It only makes sense when signaling many to many. Anything else will make the recipient wonder, perhaps bitterly, why he's not getting paid for the value of his content, time, or other product.
Post by twetch#673
I still don't see how it makes sense as a signal to anybody.
What the chain says
- Block
- 632 874
- Time
- 2020-04-30T14:57:27Z
- Signer
- 1DCqB8z2bboGmQRBbQNUxQVc5oBRpwQjKV
- App
- twetch
- Type
- post
- Content type
- text/plain
- Name in tx
- twetch#673
Fields the transaction did not carry are omitted. Open the payload to see the bytes as stored.
Signed by
1DCqB8z2bboGmQRBbQNUxQVc5oBRpwQjKV VerifiedReplies (10)
I'm a fan of @24 . But I don't see anything that Boost does better than standard payments with Bitcoin. It's the economics that fails. It clearly diverts funds away from what should be going to content creators and promoters/marketers to miners.
Just try not using it and see what happens!!!
It will be an interesting experiment. I think it will be easy not to use it. If I want to signal in a superior manner all I have to discern which party to pay directly. Please..show me one case where this won't be true. I want to be wrong.
It's just quicker to discern if you use Boost because you will be closer to good ideas all the time. If you don't use it you will have to spend more time discerning and you will be farther from good ideas.
This thread is longer than one page shows. Open a reply to see what follows it.