Twitter is at its best when verified accounts can’t tweet

Re:Twitter is at its best when verified accounts can’t tweet by enjeyw on Thursday July 16, 2020 @05:28PM (#23864022)

I think it would be interesting to use a market based mechanism for voting, where placing an upvote costs a small fee. The fee price increases as more upvotes are placed, and you can always un-place your upvote to get a refund at the current market price.

This means accounts that identify popular content before others do can make a profit by buying upvotes at a low price, and selling them high.

This doesn’t stop content from popular accounts from being upvoted a lot, but it does encourage people to search for otherwise overlooked high quality content - to your point, the fat tail.

https://ethresear.ch/t/better-curation-via-inversely-coupled...

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Twitter is at its best when verified accounts can’t tweet by jgacook on Thursday July 16, 2020 @06:31PM (#23864606)

Quadratic voting!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quadratic_voting

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Twitter is at its best when verified accounts can’t tweet by enjeyw on Thursday July 16, 2020 @08:00PM (#23865330)

Very similar! The difference is that Quadratic Voting scales the expense independently for each user, while this system scales it for everyone (and you can subsequently sell your vote)

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Twitter is at its best when verified accounts can’t tweet by hnick on Thursday July 16, 2020 @09:19PM (#23865944)

Would this fee be based on money or "karma"? I feel like if one had to earn upvotes to spend on Reddit, regular users will engage in more karma-farming reposts. At least now it's only the weirdos and people looking to sell accounts.

Has anyone tried a logarithmic or similar scale for voting? Show the 'tier' they are at (A B C D or some rating number) and it gets progressively harder to go up or down a level as you deviate from the starting point.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Twitter is at its best when verified accounts can’t tweet by enjeyw on Saturday July 18, 2020 @01:15AM (#23879164)

I'd imagine that fee would be literal money, as this nullifies concerns about people creating fake accounts to get more Karma, and means people are fully incentivised to place votes carefully. It does introduce a "pay to influence" aspect that I don't love, but one would hope that at sufficient scale the Efficient Market Hypothesis would kick in, and trying to pay to influence would just result in you burning your money.

> Has anyone tried a logarithmic or similar scale for voting?

Hmmm good question. I don't think this would make a huge difference, as visibility is generally a function of a post's current rank rather than its actual score, so any monotonic transform isn't going to have a large effect.

[ Parent | on HN ]