currently where spam is a problem. But thinking about it, current users can invite someone they vouch for by giving them an initial "liquidity" with a minimum of 100 sats.
It's hard to take things like these seriously considering that iOS is a proprietary, closed-source software.
I don't think adding a downvote would help. It's what made reddit a crazy echo chamber of the same ideas and thoughts regurgitated again and again. That's why I mentioned above that stacking sats on a post should not dictate the position of a post in the discussion and the default post sorting should be by most recent activity.
Downvote is better than moderation imo. Its kind of leveraging the wisdom of the crowd. Free speech depend on this to survive. This has been a central argument in favour of free speech since inception.
In an ideal world this would be the case. But I think reddit has shown that people will most often upvote and downvote things based on whether they agree with what was said or not. That creates a scenario where the most popular opinion in the subreddit floats to the top and the fringe and challenging ones sink to the bottom.
I think it's better to let the activity of a discussion dictate the position of posts rather than brownie points.
This might be a dim view on people but I can see a possibility where a reporting system can be used to weed out fringe and controversial opinions. With SN not having a "downvote", I think having a reporting system can (and most probably will) be used as a "downvote".
That's why I'm leaning towards letting the open market decide which posts get to the top and only filter out posts that are off-topic for the site. Heck, you can even argue to not have any filtering at all. Put a hard limit on the available posts, say 100, and let the tip system dictate which posts survive and which not. That would be a nice experiment to see.
Also, I think a reporting system like that also creates a weird incentive where the site profits for every reported post.
The docked fee could then be split amongst the reporter and the platform in order to fund the moderation at the platform level and incentivize reporting at the user level.
I was also thinking along these lines but I decided not to pursue it since you are basically rewarding people for mass reporting. This can lead to very ugly situations where wrongthink is punished and only the "most agreeable" opinion rises to the top.
I think minimal moderation really is key to foster free and open discussion. Just something along the lines of: "Not bitcoin or bitcoin-tech related? Delete." should suffice. The current system, I think, already filters most of the low-effort spam and helps fund the maintenance of the site.
I've mulled over it for a bit more and I think SN could benefit on closing its open registration once it hits a critical mass of users. Having an invite system where current users can invite new users by giving them initial "liquidity" to interact with the site can help curtail the potential for the quality of posts to go down.
That is a hard question. I've been giving it some thought since I posted that comment. I don't think moderation is a good idea and I would rather have the open market dictate the posts that float to the top. I think the current system works for filtering low-effort spam and I would like it to continue that way.
One reason why I dislike reddit is that its structure is conducive in creating echo chambers where the "most popular" opinion for that particular subreddit floats to the top and any dissenting or controversial ones fade into their own small bubbles.
The idea that I'm thinking at the moment is to not let the amount of stacked sats dictate the position of a post in any shape or form and only sort posts by their most recent activity. Clicking that lightning button should just be a form of "Thank you for your contribution to the discussion"-kind of thing and anti-spam. That way, people will not game the system for profit.
I'm thinking the current incentive structure for SN will create instances where people will optimize for the most clickbait-y type of links and articles. I hope there's a system to deal with that should SN get traction.
That is actually cool. Though being custodial does take away some of its shine though. Would it be possible for this system to work for a non-custodial LN wallet?
GENESIS