Post by twetch#2584

14QXph…wJdx Key · twetch

What do you mean subsidizing mining?

17mNxa…zGjY Key · twetch

I want to be proven wrong but I haven't found that Boosting is actually relevant signaling. It's like taking your cash and lighting it on fire. If you're paying for an activity and not getting anything in return, you're subsidizing that activity.

What the chain says
Block
632 876
Time
2020-04-30T15:57:48Z
Signer
17mNxa3wLR3UpkxzBHkTQ1ynn6boQ3zGjY
App
twetch
Type
post
Content type
text/plain
Name in tx
twetch#2584

Fields the transaction did not carry are omitted. Open the payload to see the bytes as stored.

Signed by 17mNxa3wLR3UpkxzBHkTQ1ynn6boQ3zGjY Verified

Replies (5)

14QXph…wJdx Key · twetch
Replying to@17mNxa…zGjY

It is honest signaling. Because by definition the author values their post in proportion to how much they spent.

It will be relevant to whoever wants to "tune in" to the signals that people are valuing highly.

17mNxa…zGjY Key · twetch
Replying to@14QXph…wJdx

The issue is this: Sure the signal is costly and honest. But the critical question is whether or not you're signaling what you think you're signaling.

17mNxa…zGjY Key · twetch
Replying to@14QXph…wJdx

Only empirical evidence will resolve this issue. I don't doubt it's honest..I doubt its relevance. For example, if you boost my Baemails..I will not be influenced positively. If you boost it a lot, I may be irritated you didn't just send me money.

17mNxa…zGjY Key · twetch
Replying to@14QXph…wJdx

You're implying that you can train people to value boosts. I suppose that is possible if the consensus is to use Boosts as the signaling mechanism. But I think they would prefer a fee structure such that they get paid marketing fees, not miners.

14QXph…wJdx Key · twetch
Replying to@17mNxa…zGjY

Yes. The market will determine whether it is successful.