search
Summary:
Give authors an option to withdraw their submissions and comment sections from Moon distributions, ie demonetize their content.
Problem:
Direct monetization of content with Moons has caused a negative side effect. It incentivizes users to take actions which run counter to reasoned discourse. It requires additional administrative overhead and rules to prevent content quality from degenerating into a race to the bottom for short term monetary gains.
Solution:
Give authors a method to remove their submissions and comment sections from Moon distributions by inserting a [NO MOONS](case-sensitive) tag in the title. These titles will be immutable after submissions are posted.
Since this tag is permissive and not a one size fits all solution, it can act as an experiment to test how it affects r/CC discourse where used or not used.
Concerns:
A tag would add more complexity. Less moon rewards could lead to less activity.
Notes:
The above text was more or less reworded from a prior poll which failed. Below are links to the prior polls for this general proposal:
Problem
With the SERIOUS tag being implemented we are now starting to see some serious discussions take place in the sub. While serious tagged posts are meant to be held to a higher level of content standard this isn’t the easiest to moderate, after some time the higher level discussion does seem to make its way to the top of a post, but when you scroll down sometimes it’s hard to tell that it was tagged as a serious discussion.
Sometimes innocent but unnecessary and generic comments make their way in, which sometimes get removed, but not always. Comments such as “Great post OP” “This is the type of content we should see more of” whilst innocent in nature don’t actually contribute to discussion and end up getting upvoted simply because it is of positive sentiment.
Because of this, after a couple of days some SERIOUS discussions look no different to regular posts.
Considering comments within serious posts are eligible for up to 4x karma, I think it’s important to maintain a level of content standard.
Solution
I propose implementing the requirement that all parent or top-level comments to require 100 characters minimum, else be automatically removed by Automoderator.
Keeping in mind, Serious discussions aren’t a place for simple FAQ’s or generic statements anyway, it should not be difficult to attain 100 characters in a comment in response to the original post.
It is also the poster who is requesting that their post consist of more in depth discussion rather than short generic responses.
This change would only impact parent or top-level comments. This allows anyone who has a short but relevant questions to concisely ask if they need to as a child comment or within comment chains.
The 2 main pros I can see are;
- Helping reduce moderator workload by having automod remove of a lot of low quality comments
- Helping reinforce the concept that serious discussions are intended for actual discussion
The 2 main cons I can see are;
- Users can easily add filler words to reach 100 characters
- Users can still add short comments that don't necessarily add to discussion underneath parent comments
For context, 100 characters is easily attained, in fact this sentence contains 110 characters excluding spaces and formatting
And for final clarity this change is only to apply to SERIOUS tagged posts and remember that it is the poster who is requesting their post be marked as SERIOUS discussion.
It has been a very insightful year so far and unfortunately not for the best ever reasons as we saw some rough periods and explosive crashes across the entire crypto space.
We will all remember this year for the wrong reasons such as the crash of Luna and Do Kwon on the run, the fiasco of FTX recently that is bringing down many other companies, investors and exchanges...and the overall crash of the market caused by inflation, war and energy crisis across the globe.
So many people with so many different roles in the crypto space and today I think it's appropriate to choose the Nemesis number one of crypto this year.
Pick you favorite and give him a vote. I picked the ones that were talked and mentioned the most in this sub this year.
May the worst win!
So I was looking at my portfolio and thinking what would it be like if it just soared to the moon. Then I realised it'd have to go up pretty far before even selling everything would make me 'wealthy'. I've always set out to only invest money I could somewhat comfortably stand to lose, because I know it'd be pretty miserable to be sent back years financially in my position.
But the result is that if I made 10x returns, it wouldn't actually be enough that I'd spent that on anything in particular. I'd just save. Probably leave everything largely in crypto.
It'll look very different for different people though, so I'm curious. What would 10 or 100 times ROI mean to you?
BitBoy Crypto's ego could fill the entire crypto space. He thinks he is more influential than he is.
CZ is a dubious character, mascaraeding as a hero.
Max Keiser calls himself the High Priest of BTC and wears tiny shorts.
Richard Schueler "Heart" is a true narcissist. He has taken people's ETH in exchange for a locked token.
I personally like Michael Saylor and would never consider him in my list of most frustrating crypto personalities. But he does champion maximalist and encouraged mortgaging your family business for BTC during the bull run.
In the world of crypto, there are many colorful characters that entertain and/or drive us crazy. This post is focused on the ones that drive you crazy, although that can still be entertaining. Regardless of my opinion, I still follow their posts and watch their videos and interviews. But the comment sections are usually a mixed bag with many critics calling our their faults and cheering their failures.
Further, I don't necessarily think the participants listed below are all my least favorites but they're certainly the controversial ones. It seems everyone has an opinion on these folks and occasionally a very strong one.
Please vote below.
Sam Bankman-Freid (SBF) has seen his crypto empire collapse in under two weeks, with FTX filing for Chapter-11 Bankruptcy & his other firm, Alameda Research also going under. There's been major Federal crimes alleged, including wire fraud, embezzlement, securities fraud, etc. And if convicted, SBF could even see jail time on the same level of multiple life sentences, as received by Bernie Madoff. If SBF could somehow be declared innocent by a jury, would you invest your money in a new venture- FTX 2.0?
Luna/Terra, 3 Arrow Capital, Celsius, and now FTX have all perished. Who's next on the chopping block?
My understanding was microstrategies were supposed to be margin called at 21k. I haven't heard anything about that yet. but they can't be happy right now.
tether. I feel like I don't really need to explain this one.
binance, although they're potentially acquiring FTX, have most of their trading volume in tether, correct me if I'm wrong. And they're being investigated for tax evasion and potential money laundering, which would not surprise me at all.
One thing is certain about crypto, it is sure to disappoint at one time or another. Below are some popular coins that I've been engaged or interested in at various times during the last bull market.
As we know, not all coins make it back to their former glory. In 2017, some of the top coins were DASH, XEM, MIOTA, NEO and my favorite OMG. Will any of the below top coins fail to reclaim new all time highs in the next bull market?
Reminder: not your keys, not your coins.
The update is from today, and the app will probably be patched soon. There is no reason to believe that your funds are not safu (no new reasons, this is).
The app will crash when opening, and there is a constant stream of users reaching out to crypto.com through Twitter (see here) for this matter. They are redirected to direct messages, which is perhaps not the most scalable approach when the same problem seems to be happening to a significant number of users.
Now the question is how many Android users were affected? I guess we won't know unless we find out ourselves, so please kindly answer the poll. Thank you.
Proposal by u/mellon98:
Problem
We currently require the project to burn 1-2k Moons (Just as proof of concept since the admins gave the green light)
This number is not based on anything and in my opinion it’s extremely low for the exposure the projects are getting - almost 6,000,000 subscribers and it’s the biggest CryptoCurrency community on the Internet, getting attention of that many users for 200$ is cheap and undervaluing the subreddit.
Check what other news sites are charging
Source: got these spreadsheets by emails from marketing agencies
Problem #2
Proposals for AMA ticketing that uses Moons price might not be approved by the admins due to Reddit TOS.
This proposal is basing the AMA price on the monthly Moons issuance and not price.
Solution
Algorithmic pricing for the AMA tickets based on the Monthly Moons Distributed to Users (MMDU).
MMDU / 21 * 0.25 = AMA ticket price
21 is 28 days in a month minus the MOON Week(7 days where AMAs can’t be hosted), theoretically we can have 1 AMA each 24 hours at any day of the 21 days.
0.25 is 25%, want the AMA tickets to potentially burn quarter of the MMDU.
Example
1,200,000 Moons minted last month:
1,200,000 / 21 * 0.25 = 14,285 Moons
Pros
- Rewarding the users which are the base of this platform, when the project burn Moons, it makes user’s Moons more valuable, burning 1-2k Moons wont have any difference while 15k Moons is much more rewarding for users.
- Giving a new usecase for Moons.
- Fair value for AMA, the amount is the lowest of the industry standard, projects like Binance have tens of millions in marketing funds and asking them to burn 100$ worth of Moons doesn't look or make any good.
- Quality over Quantity - 1-2k Moons can attract low quality projects, its better to have 3-5 quality AMAs a month than 15 AMAs of random projects.
Cons
- The only con I see is limiting the access to the AMAs, only those who can afford burning Moons can have AMA, on the other hand some can see it as filtering unprofessional project because anyone can afford 1-2k Moons for AMA.
As you may have seen, we had Serious posts implemented in CCIP-033 and then recently updated here.
I'd like to propose some updates based on discussions and feedback in the meta sub.
1- 2x karma for comments under Serious posts - To encourage more participation in Serious posts and reward higher quality content on the subreddit. Serious posts are often technical discussion or helping OP with a problem, which I think we'd all like to see more of. This stacks alongside any other modifiers, such as CCIP-001 2x for all comments.
2- Bring back the basic [Serious] tag - Recent updates introduced a multi-tier Serious post system which allows OP to decide what level of rules they want. However, this also introduces complexity. This proposal will reintroduce the basic [Serious] tag as an alias for [Serious-1] so users don't have to learn about the level system, but they can use higher levels if they want to. The basic tag is intuitive and familiar from other subreddits like AskReddit.
3- Require the [Serious] tag in the title - This one has a few reasons behind it:
- Titles are immutable, unlike flairs and body text which the author can modify. This is also probably a required change if we want any specific rules for moon rewards around Serious threads.
- The [Serious] tag in the title is familiar from other subreddits like AskReddit
- Body text is prone to bugs
4- Require Bronze level flair or higher to create Serious posts - This will prevent the lowest tier users (Tin) from creating Serious posts to prevent farming abuse and keep quality high.
Current Situation
Recently CCIP-033 has been introduced, allowing users to mark their posts as SERIOUS discussions. This proposal passed with a significant vote, indicating that users do what to see more serious content in the sub.
Problem
While there have been a few posts marked as serious, it’s not all that often they make their way to the front page - some users simply ignore the serious posts because they can’t make a joke comment for their own karma farming.
Solution
I propose to increase the Karma Multiplier for SERIOUS posts to 2x, not only to encourage more posts of higher quality content, but to also give more weight to posts that result in more thought provoking discussions.
This proposal will not impact karma for comments within the serious post, and other multipliers for the post still apply.
While posts might potentially earn more karma, if they truly are a hot topic, they will likely reach the karma-cap anyway - realistically this proposal will only provide more weight of karma to some serious posts that get overlooked.
This shouldn’t impact the general content of the sub because not everyone will want to create serious posts, however this could result in a few extra high quality content to hit the front page, which would be a win for the community for both old and new members.
Pro: Users who post serious content might potentially earn more karma and more serious discussions might take place
Con: Users might try to abuse the system by unnecessarily marking posts as serious
This is a poll to try and determine a cost in MOONs for ticketing AMAs. We get a lot of organizations that come to us and request to do an AMA. I enjoy hosting folks and generally don't mind coordinating things, but it does require a significant amount of work. This proposal would add some cost in MOONs for them to appear on the sub, in a way that benefits existing MOON holders because the fee is burned by sending the MOONs here:
https://nova-explorer.arbitrum.io/address/0x000000000000000000000000000000000000dEaD/token-transfers
Relevant Satoshi quote:
“Lost coins only make everyone else's coins worth slightly more. Think of it as a donation to everyone.”
You can see from the explorer link that we have already started charging folks 1000 or 2000 MOONs since we switched over to Arbitrum Nova, just kind of experimenting with the idea. We would like to try an algorithm that will adjust with both number of users on this sub and the price of MOONs rather than just selecting an arbitrary number like 2000 MOONs.
Here is the formula I am proposing:
Ticketed AMA Cost in MOONs = # of unique visitors the previous month) / (10000 * current price of MOONs)
*rounded up to the nearest 100
Here are the traffic stats for r/CryptoCurrency for the last 12 months:
So, if someone came to us today we would use the number of unique visitors in Sept and a price of $0.106, the cost would be:
Ticketed AMA Cost = 1,898,643 / (10000 * 0.106) = 1,800 MOONs
This way if unique visitors increases while MOON price stays constant, the cost will go up in MOONs, but if MOON price appreciates significantly while users rise then they will offset each other in USD terms. Last December the cost would have been about 3,400 MOONs even though MOONs price was higher at about $0.15.
Do you support this approach for ticketing AMAs where r/CC is approached for an AMA or giveaway by someone?
I read this article recently and it's easy for me to be critical as a crypto-supporter.
When mass adoption occurs (which seems more likely than not) simply raising the overall market cap will have a positive impact on value. Adoption = market cap increase... limited supply = increased demand... BTC goes up, "the rising tide lifts all ships". Basic economics, so I'd love to hear some of your thoughts on this. Feel free to educate me where I may be lacking.
I'm looking around and there doesn't seem to be anything capable of turning cold hard cash to crypto without a government regulated entity. There are crypto ATM's so to speak. But they all fall under strict financial scrutiny from regulatory bodies and are subject to know your customer measure for deposits and withdrawals over a certain amount.
As it stands, outside of a peer to peer transaction, which can be risky for large sums as you're likely to be robbed especially in countries with higher crime rates; there's no way to turn physical cash into cryptocurrency without interacting with a centralized exchanged, bank, or card company like visa which are all subject to government regulation.
If there was an at home device you could use to turn potentially infinite amounts of cash to crypto currency with no regulatory body to impose financial disclosures or other restrictions; would you buy it.
This poll is meant to help identify the gender makeup of crypto investors in the CryptoCurrency sub. As of April 2022 men were a little over 2x as likely to invest in crypto compared to women. Although I don't think this will have changed significantly since this poll was completed I think the gender makeup of this subreddit might be different.
Additionally, lurkers who browse but are not invested in crypto assets can identify themselves in the first option.
Please note this poll does not differentiate the total investment value of different genders, if you have any money invested please consider yourself an investor.
Current situation
Currently, we have a system defined by CCIP-012 where there is only allowed to be X number of posts about the same crypto in the top 50, decided by market cap. I understand the need for this rule, as otherwise you'd have too many similar posts clogging everyone's feeds.
Problem
However, there is a slight issue, which occurred recently. A 'comedy' flaired post about LUNA caused actual serious posts about LUNA to be automatically be removed. In my opinion, the current system makes comedy posts slightly annoying, as they stop genuine debate and news.
Solution
Comedy posts do not count towards the Top 50 rule for number of posts allowed per crypto. This would stop comedy posts hindering real discussion and news.
Additionally, only 2 comedy posts are allowed in the Top 50 at any one time. Comedy posts achieve 'Hot' status relatively easily in this subreddit (due to the 0.1x karma multiplier), so adding this limit would balance out the kind of posts that are seen. It would also stop abuse of the other change implemented in this proposal.
This poll was created by Laughingboy14 but they became unresponsive after approval
Do Kwon is currently in hiding, avoiding authorities after a red notice was issued by Interpol
It's estimated that Do Kwon cashed out eighty million every month that was sent to different wallet addresses for supposedly operating expenses, another recent report is that LFG transferred 3,133 BTC on September 15th. You could estimate that he has at least Five Hundred million to one billion is funds to aid in his escape.
On the other had Do Kwon is also a pretty well known person and it would be difficult for him to hide in any major city without going into complete isolation or maybe some sort of change to his appearance.
Do you think Do Kwon will be caught by the authorities or will he join the list of billionaires who mysteriously disappear when they are facing prison time?
South Korea said Interpol requested law enforcement worldwide to locate and arrest Terraform Labs co-founder Do Kwon, who faces charges related to the $60 billion wipeout of cryptocurrencies he created.
Prosecutors in Seoul said Monday in a text message that the international police organization has issued a Red Notice for Kwon, the latest inglorious chapter of a $2 trillion rout in digital assets that exposed hugely risky practices. South Korean officials have accused Kwon and five others of crimes including breaches of capital-markets law.
BinanceUS has staking now. I can earn 4% interest on my BNB's and 6% interest on my ETH's. I think it's a great way to make passive income instead of my coins just sitting in my hardware wallet. And, they are only locked for a week; so you can take them out of staking with maximum 1-week notice.
Of course, there's the usual issue of "not your keys; not your coins"; however Binance and Zhao have proved to be very reliable and resilient every now and again. E.g. I would not trust Coinbase with my coins at all, since it's being publicly held and can declare bankruptcy at any point (I've withdrawn all my coins from Coinbase). What is the sentiment among this community regarding BinanceUS? I know there's always a little risk of putting it on exchanges, but is there anything concerning regarding BinanceUS?
Thanks for your inputs.
It would be interesting to get a view of how long people on this sub have been investing into crypto.
I started early June 2021. Got a taste of the bull run, which is what keeps me going. Of course I was waiting for 100k, but still managed to salvage small profit. Started buying back in late February / early March (pulled the trigger too soon).
Over the last 9 months, I've also become desensitised to price dumps. My outlook is for the next 2-3 years, until then I'll just keep stacking.
What's your story and how are you finding crypto so far?
