Subnostr

I love the #nostr protocol and the tech being built on it. The future is exciting.

Nothing’s perfect though. I’m struggling NOT to see a plutocracy forming around content zapped by big players. I know their intentions are good, but when a fat #zap bumps a post to the top automatically are we really getting the voice of the community on our feeds?

I wonder if a filter option like this for a #nostr client makes sense: prioritize by number of zaps under x value, perhaps with a sliding scale so you can make judgements for yourself about how different tiers of #btc wealth value something. You still get the skin in the game aspect of zaps which is way better than the “likes” noise, but might be able to skim off the natural plutocratic effects.

Thoughtful discussion appreciated! Cheers.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

Pip the WoT guy 1y ago

I think it's more reasonable to constrain the set of people your feed considers for Zaps.

Something like "Most zapped by my friends".

This way, you also avoid another problem of zaps (and of your filter for that matter) which is self-donations.

Eric FJ 🪬⚡️ 1y ago

This is a good point- I think that’s a useful filter too but I wonder if that wouldn’t create echo chambers. (FTR I literally self donated as a test on this post 😅.)

Do you not think number of discrete zaps under a limit would get us useful broad community info outside our friend bubbles? Self donations would be tough in that frame since I would need a large number of wallets/npubs under my control- or am I naive in thinking this isn’t easy?