@Read.Cash
edited
The random rewarder @TheRandomRewarder is the bot built to split the daily payout from our fund. https://read.cash/@Read.Cash/homepage-and-the-bitcoin-cash-distribution-fund-cc9cd14a#bitcoin-cash-distribution-fund You can find the detailed information about it in the "Have I tipped you?" article. https://read.cash/@TheRandomRewarder/have-i-tipped-you-a12541ca
187 comments
I think this is a great start and am very curious to see how this works out. If the site gets enough traction, maybe you could even start adding promotional articles/advertising to generate revenue for the site, and maybe even divert some of that revenue to the fund. That way it could become self-funding without relying on donations.
Yeah, I think it might get to that point, but for that we need much more popularity, of course. Right now at best we're getting offers to place a "guest post" (which is spam, of course, because should they even read a bit about read.cash - there wouldn't have even been a question about a "guest post" here, they would've just registered and published an article, which would be useless though, since all of the links are marked as "nofollow", so they are are useless for SEO). But right now we're diverting nearly 100% of any revenue that goes our way (boosts, upvotes, commissions) towards paid upvotes and the fund. So, naturally if any good revenue source comes (like sponsors or some appropriate advertising that isn't too annoying) we would happy to divert the majority of the profits toward the fund.
Good, But some bigger accounts will have a clearly advantage trhought small writers. Also, this is info is correct? takes a few time to update? https://i.imgur.com/fnT1Er3.png
Yeah, I think it's like that everywhere. If you have worked hard to create a following - you should get a good reward. However, I don't think it's a problem right now. The biggest account is this one (@Read.cash) with 288 followers, and probably 90% of them being inactive :) however if that situation arises (bigger accounts taking the majority and it getting too hard for new accounts to get through) - we might divide the fund into the leagues, so that maybe 50% of the fund goes to the big accounts and other 50% goes to smaller/newer accounts only - just a though, but it's possible.
Cool just a thought, and will be good some incentive for small accounts too, but I think the points system will work really well for that.
Regarding the upper bar - some of it is real time, some parts take a few minutes to update.
This is a great run down of how the BCH will trickle down. I’m glad that you are accounting for the negative activity as well! When will this take effect?
Within a few days, hopefully.
Greetings to the Read.Cash team. I am particularly excited about this experiment as it provides a development opportunity for those of us who have lost everything in this pandemic. I have some experience writing articles. For several months I wrote for Steemit, with a frequency of 5 to 6 articles per week. The point system seems to me to be fine to start with, however we will have to wait for its implementation and verify that it really benefits all good RC users and not bots or cheats who make 500 character spam content. They might consider a content curation team to prevent this from happening. , the point system may not be sufficient to determine the quality of the content of a publication. Many times the reader, if he does not like the content, does not vote against or in favor of it, just closes the window. I understand how complex it is to have a content curation team, because a fair and even polyglot content evaluation scheme would have to be drawn up. As well, it could bring conflict with authors. However, I leave the idea for you to ponder. Thank you for this initiative.
Yeah, the problem is that we don't have any money to hire the curation team :) So, we'll have to rely on our own eyes and see if anyone games the system. Naturally if the site starts to gain in popularity we'll find a way to get some moderation/curation team to help us. We surely hope that the fund and the point system helps read.cash grow :)
Yes, point system is nice. You can start with the one you posted and in some time you can change/shift it when you see how it goes. It's really good that site is developing, I'll be coming more often here. Good plan with 1 mln fund, it will also bring more writers
Yeah, that's the plan - launch and correct as needed. Thanks!
How much will points scale with funds given? Will we be able to see how many points we currently have?
Yeah, it's a bit hard to predict. Let's say that the day starts. It's 6am (in the morning) and people got (in total) about 100 points. The fund has about $10 to pay tomorrow, so every point gets you about $0.10, the day progresses and by 6pm (in the evening) people have gathered 1000 points. So, it's about $0.01 per point. But now a big donor comes and pledges $50,000 more, so tomorrow's payout is now $260, so each point is now worth $0.26... 🤷♂️ as you can see it's a bit hard to predict. So, we might show some prediction, but it will probably be way off. And even if nobody donates anything - one day it might be that people have earned (in total) 1000 points, yet the next day maybe only 500 points (so each point gets them 2 times more than yesterday).
Thanks team for the awesome update. This is truly a great idea that no one has ever thought about or even bothers suggesting this to read.cash, you're all amazing. Hoping for the best outcome of this :) 💪
👍
Awesome stuff man. Really pleased with the direction of the platform.
Thank you!
This is a great idea and it will be exciting to see how it develops - but I have one comment. For how long an article or comment must be to earn points, you set a limit based on the number of characters. That can be confusing for certain people. You need to explain exactly how you count characters. Are space between words a character? Is the title of the article included? I am sure this is not obvious for everyone. I know of experience that if there is anything that can possibly be misunderstood, however far-fetched it might seem, some people will indeed misunderstand it. Better try to prevent that.
Thanks! I think for most of the people it wouldn't even matter. A reasonably sized article or comment would be big enough to get points and not care about the character count. Whoever starts to do the character counting to get points is doing something wrong :)
I agree, of course, and it is almost impossible to write anything so short that it is not satisfying your minimum requirement anyway, I just know that such people will turn up. There is always people trying to balance on the borderlines (with everything). If the rules are in any way unclear, they will deny their overstepping them, with fuss as a result. Dealing with such people usually takes unreasonably much energy and time from the administrator, I have learned that the hard way. It would be a problem for you, not for me. If you don't see it as a problem, let it be as is, I just wanted to play the devil's advocate here :)
Sure, it might become a problem, but we'll try to deal with it as it comes :) If somebody obviously abuses the rules we could just ban them. It's not like we're an organization that _must_ stay open to every possible abuse :)
It looks like a reasonable and well thought out scale. I like that it takes into account interaction by the recipient and the users interacting with the blog. Makes sense. You avoided the pay-to-play pitfalls and hopefully this will spur people to add original content, both posts and worthy comments. Nicely done. When will it take effect?
Thanks for the analysis! Within a few days.
I strongly supported this development as it will encourage the dedicated users of read.cash The only aspect that needs proper monitoring as indicated in the post is the likely cheaters who may be paid-upvoting and upthumbing themselves deliberately with a view to earning more than true workers on the website.
Yeah, absolutely. I think it wouldn't be a problem at start, but we'll watch it closely. We'll even try to add some transparency into how people earn points so that other people can alert us to any possible misdeeds.
That's OK.
That's a very good idea. But you must watch to see that there's not too much abuse. There will probably be people who will create sock puppet accounts, create inferior content that they will up vote themselves. However, it will partly solve the problem that too few users are willing to pay even small amounts of BCH for the posts.
Yeah, I think it's better to have a problem that you have a lot of activity and you need to fight abuse, rather than the problem that you have no activity :)
Yes it's true, but for the search engines it is important that the activities take place from different devices, different IP numbers, so you should check if the same device does not create multiple accounts.
We frankly couldn't care less about SEO. SEO is a game for big companies with deep pockets, most others get chump change for visits. Our main goal is to make the site interesting. If the site is going to be interesting - the SEO would follow, not the other way around. It was possible to get SEO first maybe like 5-10 years ago, but not now :)
So far i like the concept. It makes it more fun :D
One question: Let's say you post an article today, but it doesn't reach 100 views until a few days later, do you get the +20 points for that achievement the day it happens? Or does it have to happen on the day you posted your article?
Whenever it happens - you get the points.
keep it up read.cash,i like this new points concept because i guess it will make it more profitable to be active on read.cash. but i think you should give the user the choice when he wants to the points to BCH. in my openion it's better to accumulate points for a while then change it into bch.
Yeah, we're definitely thinking about it.
[deleted]
I think you misunderstood a little. Accrued points would also have to be burnt to be converted to the payment. It's just that you have the decision whether to burn today or on a certain day in a year, when potentially the fund is bigger.
Great set of ratings. I am happy there is no downvote. This feature allows groups of people to coordinate and attack one user and their posts if they don't like there content. But of course read.cash manages posts at a principle level. Obviously that is subjective and would not qualify as freedom of speech. Which this platform is not. But it is up front about it and promotes a good place for quality posts and rewards. I like it a lot. First day for me here.
Glad you like it. We really try to keep the place nice and clean. There are downvotes actually, but they are also experimental, we'll see how it goes. We're experimenting a lot and monitoring the response :)
I would get rid of downvotes. Its negative and as I said groups can attack using it. Certainly not inline with the principles of the platform. If people don't like something. Just don't upvote, tip. When groups attack they attack all the persons posts. Uptrennd has this problem and a number of attacks there have taken place. Cheers
Yeah, there are a few things we could do if this starts happening. First of all, we could of course find and block the downvote brigading, i.e. if a user starts to downvote certain user - it wont work anymore (as an example) or maybe if a group starts stalking a group of users - maybe we could block that too. I don't know - we are open to suggestions. Right now, mostly the downvotes are pretty reasonable. Yeah, as a last resort we could just ignore all upvotes and downvotes of abusive users. The question remains how to determine the abusive users. Anyways, I don't think it's a problem now, but if you start to see the problem - just let me know, we'll look at it (or you can always click the flag under any article or a comment to anonymously report any problems)
Yeah my feedback is that downvotes are negative. Another problem is that the moderator may agree with the abusers either out of agreement or ignorance. And not intervene. I think a positive upvote environment or no comment is better :)
We've had it previously (upvotes only) and unfortunately bad articles started taking over (like empty or one-line articles, articles that make no sense, etc...) We'll see how it goes.
Wouldn't post parameters and/or delete suffice, or warnings. :) cheers Yep see how it goes.
To me 500 words seems like a lot for an article. I tend to do articles with a lot of photos so I don't have to include as many words. The whole picture is worth a thousand words thing. Maybe pictures should count toward that 500 words.
500 characters, not words. Your comment above is about 200 characters. So the minimum for an articles is about 2 times longer than your comment.
This is 4very nice. With this one can even earn without writing an article.
How about point for affiliate program?
Not yet, but in the future.
More comments