pull down to refresh
Is there something like the sunk cost fallacy going on here?
Right now? Not for me. I'm just using the sats I get from these scams and people fighting scammers, to fight scammers. I'm sitting on today's reward sats to see how it can be used best, depending on how the situation develops, as there's a delay between the rewards side and the damage being done. Ultimately, if there's no use for the sats as down, then I'll just distribute them to good content.
The cards in the current system are stacked against any scammer. The masses win if they wanna. They just don't wanna. Which I found out back during the first war. It didn't get better since, not for upzaps and not for downzaps. And that's ok. It just shows the algo has weaknesses.
FWIW, and to your point about
the strategically correct move
I've personally been very careful to not downzap such posts into oblivion because I hate zap wars. Only need to get it back to a normal balance without the boosts, and I don't care if it's on lit for 4 hours or even a day: if 99.95% of a post's display value is boosts, then that's the threshold for down; maybe even 99.94%. In all cases, the post started with a boost. "Initiation of hostilities" was done by the poster in each case.
PS: If I lose my mind (more than I already lost it) tomorrow and were to start posting scams, I'd hope you all downzap me. I truly do. You really should. Because don't let new people fall for the scams. I've already seen some results that I really do not like to be caused by SN in general. I see people being at risk because they are attracted to the wealth of this scammer. Luckily not on my territory because then it would have been my failure.
I'm not sure it's true for the long term.
If all the top posts have 1M sats positive balance, then that's the new bar. The future content that is better than what is there, then requires at least 1M sats positive balance. Feasible with a growing money supply. Not so feasible for Bitcoin denominated posts.
Maybe we're talking about different things. When I say downzapping may not be more capital efficient in the long-term, I mean that it doesn't not incentivize the creation of more quality posts in the same way an identical amount of upzaps would.
We likely differ on this, but I care more about people realizing that they will be rewarded for adding value here than I do about people realizing that they won't be rewarded for trying to extract value from here.
But they're not mutually exclusive, and here's why:
downzaps are 100% circular.
So the ultimate recipient of even more encouraging zaps for good content than was possible before can be had the next day, when the boosts have been redistributed through downzaps into rewards.
To that end, I have the perfect solution: pay rewards in CCs 🤣 (I'm actually only half joking, but still not recommending this, to be clear.)
I've also kicked around the CC rewards concept.
I think it's a bad thing from a custody pov. Just like removing boosts is bad from a sybil pov. And removing downzaps is great... from a shamelessly self promoting scammer pov.
There are multiple hooks into the system as a whole and if your discussions (and my endless venting so I can cope with things) are proving anything, it is that balance is really, really hard to find.
Since rewards are the mechanism for turning CCs into sats, we'd at least need to replace that with something.
Ultimately, I think it is better to make everything withdrawable sats that can be withdrawable sats and moving in the other direction is sort of scammy.
This is when I started thinking along these lines.
Is there something like the sunk cost fallacy going on here? Once you have the sats, their source is irrelevant to what you choose to do with them.
True for the immediate term. I'm not sure it's true for the long term.