@adam hmm il wait for some others to chime in... Either way I don't think this should be a top priority right now, there are other more immediate things that should be worked on once the blog updates are done, like user profiles and a bunch of other stuff on the forums (like sub forums I mentioned).
solves a lot of our problems
What are some of the problems it solves besides deterring spam?
@cryptonaut @adam hmm il wait for some others to chime in... Either way I don't think this should be a top priority right now, there are other more immediate things that should be worked on once the blog updates are done, like user profiles and a bunch of other stuff on the forums (like sub forums I mentioned).
solves a lot of our problems
What are some of the problems it solves besides deterring spam?
My dream is to see LTBcoin used more directly to solve these problems.
Instead of introducing a posting credit, can we just create an LTBcoin credit (LTBCcredit)?
People could send LTBcoin from their counterwallet and top up their LTBCcredits, so that adds utility. And if we add the ability to promote posts with LTBCcredit, that could make LTBcoin very useful indeed.
By making every post cost some amount of LTBCcredit, that adds utility and fights spam.
And I think the weighting solution should absolutely be consumptive. It should cost LTBCcredit to upvote or downvote. But you should also be rewarded LTBcoin by doing so (not sure how yet).
I think we have the opportunity here to launch the first upvote-downvote forums that have a real economy.
@deweller Can you articulate the differences from what I'm proposing?
@adam @deweller Can you articulate the differences from what I'm proposing?
After reading your post again with this in mind, I see only a few differences.
You suggest: 100 LTBCOIN = 1 postcredit
I suggest: 100 LTBCOIN = 100 ltbcoincredit
You suggest requiring 1 or 2 postcredits to reply or start a topic.
I suggest requiring 100 or 200 ltbcoincredit to reply or start a topic.
You are suggesting the majority of the forums require a paid access token. I think this can be implemented as a separate project before or after the credits system is implemented.
We agree that users should be rewarded in LTBCOIN from the new credits gained by this system.
I am also suggesting that on our platform, ltbcoincredits can be spent in the same way that LTBCOIN can be. So if you acquire ltbcoincredits, you can redeem them (instantly!) for things sold by our platform.
So you want to remove the abstraction of a post oriented credit. If we do that I don't see how we get away with not letting people exchange LTBc credits for LTBc. If we make people put it into a pre-paid post but still let them trade it within the platform there is no compulsion to let them change it back to LTBc because there is a natural path to do so (make a post that isn't spam and don't get it paid back to you as more credits)
Does that make sense?
@adam @deweller Can you articulate the differences from what I'm proposing?
After reading your post again with this in mind, I see only a few differences.
You suggest: 100 LTBCOIN = 1 postcredit I suggest: 100 LTBCOIN = 100 ltbcoincredit
You suggest requiring 1 or 2 postcredits to reply or start a topic. I suggest requiring 100 or 200 ltbcoincredit to reply or start a topic.
You are suggesting the majority of the forums require a paid access token. I think this can be implemented as a separate project before or after the credits system is implemented.
We agree that users should be rewarded in LTBCOIN from the new credits gained by this system.
I am also suggesting that on our platform, ltbcoincredits can be spent in the same way that LTBCOIN can be. So if you acquire ltbcoincredits, you can redeem them (instantly!) for things sold by our platform.
I love the idea of a credit system, but here are my suggestions to help combat the spam and alter your idea a hair:
I do not like the public and private area. @tintin is right, this can lead to ideas not being accessed by one time users. TCA is great for specific projects but not half of the site. Also how would you choose which thread sections get to be public and private?
The credits is awesome! I think that is great, but what if we changed it a little. How about instead of distributing the lets say 10% spam credits among everyone, what if who ever flagged the spam would receive the credits from the spam? That would give an incentive for people to go spam head hunting. So if you dont flag spam, you dont receive the benefits
What if good spam hunter had a reputation system where if they have flagged enough spam that when they start flagging the spam it is removed from public view and sent to the LTB administration to review and make sure it is indeed spam. If it ends up being spam, then LTB can delete it permanently and if it didnt end up being spam, then it goes back to public viewing exactly where it was and the flagger receives negative feedback on his/her reputation possibly losing the ability to remove posts from public view.
I think the small amount of LTBC to pay for credits is not a bad thing, as LTBC is supposed to be used for this site. So finding another use for LTBC is not bad and I would never even expect to see it back. If I get 100 credits and continue to flag and add content, unless I am posting 100 times a week that should last virtually forever.
- I do not like the public and private area. @tintin is right, this can lead to ideas not being accessed by one time users. TCA is great for specific projects but not half of the site. Also how would you choose which thread sections get to be public and private?
Sure, i'm willing to disconnect this from the broad concept.
- The credits is awesome! I think that is great, but what if we changed it a little. How about instead of distributing the lets say 10% spam credits among everyone, what if who ever flagged the spam would receive the credits from the spam? That would give an incentive for people to go spam head hunting. So if you dont flag spam, you dont receive the benefits
The system i'm describing here is seperate from the upvote/downvote system, but yes I imagine it will find its way into the rewards program.
- What if good spam hunter had a reputation system where if they have flagged enough spam that when they start flagging the spam it is removed from public view and sent to the LTB administration to review and make sure it is indeed spam. If it ends up being spam, then LTB can delete it permanently and if it didnt end up being spam, then it goes back to public viewing exactly where it was and the flagger receives negative feedback on his/her reputation possibly losing the ability to remove posts from public view.
Sure, i'm open to something like this in more advanced versions of the system.
- I think the small amount of LTBC to pay for credits is not a bad thing, as LTBC is supposed to be used for this site. So finding another use for LTBC is not bad and I would never even expect to see it back. If I get 100 credits and continue to flag and add content, unless I am posting 100 times a week that should last virtually forever.
Right, just by posting normally you should never be net negative in this system and if we allow LTBCOIN shares to be automatically changed into credits than its an invisible system to people not posting spam.
- It is good to note that someone might not want to go through the hassle of acquiring LTBC in order to purchase credits if they do not already have LTBC. What if you made it possible to buy the credits with BTC and LTBC? You said accepting other tokens is possible, but if they dont have LTBC and are coming to the site for the first time, they may not have any CP tokens.
Yes, BTC, LTBC, any counterparty token we're interested in and Dollars too. Since credits aren't tokens there is no downside to selling them also for dollars. Obviously the rate would be best in LTBC, good in BTC, and the worst in dollars.
@adam So you want to remove the abstraction of a post oriented credit. If we do that I don't see how we get away with not letting people exchange LTBc credits for LTBc. If we make people put it into a pre-paid post but still let them trade it within the platform there is no compulsion to let them change it back to LTBc because there is a natural path to do so (make a post that isn't spam and don't get it paid back to you as more credits)
Does that make sense?
I see it this way for an established user:
How do we get away with not letting people withdraw ltbcredits? Well, we just don't allow it. Think of it like Microsoft Points on XBox Live. You must pre-pay for them and you don't get your money back.
However, people can use their points to post well-liked (or upvoted) content and earn LTBCOIN at the end of the week.
We do not want to be an exchange or anything close to a MSB. If we do a deposit-only, then people are simply redeeming points to use our software.
But LTBCOIN is not like microsoft points, this is why I think its better to have an abstraction that can be fixed value and literally be property that people purchase for its utility. It's functionally the same in terms of what it does for us, but it's a use of LTBCOIN not LTBCOIN itself which we want to have all its functions wherever it is being used. If we integrate LTBCOIN it should be two way.
Please Login to post a reply to this thread.
