Which is why, all things equal, you should zap the smaller accounts that say something insightful or offer value because it will stand out more and have a greater incentivizing effect.
But I agree with both of you — Twitter drags you down into the cesspool of paranoia, while Nostr clearly has different incentives. Don’t think it’s so much “positivity” as saying something everyone is thinking but hasn’t yet articulated to themselves.
And that’s how it should be.
Replies (5)
Yeah, I doubt the big accounts even look at zaps. Basically giving $5 tips to millionaires. I'm not against it, but the idea that they notice or care is laughable.
I hope that "incentivizing effect" will also mean that zapped post will remain longer into the future (not be deleted a la "Delete * from posts where zaps = 0") and be used for AI/knowledge base training in the future.
actually, maybe that's how proganda works. but at least with zaps, you will run out of zaps on your favorite topics and so your personal influence machine will never be an energizer bunny.
It is a well-known phenomenon that people prefer to put their money where lots of other money already is. It feels like a safe investment.
And, as you note, people aren't only enthusiastic about positive notes. They're also enthusiastic about insightful, uncanny, or revelatory notes, which are often "negative" in tone.
That isn't reflected in zap statistics because the follower count is by far the strongest pull-factor, as visibility is required to receive a zap. We would have to analyze zaps/views, in order to determine a correlation.
Especially when, no offense to any Nostr Client Dev the zap notification systems kind of get silly at times :/ .
