121 likes if I may be honest. I want to say the zap but my brain won’t allow it 😔
Discussion
Same
How about 21 likes vs 21 sats?
Likes
If there were 21 people each zapping 1 sat, then it would be different. The more people liking mean the more people found this post a little bit helpful.
This.
This makes sense. I was thinking something similar, that 21 like, is 21 people. 1 person zapping is only one person.
One other question.
Do you evaluate a like differently if:
* you can only like
* you can zap and like as well
I think if a zap seems automated, I don’t value it as much. I get some zaps that are like 5 sats every time and that seems to indicate that they are autozaps. My mind disregards them. Pretty much anything below 100 sats feels like spam even though it could be a person zapping 21 sats or 69 sats 😉
And auto likes? 😁
If they were occasional auto likes, I might not be able to tell and would treat them as legit likes.
But, if someone is liking all of my notes or even too many notes, I’d probably ignore them. It’s weird to like everything someone says. To me that just feels like spam or kissing ass.
I think the same.
So for me, like and zap are tools. They both can have different usecases.
Both can be overused.
At the end, the meaning is important.
Automatic stuff has less meaning.
If someone likes everything, it also has no meaning.
If you can like and zap, you can attach different meaning to them, compared to the "traditional" system.
Also the problem with likes is, its easy to "create" them. Maybe we shall add proof of work to likes to show that we mean that like by mining it. Would be an interesting concept. Still it would be "free" to give, because you only pay your electricity. You don't have to use additional money, but it would have kind of a proof in it.
I also use likes as acknowledgments. Liking a note can mean I read it and saw what you had to say. I may agree with it in full, partially or not at all. That person will never know which it is. But, that only applies if they reply to me.
If I’m not the opposite party in a conversation then it’s most definitely an agreement about their statement - again partial or full.
I hate my mind for this. I don’t care for likes but given those choices, despite actually knowing what’s better, my animal brain still craves the likes.
Right! This implies there is some msats value on likes, which is a per-user subjective function of # of likes, # of zaps, and sum of zaps.
I hate myself for even thinking this or saying it but anything below 100 sats feels like it could be automated and doesn’t carry the same level of significance as say… a 420 zap.
Maybe that just means I’m still on the fiat standard despite telling myself I’m not? 🤷♂️
Or just brainwashed for years to be addicted to likes.
I do value conversations above all other metrics I think. Even with just 1 person.
Get it out of my brain please, need to switch that switch .
Same
also probably an unpopular opinion: logically 121 likes is a very good affirmation for your posts, a good data point, might actually be more valuable than those 21 sats, at-least in the short term.
Same 🥲
🤔9 hours ago… “Nothing excites me more than nostr and zaps ⚡️🐱”
I like both, i toggle #onlyzaps depending on how busy my feed is at any given time. I use it more as a noise reduction filter.
Agree… #onlyZaps definitely cleans up my notifications. I think it will just take time for people to get past the legacy “like” system, especially millennials who grew up with FB and Twatter.
Speaking of #zaps, ever thought about a dynamic zap amount? Like a zap setting that tracks a Moscow minute? #[5] also had a cool concept where the zap amount increases the longer you hold it. 🤙