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 š 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
25 reactions
whimsi
@whimsicott.eth
when i first looked at alfafriends mechanics, it felt like there was only one real way to be a winner - get in early, farm alfa and stake in your own channel, cancel subs when you feel like you have enough alfa and then extract value - the whole system is built on needing constant new users to come in and as soon as that stops, the only people with +ve cash flow are the ones who farmed alfa early and cancelled all subs then for stage 2 of value extraction (where weāre at currently), it just requires moving the staked alfa out your channel when your sub count diminishes and you have no active channels subbed to (so the alfa penalties no longer matter) and staking into another channel with subscribers until youāve extracted wealth there to me this was always gonna go one way, it was just a matter of when the ponzi music stopped playing - until they change the % split between staking and direct subs, i canāt see this not being the āoptimalā strategy
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Ryan J. Shaw
@rjs
I'd say zero sum, rather than ponzi, but yeah -- the cashback parameters guarantees what you describe. But they are working on making it configurable, then it'll become a viable alternative to e.g HyperSub
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
whimsi
@whimsicott.eth
but isnāt a ponzi scheme by nature zero sum? new blood pays old blood, with the only difference in this situation being technically new blood could āp2wā their alfa allocation by investing more into subs - the alfa earning mechanics only really worked while inflow > outflow, which makes it pretty much the same as a memetoken with āutilityā in my eyes yeah i did see about the configuration thing - unfortunately i think it may be one of those things where itās a little too late though, like no man sky updates post release š„² would love to be proved otherwise tho! realising iām coming across as an AF hater - i hate to come across so negatively talking about projects within the space but i was always scared of how AF was going to achieve sustainability and now it feels like the answer was what i was expecting - āit wasnāt going toā
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
