pull down to refresh
Love it
I'm pretty sure I've pitched all kinds of randomizations, including that one. It's such a great way to preserve the general incentive structure while reducing gamability.
Also, splitting the rewards over different payout durations might reduce some of the extremes.
all kinds of randomizations, including that one.
That could lead to some unfair situations. For example, a stacker who’s spent a lot on curation could miss out on the best reward intervals and end up getting the worst ones instead!
That seems more likely with the current situation.
If you spend a lot on curation for a day with low rewards, you miss out completely. If it were split across different periods, your daily reward share would suck but you might make it up on the weekly or monthly rewards shares.
I was thinking shorter than a day! ~lol
I actually think it might be possible to do dynamic rewards, where each zap skips the rewards pool entirely and gets distributed directly to rewards earners.
Sounds kinda complex, but maybe I'm just not seeing the whole picture.
k00b mentioned wanting to try hourly rewards awhile ago and I didn’t get how that could work, either, until we got the new ranking system.
Basically, at the moment of each zap we know the ranking of each item and the strength of each stacker’s contribution to the item. So, we can have a list of where everyone ranks in the rewards categories that updates in real time. That’s what informs the reward split of each zap.
What if the size of the rewards pool was not publicized?
That kinda reminds me of the old algorithm (was it the first or the second one?). Even so, I think you can get a rough idea by checking out the day’s posts. I’m just not sure that would actually make the user experience any better!
What if the size of the rewards pool was not publicized?
And what if distribution times were randomized?
You get the same incentivzied behavior, but because the connection to actions is more diffuse, you might get less distorted behavior.