I have to find a way to prioritize issues raised by those who Zapped the Devs. 🤔
Discussion
Justo
When that popup comes up It fails everytime . Lightning address not set
Now that would be cool!
Are you sure about that?
I'm sure the political donations system started out as innocent also!
This is not a democracy.
OK. So open to the highest bidder then?
Sure. It doesn't guarantee that we will follow it, but we will definitely take a look.
But more sats helps?
Slippery slope.
I understand your position but morality usually shifts over time. Meritocracy is important IMO.
Are you thinking of it as an incentive mechanism to bring in cash for devs? I guess that reward is probably low for amount of work
I don't know what you mean by meritocracy. Those involved in the project will already what they want to do. So, any merit is already been accounted for and by themselves. The only other merit is to those that donate to the project and deserve to be at least listened to.
I'm meaning that ideas should win. Not sats.
Understand your position. As you said you will do as you see fit also.
It doesn't work. There are so many ideas on what we should do (every user has a few) that it is impossible to even gather them all. I try my best, but I don't see most of the Amethyst-related discussion out there.
What slippery slope are you referring to? What is the outcome that you're afraid of?
To me, functionally this doesn't sound any different from any of the other feature bounties that exist. would you disagree or do you think they're all bad? To me it just seems like it's creating a market that allows for users to get features they value, and for devs to get paid, which both seem like good things.
Just hoping that the best idea wins, not the biggest wallet.
So if a donor gives a few sats and the idea is good, the idea would be judged on its merits. OK.
If a donor gives a lot of sats or repeatedly gives sats but the idea is not so good what happens? Sats are important to fund the team right? They need to eat too. I'm.not saying its gonna be the main case. But edges cases start as just that, edge cases.
Fully aware if users don't like the system they can try another client. Not debating that. Just saying that is the slippery slope I see.
I see your point. I guess I'm just not too worried about it since: as you pointed out there are other clients, technical considerations aside, unless zappers are malicious, I don't know that there's any reason to assume that donors' ideas are going to be worse than someone who's specialty is coding (as someone who does creative technical work, I cringe in fear every time I boss asks me to "just make something that users will like"), and it seems like, unless a whale of a donor functionally wants to buy a client, we'll still end up with the wisdom of the crowds giving us a great result.
And perhaps more coldly, while I too want great clients, client devs aren't running charities, no one owes us anything, and it'd be wrong of us to expect them to put our best interest ahead of their own.
When zaps are used to indicate interest in a feature I think ita fair to reduce the vote share of additonal sats from the same pubkey using an exponential curve.
Its different if they are used as a financial incentive to undertake the work.
What would make the prioritization difficult?
Seriously curious as I would inherently think that the most frequent issues raised would be the highest priority. The quantity of zaps shouldn't matter it should be the quantity of times each respective issue is brought up.
Is there a way to bring up the Zap the Devs dialog any time you want? Sometimes it's just Tuesday and I feel like a little dev-zap is in order.
You can click the version number at the bottom of the menu & it brings you to the latest release notes & can zap there
Hi, I can teach you how to turn your $250 into $6500 with Bitcoin in just 4hours without interrupting your daily activities or sending money to anyone
TEXT ME IF YOU ARE INTERESTED FOR MORE INFORMATION: 📱 WhatsApp : +1 (332) 288‑4872
The first 30 individuals to reach out to me through my private messages will receive guidance on how to multiply your $250 to $5,700 in just 4 hours. Please feel free to inquire further by messaging me via WhatsApp at +1 (332) 288-4872. Text inquiries can be directed to +1 (703) 879-8125.
I think this type of thing is very important!
A software economy is a different than an economy of products manufactured, distributed and purchased at a store.
Software is mostly zero cost to replicate and not scarce, time for development on the otherhand is scarce and benefits from being able to determine where time is valued the most.
Software development is a service, buying software is about the next marginal unit that doesn't yet exist. People will value it very differently.
How about donate by zap votes on issues? I know the github classic don't support it, but maybe we can innovate :)
Yeah, that would be awesome. List a list of things people could vote for by zapping.
We've been discussing exactly this point with nostr:nprofile1qqs2qzx779ted7af5rt04vzw3l2hpzfgtk0a2pw6t2plaz4d2734vngpzamhxue69uhhyetvv9ujumn0wd68ytnzv9hxgtcppemhxue69uhkummn9ekx7mp0qy2hwumn8ghj7un9d3shjtnyv9kh2uewd9hj7hycrvd . Definitely on the roadmap. I want it like yesterday
It will be very cool when implemented
0. Maybe a developer forum containing all github isssues and a way to zap-vote-rank them there, for the nerds.
1. And in each new update notification in the app the two most ranked are shown in the app for all amethyst users to vote-rank when donating.
A two level system might help lower the overwhelming feeling for non-techies.
Time for creativity :)
I've been thinking about this and have been sketching UX ideas on how this could be done on nostr. Will post more when I have something ready. Moving towards git repos on nostr, with issues, I think is a part of it.
What's the current development of something github like running on the nostr network?
Perhaps https://gitworkshop.dev and NIP-34?
Interesting! Will look into this
Gotta find a way to do escrow so that users can zap into escrow that gets released later.
nostr:nprofile1qqs8y6s7ycwvv36xwn5zsh3e2xemkyumaxnh85dv7jwus6xmscdpcygpz4mhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuerpd46hxtnfduhsz8thwden5te0dehhxarj9ekh2arfdeuhwctvd3jhgtnrdakj7qghwaehxw309aex2mrp0yhxummnw3ezucnpdejz7qxvpy4 and I were discussing with cashu dev nostr:nprofile1qqsqfyvdlsmvj0nakmxq6c8n0c2j9uwrddjd8a95ynzn9479jhlth3gpz4mhxue69uhkummnw3ezummcw3ezuer9wchsz9thwden5te0wfjkccte9ejxzmt4wvhxjme0q9n8wumn8ghj7enfd36x2u3wdehhxarj9emkjmn99ah8qatzx9ck5emrd4k8q6m909krsmtyddm8qdrnxpuxcue5096xxatcxekhjd3sxe6xwenc89u8gar4wsunqdmgxpa8xdekd3nk5aelvfex7ctyvdshxapaw3e82egzmrk82 in riga the possibilities of zapping into a nutsack that's encumbered by a 2 of 3 multisig between the zapper, the dev / dev team and an oracle that can handle disputes. The zapper can even set a time limit where they can automatically claim back the funds if the feature isn't implemented. This is exciting stuff and would enable more meaningful amounts to be commited as bounties doe features. But at outset just having issues with a zap split that goes to the dev and a UX where zapping an issue is an indication to the devs that the feature is a higher priority for the zapper would be a win. What do you think?