Thread

@npub1arcw...ggtw allows creators to use their reach and numbers to reward their followers in a value for value economic model. For this exmaple, let's use me. πŸ‘€ Let's say that I wanted to reward the people that followed me and also shared a note of mine. I would add the $boost tag to my note. Prism picks it up, and tracks who shared the note. Now let's say that my original note was Zapped 100,000 sats. I could then in turn Zap the Prism created note all 100,000 sats, to reward users for boosting my note. That's wild. This opens up a completely new advertising model for Zaps. The implications and use cases here are going to get really interesting. Now back to my example. Let's say a new company with very few followers asks me talk about a product or announcement of theirs, because I have a larger reach. Maybe they do some Zapvertising? Or maybe @OpenSecret and I work out a deal where they Zap me 50K sats to post their announcement and talk about their announcement and I send 25K sats to everyone that boosts my announcement note. This allows those on Nostr without large audiences to participate in essentially what is ad revenue sharing via Zapvertising. 🀯 On Twitter, if you follow some influencer and share their Tweets, you don't get paid for it, but they do! That model is broken, because it takes advantage of people's followers and the person at the top reaps all of the benefits. It leaves a bad taste in your mouth too. 😑 Boosts in this capacity are really cool as they allow for all to participate since we're all building Nostr together. It's more democratic and inclusive. I really like it. πŸ”₯

Replies (85)

↩ replying to Derek Ross
There should be some marginal attribution of each of the zaps your received. Let's say if Jack boosts you a lot more marginal impressions and zaps, he should get a zap share somewhat proportionally amounting to it. A new bot account with no follows shouldn't get any amount. == What do you guys think about the game theory of this for big accounts? - Will they have too strong of an incentive to just keep boosting other notes? - Would it be wrong to do so? - -> I'm thinking it could be a great force for decentralization; similar to the Joe Rogan podcast giving spotlight to new interesting people.
↩ replying to Mark Camper
Hmm. The ripple effect. I medium like it, maybe that's something that Prism could build in. However, I don't fully like it because it then takes away from others who share the note too. It's not as inclusive then, catering to larger followings. I'd probably be okay with a configuration that allows you to choose to enable ripples or not. For now, I think it's fine this way.
This is a terrible idea & will create more spam & in result because I keep seeing the same noteore then twice I like many others would end up blocking every single person sharing the note. Spam is already an issue that the filter to me personally has no use. I still see the same jap or chinese doosoo chatgpt yadayada with the filter on. I can see spam makers using your idea to zap their own spam boosted & share the zaps mostly to themselves which would encourage more ppl to do it. They will think hey zaps for me if I share & boost then it will be a clusterfuck of boosted spam non-stop all day every relay. Then i'll have to quit nostr.
It incentivises noise... right? It also undermines or trades the trust I have placed in the people I follow as they sell off my attention for their personal gain... It doesn't seem like value 4 value to me. It seems like the opposite. Value for amplifying noise. Maybe I've completely misunderstood.