Proposal: Pay per "Like"

So this:

Actually Means this:

Ah, Thank you for clarifying that.

I guess you can read that I wrote more than that post and if you´re interested in what I meant then look it up. Anyway, I think you got my point.

He brought a good point. You see it in twitter and facebook. Politicians, etc pay people to like them in order to appear more popular.

A song uploaded might be so so in quality, but if the singer’s agent buy likes then the sheeple think the song is much better and they like it (pay for) the song. Amplification “attack” using human nature. THe agent buys 10,000 likes and sees 100,000 likes from the sheeple

So for 10% investment they reap the other 90%

1 Like

Just want to clarify some things about the proposed idea. Maybe it will help.

Originally, payment for “LIKE” was not meant to pay the producer. It was meant to post your opinion on a Network Level, regardless of the APP used to GET the content. Example: I pay 1 SC to let the Network know I like/support/approve of this content (walletmark). This is why SAFE Like is different from an APP Like.

The 1 SC, charged by the Network, is taken as revenue for providing this service.

It can be that simple, and nothing more… however I added the “farming attempt” as a way to indirectly fund PtP.

Why?
Because I suspect it’s more convenient for people to 1-Click-Pay for their opinion (LIKE), compared to manually entering X amount each time they want to TIP a producer. They could set a default TIP amount. But honestly, I give different TIP amounts depending on the product/service provided. This is why I consider TIPS a separate function.

IMO, I think it could be very useful for…

  • Consumer Reviews as a Network wide metric.
  • Producer bonus income, depending on SC farming availability.
  • Network income, helping to add more SC to the farming pool.

I’ve read the objections of those who disagree. All I can say is… If the masses “like” this feature, they will use it. If not, then it collects dust and fades out of use.

1 Like

And, oh yeah BTW this:

I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again, the bandwagon argument is the most poingant and I use it quite often (even if it’s not exactly true) for a reason - because it works.

So any one of these several ways to game the system will be instantly exploited for a popularity boost. End of story.

1 Like

I don’t really see the use of reviews that can be gamed. That’s not really about your proposal, it’s against reviews on the web in general. People find them useful because they (still) act naive towards the judgement of complete strangers (not talking about elaborated reviews where you can make a judgement about the reviewer by reading the review though).

My questiona here are:

  • If it’s easy to game, why should it be implemented? Giving naive people a reason to download a infected file that has been upvoted?
  • How is the price determined decentrally? You refer to 1SC, but what if that turns out to be 1 EUR? Who decides to lower/raise the fee?
  • On which interface would users give the like command or display the reviews.
  • And finally: why does it have to be done on network level if it can be done on app level? On social networks the chance to really reward the producer and not the uploader is much higher due to transparency.
2 Likes

The Walletmark Tipper (Plug-in)
The name needs a little work. But I think the idea has real potential. Our most used “medium” to explore the internet is browsers (Firefox, Chrome, etc). So a plug-in fits nicely.

Credit to @neo for the browser plug-in idea.

So how does it work?
Every request from SAFE is done through a GET. If the Network also provides a “walletmark” meta data, the plug-in would know who to reward for the content.

What does this mean?
I means you can TIP Safecoin directly to the producer of the content, regardless of the website you found it on.

Can this be used with (Pay per LIKE)?
Yes, it would cost the minimum SC per LIKE. Payment goes to the Network. Right now 1 SC is the smallest unit transferable. This may provide a useful metric for other people using the plug-in to see what others think. If SC is made divisible then the smallest unit of that will be used.

Can I spam LIKES?
Not without costs, and not using the same account. If you LIKED a particular content, then tried to LIKE it again, the Walletmark Tipper would say, “you already LIKED this content.”

Why Pay-Per-Like instead of FREE likes?
That depends on each person’s view of it’s usefulness.
I would say Pay-Per-LIKE is more serious because of the costs involved. At the same time, consumers indirectly support the producer of that content by triggering a “farm attempt” for the producer. In addition to that, the SAFE Network benefits by gaining more SC added to it’s income pool.

What if I want to reward more?
Then you click the TIP button and enter an amount, unless you have a default amount already set up.

Summary
The Walletmark Tipper provides a way to PtP anywhere on SAFE, at any time, and provides a useful “like” metric for other plug-in users. This means content also shows the total amount of “paid for” likes from other users.

Won’t big marketing companies abuse this (i.e. paying for LIKES)?
I hope so, because they would add more SC to the income pool. Then everyone (farmers, producers) would have more to farm.

2 Likes

Do you have no ethical problems with this? :smiley:

Compared to what already exists, vote rigging, mass marketing (AD spamming), fake accounts. I think this would be an improvement…

I was going to add a future version, where plug-in users could add a “trusted source” filter (friends, family, expert reviewers), that would mitigate fake LIKE spam from unknown sources. But I’m trying to keep a minimum functionality to start.

1 Like

True, if linked to the walletmark thing - I forgot to consider this. :smiley:

1 Like

Looks like this belongs in "Most Wanted app list "

3 Likes

I’m not sure the “not using the same account” party is feasible:

  • if done by the plugin, spammer creates a plugin that bypasses that check
  • don’t see how this could be baked into the network because the network would have to start building a list of who tipped each time, and that’s a big overhead.

The “not without cost” applies of course.

1 Like

Yes, I’ve considered someone hacking around it.
But the point of the check is not spam prevention, it’s accidental repeat liking.
The spam “deterrent” is the costs, as you said.

Ultimately, it’s not a perfect system. And I’m no longer interested in pursuing perfection. I’ll settle for “more useful that what we have today.”

2 Likes

My remaining concerns would be about 2 things I think
Firstly, I’m considering the consequences of depriving those who cannot afford to Like something of their voice to an extent Could this not lead to their views/opinions not being represented fairly etc?
Secondly, is there not some trade off with anonymity issues to consider? Would it create a trail of “Liked things” and do you have to definitely pay to like? If not - how do you differentiate free from paid for and have you not only just shown certain “wallet addresses” paid to like something - whereas others liked it without paying - I’m not sure what this demonstrates other than this fact - unless money =power/influence/reputation. :smiley:

If you think Likes don’t equate to money you are highly naive and ignorant of marketing. Likes are used excessively by advertising and marketing. If you get a lot of likes you sell a lo of advertising. If nothing else you’re showing that you have good product and influence and are worth investing in. Where are you going to invest your money? Some backwater nobody or someone with 1 million likes on their page who can get you a return on your product somehow? Money = POWER = influence = LIKES. It’s all the same thing just different forms.

Yes in fact you do get paid. You get paid in various services or freedoms that the representitives would lobby for or pass into law. Want welfare? You buy it with votes. Want to get rid of gun control? Buy it with votes.

Again Money = Power = Influence = Likes = Votes. Just different forms of the same thing.

I don’t see why not with the advent of SAFEx though it would perhaps be a rather obscure way to go about it. You could hire people to like your page and pay them micropayments. Anything can be traded.

2 Likes

Can you please elaborate this point. Not sure I understand. Thanks

What happens when there’s a MAID safe site out there that is promoting an unpopular truth?

At that point with this mechanism in place it can be used to sway popular opinion, and support site owners who want to cater to the masses. Now we’ll have a bunch of site owners telling itching ears what they want to hear effectually donald trumping MAID safe site owners.

This idea is even worse than the idea of paying a site for being popular on MAID safe. At least with the previous idea someone promoting an unpopular truth might receive monetary gain for the risk…

2 Likes

Here’s a detailed example…

I upload an article with my walletmark on it. People viewing my article have the ability to Pay per Like it. Unlike regular “likes” which are free, this one literally costs 1 SC or the lowest denomination of Safecoin.

The user pays 1 SC to the Network, recycling it back into the unowned farming pool. The user gets to up-votes my content, like the :heart:'s used on this forum. One-click-done!

At the same time, the Network treats this event as a farming attempt for my walletmark address.

The beauty of making it a “farming attempt” is…

  • If farmable (unowned) Safecoins are abundant, 1 SC will probably be paid to the walletmark address.
  • If farmable (unowned) Safecoins are scarce, 1 SC will probably NOT be paid to the walletmark address, adding to the Network’s income instead.
  • Revenue for PtP (Pay the Producer), and PtD (Pay the Developer) balances with PtF (Pay the Farmer).

The front end “liking” can easily be done at the APP level.
However, the back end “farming” has to be done at the Network level.


This is my personal view which may not be relevant.

I really like the “intention” of PtP and PtD, but I’m concerned about sustainability over the long term. In any business system, income must always be equal or higher than expenses. Otherwise, the business system goes bankrupt and stops producing.

The hardest part is currency circulation. Economies with limited currency supply are more dependant on circulation compared to unlimited ones.

I see Pay per Like assisting circulation for: PtP, PtD, and PtF. It collects more Safecoin when needed, and pays out Safecoin when available. Also, users guide payouts for PtP and PtD in a very granular way.

No system is perfect. But at least big money unintentionally help circulation by trying to game the system. It takes some of the money from AD marketing and spreads it out to PtP, PtD, and PtF.

2 Likes

I liked your style :money_with_wings:

1 Like

Why on earth would I use this like system that won’t guarantee that my money gets something in return?
If you implemented this, there would be a competitor almost instantly and it would advertize itself with “Tired of the people you want to support not getting anything even though you spent money on them? Use tipster and be sure you get your money’s worth!”
That whole farming attempt business is completely superfluous.

2 Likes