Content
@
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Ryan J. Shaw
@rjs
At last the debate arrives at our hidden presuppositions! @vijay believes that a 70% cashback parameter will promote more participation in AF than an e.g. 30% cashback parameter, and therefore will produce more revenue overall for *some* channels. I believe the number of subscribers in my channel is a result of *my* hard work, not $ALFA games. I don't need the gamification - my game is delivering cold, hard content 👊 So this is why I'm annoyed that my work is being potentially discounted down 70%, and why @vijay is annoyed *his* work to build an active subscriber base is being discounted by me in turn. Specifically, the 70% parameter would need to consistently bring in 2.6x more subscribers with the e.g. 30% parameter for @vijay's argument to hold. Who's correct? I think he and I are on the same page here -- it needs to be a configurable parameter which each channel can play with and discover what works best for themselves.
12 replies
3 recasts
23 reactions
Tony
@0xt0ny
I never understood AF for creators when hypersub exists...why are all the staking games necessary? Because people are not there to subscribe to a person, they're in it to farm like a defi protocol
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
Ryan J. Shaw
@rjs
I think a *small* % of forced staking acts as a forced "discovery" mechanism, and benefits small channels potentially. You're forced to explore the community and find high quality people you want to 'invest' in. A large % of staking leads to what you describe yup. The argument against HyperSub is the upfront commitment - AF has a built-in low-cost trial mode. The argument against this argument is do you really want people who can't afford / don't know what they're signing up for to sign up to your content...
2 replies
1 recast
2 reactions
