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.

350 sats \ 2 replies \ @Murch 17h

Have you thought about smoothing it out: e.g., paying out 10% of the reward pool every day?

reply
108 sats \ 0 replies \ @Kruw 8h

I mentioned that to @Scoresby already.

reply

I haven't thought about that for the rewards pool, but it is what I do personally for my zap amounts.

reply
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!

reply

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.

reply

I was thinking shorter than a day! ~lol

reply

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.

reply

Sounds kinda complex, but maybe I'm just not seeing the whole picture.

reply

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.

reply