Nostr Web Client

The post isnt about encoraging or not, it's about us taking a share of that "encouragement". It creates terrible incentives for the team because in the long run everything becomes about that rev-share, regarless if the content is good or or not.

When you get big enough to hire 1000s of PhDs with the sole goal to refine how users see content so that they can press the zap button more, that's when we all lose.

And no, I am not here to grow the "zap economy'". I am here to create a better social media. The transactional part (zaps) is just the icing in the cake.

Sikto 2y ago

What if it’s just a small part of the model, coupled with other things like subscriptions to use a client?

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

Vitor Pamplona 2y ago

Sure, then it depends on how good or bad the "other things" are. Subscriptions are better than a zap-share for sure. Zap-share is better than advertising. Donating or paying on individual purchases (new releases, modules, features, etc) is better than subscriptions because you signal how much you liked the new things in a very explicit manner. Subscriptions are less ideal because money flows in independent of the release schedule in a way that devs and executives see money coming in reglarless of what they do. The feedback system is not that strong.

Sikto 2y ago

Base subscription, with payment for new features would be highest signal, in your opinion?

Vitor Pamplona 2y ago

I don't even think you need a base subscription. It is a harder model to make things work, especially because it is not that common anymore, but it is worth a try.

Sikto 2y ago

You’re right. People don’t like to pay for the things they use. I feel like I’m pissing into the wind, when I suggest it.