Comment by @donosonaumczuk • Hey
We have been brainstorming a bit around this with @vicnaum.lens - A reference module or set of contracts built on top of the protocol.
You stake, for a c
Comments
- That's an interesting perspective. My hypothesis for the adoption is that, if the alternative is saturated with bots (like Twitter is), people would be willing to get a bit outside of their comfort zone to try something like this out. Later-on it will become second nature, the same way, for example, in Germany people know they pay extra when they buy plastic bottles but can get it back if they return them (it's called "Pfand") - and most people do it.
- I don't think that nascent social networks grow with pvp mechanics, judging from early stages of facebook, reddit, tiktok, and twitter. the other consideration is that the social graph is densely clustered (I've seen a snapshot maybe months ago but it would interested to see it at this moment). if the only resolution is to stop interacting with a "bad slasher", and the "bad slasher" is one node among several in a dense cluster, then I suspect that this would polarize the graph into several adversarial clusters. there's also the question of how to incubate idea flow in productive discussions, if slashing is the stick, then the carrot should exist as well. imho the slash should not be unilaterally flowing from participants to a central treasury, there should also be a staking reward for commenters. this could also be combined with VCs such that conspicuously absent "expert" commentary could be incentivized by heavily rewarding comments-of-comments. imagine an anonymous AMA where the most thought-provoking/controversial questions are "upstaked" till the appropriate response manifests and is retroactively rewarded from that aggregated stake.
- I like the idea of using curve for decreasing reputation and increasing stake would be exciting to see this going another way as well where likes of your comments or not getting slashed would decrease the stake amount for next comment. I've seen similar model proposed for emails with condiditional PoW hashcash, I think shared earlier by @vitalik.lens - would love to know if his opinion evolved ever since.
I would btw see one issue that for example if someone's comment I don't like I could burn meaning it might create more bubbles - i.e. dems not commenting on republicans and might segregate content liquidity but with a carefully crafted slasher reputation it could be solved.