Community Directory

Forum Posts

• Replies: 1,869
• Topics: 75
• Likes Received: 1,082

• Re: Proof of Participation point metric adjustments

  @rob

  @cryptonaut

  I think it's fascinating to watch this experiment as you try to figure out the best ways to combat the bots, etc. I guess you can just keep tweaking and seeing the results. Maybe you'll eventually develop a really amazing system! Though I guess it's always a chess game vs. people who will keep trying to game the system for LTBc.

  Thanks. Yeah, it definitely is like a chess game. I find it pretty fun actually :p That is pretty much what I'm doing, just observing what happens and tweaking things as needed until we hopefully get the desired results. Trying to make it so that the best way to "game" the system is to actually play by the rules fairly. Kind of like with Bitcoin how it is more profitable and makes more sense to just mine normally (play by rules) than attempt to pull off a 51% attack.

  I'm trying to figure out what the downside of weighting the likes based on LTBc might be (other than giving early forum members and content creators a lot of power). I guess for $17, one could buy 100K LTBc, then "like" a bunch of comments, then send the LTBc to another account, which could "like" a bunch of comments, and that could be repeated. Is it too crazy to set up an algorithm to watch the flow of LTBc, to keep this from happening? Or could something verify that the 100K LTBc has been in the account for some minimum amount of time? Both are probably too complex, but I'm just thinking of ways people might game the new system you propose.

  That is true.. $17 right now anyways. maybe the price will go up at some point lol. That is only for a single PoP point though (the current like value), and would only give that many points if the other user you are "liking" has 100K less than you. Also, is giving content creators and early members slightly more power/influence necessarily a downside?

  BTW, in reference to it seeming the top LTBc earners are benefiting from like farms, do you take any action against those people/bots who seem to be totally gaming the system? Or is that too draconian, and perhaps you don't want to mistakenly penalize anyone who is (fairly) innocent? Or maybe you play by whatever rules you set up each week?

  Yeah, too draconian IMO. It might not be "fair" that they received so much when it can be argued they provided basically no valuable content... but it is "fair" in that they just used the available system and rule set to maximize their earnings. It is up to us to prevent abuse and farming at the core, no sense in wasting time hunting down specific users. Also just like the death penalty, I would rather have 100 people abusing the system than 1 valuable member burned by false accusations :)

  @mdw @cryptonaut I think you should reconsider basing anything on how many LTBcoin a user has. As soon as there's a viable and trustworthy offline storage alternatives to the web wallet at counterparty.io everyone should consider moving all longer term holdings there in order to gain more control over their tokens. Rewarding based on how much is kept in a hot wallet sounds like a temporary solution at best.

  I am not sure what you mean.. CounterWallet is not a hot wallet at all. They do not hold or ever touch your passphrase or private keys. I agree that we need better wallet alternatives, but also any bitcoin address can hold counterparty tokens, so you can transfer to a paper wallet or whatever if you really wanted to. As long as you have the private keys you can just load it up in counterwallet and make transactions. Counterwallet even has a "Create Armory Offline Address" feature.

  Reputation is surely a better metric to use. If my posts have been "liked" 100 times, I have sufficient rep to "like" others' posts such that they earn a little LTBC. Perhaps some combo of writing posts and having them liked?

  Reputation will definitely be a part of it as well when the main forum upgrades are made. I like the idea of only allowing a user to "like" or upvote something once they reach X amount of likes and/or reputation actually. It would definitely create a major hurdle for people that try and make lots of new accounts for farming.

  Posted on November 23, 2014 at 10:56 AM
  LTBcoin Talk

• Re: SPECULATE.XCP - Weekly Payouts!

  Weekly payout made, things are going smoothly!

  Some quick info on fund progress so far (6 weeks):

  • 2.8 BTC has been raised and invested in total
  • 9.7% of total funds raised have been paid back to investors via dividends (0.275 BTC)
  • Weekly income has increased 60% since week #1, from 0.04 to 0.1 per week
  • 33% of existing SPECULATE tokens are still unsold
  Posted on November 22, 2014 at 9:15 PM
  Metacoin Central

• Re: Proof of Participation point metric adjustments

  Also, here is the solution im thinking of to nerf likes:

  Weighted "likes" (precursor to weighted upvotes/downvotes). Each "like" on a post has its own score instead of each being worth 1 point. Minimum 0.05 points and max 5 points. Score is calculated based on how many LTBcoin MORE you have than the other person, up to a maximum of 500,000 more. So in order to give somebody 1 whole point, you need to have at least 100,000 LTBcoin more then who you are "liking". half a million more LTBcoin than them to give a full 5 points.

  So, looking at this weeks stats.. top guy got 1109 likes. Most likely pretty much all of those were from low level accounts, which would only give 0.05 points each in the new system. so instead of getting over 1000 PoP points, that user would have only gotten around 50 or 60 points (~300 LTBc vs ~7000)

  thoughts?

  Posted on November 22, 2014 at 9:03 PM
  LTBcoin Talk

• Re: Proof of Participation point metric adjustments

  @rob

  @cryptonaut Looks like some of you guys were right and people have switched from farming page views to farming likes on posts lol. I guess how "likes" work will need to be nerfed / changed for next week!

  http://letstalkbitcoin.com/ltbcoin-stats?details=79 (if you see "0 ltbcoin" for everybody, its because the distribution is still in progress)

  Do you think ANY of the top people are really people who participated in non-spammy, non-farmed ways? If not, who do you think the first real (non-spammy) person is?

  Yeah your right, I dont even recognize most of those users. #27 and #29 are the first that I see right now that i know are legit upstanding users :p (asdolino and cryptozio)

  Posted on November 22, 2014 at 9:00 PM
  LTBcoin Talk

• Re: Last 2 Magic Words already expired?

  @Rob yes you are correct, that is how it works. I kind of think it would be a good idea maybe to extend it from 4 days to 7 days?

  Posted on November 22, 2014 at 11:02 AM
  LTBcoin Talk

• Re: Proof of Participation point metric adjustments

  Looks like some of you guys were right and people have switched from farming page views to farming likes on posts lol. I guess how "likes" work will need to be nerfed / changed for next week!

  http://letstalkbitcoin.com/ltbcoin-stats?details=79 (if you see "0 ltbcoin" for everybody, its because the distribution is still in progress)

  Posted on November 22, 2014 at 11:01 AM
  LTBcoin Talk