Each post costs a small fee (paid to a community reward pool)
Replies cost a small fee (paid to a community reward pool)
Upvotes cost a small fee (paid to the poster/commenter being upvoted)
Post visibility/ranking is determined by sum of community investment (total money spent on the post from all users) – halved every x hours so as to keep things fresh.
Community reward pool divided among most “valuable” users (valuable might be users who post things that get most upvotes or users who spend money to upvote things that others go on to upvote, etc)
What do you think of this idea? Where could it fail or cause friction? What dynamics might be interesting to add?
This is… certainly new and unprecedented. Never seen any forum like this.
This would actually be a pretty good spam-combatant, and to also force users to make higher-quality posts. Or not.
But I think that a big problem would be the fact that users with more money “control” content a bit more? Plus, it could also drive people with good ideas away. If I see a page where I have to pay money to share my thoughts (and not the other way round?), I would be put off replying at all.
Also, what currency would this be in? Do you forsee users from different countries?
I would rather go the hunger games route and get people to pay to boot people off a topic.
This could also be a part:
pay to downvote (money goes to community reward pool): this money would count as a “negative” investment in the post/comment for ranking purposes.
Imagine the home page or main page of any particular category as an auction: people are all bidding with their upvotes and downvotes for what posts should occupy the spaces highest up on the page.
Also, the goal is not necessarily to use the money as a motivator so much as making sure that users actually put some effort behind posts and replies. If you have to pay to do it, maybe a user would be more likely to consider what they are saying?
I agree that at first glance paying to post is off-putting. But it makes much more sense than paying to read, and lots of people seem to be willing to do that. Also, many people pay subscriptions to join “private” or “exclusive” communities, so there is some sort of concept of paying to take up the space that the community has.
It seems like most forums determine what users see based on some level of voting, but the problem is that then moderators have super powers and have to spend all their time making sure people don’t game the voting (eg. sock puppets bots). Using money relieves the pressure on the admins, in favor of the community as a whole doing the moderation.
But does any of this change how you feel when you show up? Probably not. I think this would be a major hurdle for such a forum. Perhaps it could be solved through artful marketing? You spent fifteen minutes writing this comment, isn’t it worth fifteen cents?
Currency is a tricky one. Money transmitter laws are awful and would make this very difficult for any traditional currency. (I would suggest bitcoin, but I don’t want to make this post about that, so let’s just assume there’s some magic money that could make it work?)
There are lots of places where you might have to pay to be a member of an online community. Do you think that these places are also problematic?
But on a more abstract level: everybody seems to agree that having your data sold to pay for your services online is a pretty sucky model. And advertising is also highly unpleasant. As spam and slop get worse, how long until people are more than willing to pay for a space that is free from all that?
Sorry, perhaps I was a bit glib - you have a kind of lottery system where your contribution is your “ticket” - that’s an unusual model (probably because it doesn’t work) - but you could give it a go and find out.
The challenge you have initially is getting the momentum going - not only does someone have to find your community, not only do they have to find the content engaging, not only must they be motivated to post, but they must also pay cold hard cash for the privilege - with maybe some chance of a return - but most won’t get any.
After they’ve failed to get a payout once - they will pay and post again?
You are essentially putting up a barrier to post, albeit with the promise of being part of some kind of lottery to win something.
I could see a model where someone joins and is given 500 topic bucks, to post you spend your virtual moolah. If its poor quality it is money lost, eventually you run out and no more posting until payday - your budget is spent.
If you post valuable content you earn more moolah so you can carry on and grow your presence.
If you are flagged you are fined.
With spare moolah you can buy badges and virtual merch and increase your status.
I could get behind a model like that. Doubt it would go down with the current human psyche but as a system for driving behaviour it would be an interesting experiment.
this is sort of the basis of how Discourse is tailored to work. (not this forum but Discourse forums in general) You show up, you read a bit, you contribute a like or comment and eventually you ‘earn’ a higher trust level. You have invested your time and earned a reward. With more investment you ‘earn’ the ability to help moderate the forum.
The community, if popular, gains critical mass. The contributors help steer the direction of the conversation by popular demand.
Lets say the initial investment is 10 cents. And we’ll even let you skate on paying for now. Just promise us maybe some day you will pay.
Starting a topic is expensive… it’s .25 cents. Replying is cheaper .0125 cents and a plus one or like is trivial… .00625 cents
A whole day’s total transactions is 1 - 2 cents. But you earned back .5 cents so…
Eventually some users accumulate a decent sum. But then ever year you have to pay ‘income tax’ Higher earners pay more.
just blue sky thinking… ignore if you want
he is kind of right
Patreon is full of people paying to listen to somebody else talk or watch them do something
Well, I pay to be a part of a gym (but in this case, I’m mostly paying for the exercise equipment…although maybe also a little bit the fact that there are other people there and they are trying to do the same thing as me and that helps me feel motivated).
Also there are Masterminds (i’ve never paid for one, but they seem like a real thing and apparently some people like to pay to be involved in them).
Lots of people pay for X (blue checkers – are they paying for content or for reach?)
What if you pay to post, and it isn’t necessarily about making money. Instead it’s about getting yourself in front of other people. Almost like an ad? That sounds gross, but think old school newspaper classifieds?
You are essentially putting up a barrier to post
Yes. I think this is true. Judging by most of the stuff I see online, it’s probably good if there are some places where there is a higher barrier. And I’d rather the barrier be something like money than something like the mods’ opinion of me.
I can see a model where someone joins and is given 500 topic bucks
The problem I see here is that you have to figure out how to prevent someone from creating a lot of accounts. So that means you are either taking kyc info or you run it all through some sort of human approval process.
If you use real money, these problems go away (kinda?)
I could get behind a model like that. Doubt it would go down with the current human psyche
Is this because you think most people don’t like to pay for things on the internet?
Yes, people tend to overestimate their own importance. Why should they have to pay to share their greatness with you
You want music, movies, news? You just push a button and there it is. These things don’t have an intrinsic value associated to it, it is just something you consume in the online world.
Little do they understand they are the product on sale at most of these sites. But thats another subject altogether.
