Collecting pitfalls of XIO social

Hi,

Saw just the video about the new social program. Happy for Jörno it’s a great choice :ok_hand:

One opportunity for exploitation I immediately identified was that the 10% bonus is easily be exploited.

E.g. Coming up with a thread that is an evergreen such us ‘Calling for up to date ideas’ or ‘The ultimate on boarding help for beginners and professionals’
Such threads could lead to continuous engagement while I believe it is wrong to reward individuals to just post it.

Hence I would like to collect ideas how Social XIO can but should not be exploited. What rules should we follow?

Given the problem named as an example we should add a reward roof, max lifetime value.

2 Likes

Well, such “evergreen” posts would spark some ideas that would benefit our xio ecosystem anyway, so I do see it as a win win situation as it is. Is it a bad thing? I don’t think so

I see both sides, but the point of the XSI is to encourage quality conversations and help each other. The XSI is less about a competition than it is about citizenship and being supported, especially when you’re new to XIO and have 1000 questions ; )

1 Like

I do not think that this type of post should be promoted by the Team with the 10% bonus.
If desired, they should reward the OP with a fixed amount instead, which was indicated as one future idea by Dash and then create a new post by the Team.
This would reward the OP, but avoid exploitation of a continuous 10% bonus.

1 Like

Well, it can’t be “evergreen”.
Posts are supposed to be valid 1 week only, no?
So the post would work the first week, then it could stay opened to gather new ideas but would not earn more credits to anyone.

But the team should then choose precisely the topics to avoid rewarding twice the same kind of question some weeks/months later.

Actually, if I have a worry it would be more about the number of post sponsored.
In order to avoid having 10 posts every day sponsored (making it discouraging for the community to follow) and in order to keep high quality standard, should there be a high selectivity and low number of posts chosen every week?
Like “no more than 2 sponsored posts a week” ?

1 Like

“no more than 2 sponsored posts a week” ?

I am also concerned about the time already dedicated and finding a good balance. On one hand I like giving people the room to express themselves and hindering someone’s desire to start posts can easily lead to that person losing interest.

Perhaps each citizen starts with a low cap of publishing rights while quality contributions qualify for more rights?

How about following up on the development, would prefer if spamming and overpublishing is not becoming a problem.

Gald to hear that you share my concerns and see both sides. Quality conversations will keep engagement high and drive development in the right direction.

Hope it’s okay to refer to your recent post on feedback for the flash staking competition.
Should we have this? Definitely.
Should comments be rewarded? Yes.
Should one citizen get an extra reward for being first in starting an obvious post? I don’t think so.

1 Like

It’s an obvious post but nobody did it. Some people anticipate future value, others create it.

2 Likes

right, people can start spamming the posts for earning more points but it would not be an issue if the posts are moderated properly.

1 Like

most of the questions are answered in telegram group or here. It happened to me a lot. The good thing is thatthe team listens and implements those suggestions or zach releases a video answering it in more detail.

Think this can lead to a lack of focused discussions, a forum that overstretches how many ideas can be practically identified and used in a given time frame, and creates a culture of quanity over quality. Also, will ready be hard for the team to “grade” and collect too.

Great to create a forum for ample ideas to be discussed and I have full confidence in the leadership and reflection of Jörno who I have had the luxury of working with a bit already. I do see time frame/amount of posts as an issue. Too many topics in the discussion can lead to everyone being over stretched. If we tackle too many big issues, rather than 1 or two issues at a time that the feedback can be immediately implemented, we toe the line of our ideas having less value. Also, we all have limited time, and the most fruitful discussions with be a single directed one. I have some ideas.

1 topic per week chosen by Jörno.

Only 2 posts selected a week. You can only post 1 per month.

Think we can also add a degree of marketing here and have a more mutually beneficial experience. The network gains a lot from ideas. Think Citizens can provide even more. For example contributing to a viral marketing campaign (Citzenship references for credit) or even just a simplistic retweet (modification would be to automate the point system here …those who retweet get auto credit almost like getting rinkeby ether on Twitter).

3 Likes

I’d hate to see it exploited - I think the fact that Zach and Jörno screen them right now will help with some of that. But yeah, I think maybe limiting the amount of reward or adjusting how much is given may become warranted. I’m sure they will adjust it as we move forward. Also - maybe add an additional incentive for new ideas that end up getting implemented? So perhaps cap or limit the rewards but if it generates a new idea or implementation for XIO then it gets an added bonus or something.

2 Likes

I don’t think we should limit someone to post 1 per month, what if they come up with a couple of great topics/ideas, would we really want to suppress that and have them wait to post until the following month? I think that’s kind of counterproductive but yeah I agree there should be some way of limiting or dis-incentivizing folks from trying to generate too many just to earn social credits. By having Jörno and Zach screen them probably helps limit this already.

A community vote of some sort could be another approach - for example only the top 10 social posts per month, as judged by votes from the community, earn the XIO social credit. Those not in the top 10 get a lesser limited credit etc.

I don’t think we should limit someone to post 1 per month, what if they come up with a couple of great topics/ideas, would we really want to suppress that and have them wait to post until the following month?

How about 1 per person per week? This way one person would only earn credits for one created topic at a time. As with the #XIOdebate people can earn credits only for comments the first week.
It should also be often enough so we are not suppressing them for too long.

Understand your counterpoint. However, this is less about the restriction of ideas and more about the focus of them. I may be relating this to my life experience too much, but having many wide ranging subjects will create two related issues in my opinion. 1. An unfocused narrative for the week or month that isn’t directed at any 1 problem but every problem. You may or may not get the “best ideas this way” assuming not every citizen will be to post their best on each post (although it may limit those to only post on things they can help, but that’s doubtful as I know I at least think I’m an expert on everything…). 2. This is going to get increasingly hard to quantify. If we are trying to make xsi forum have as much utility as possible, I would rather see it used a mechanism for debate before a decision. A million conversations and ideas on a wide array of topics will be hard to move on. Would rather focus on what’s most urgent.

Quantity quality balance could become an issue.
Originally I wanted to raise awareness that the new rule “Citizens can now jumpstart a topic of their own and earn 10% of all credits their topic generates.” can be and are already exploited in ways where I cannot agree to paying royalties to someone who just jumped on an obvious topic. Frequent and easy opportunities are:
-Calling for feedback on XIO events/features/Zach videos asf. If anyone is entitled to a premium it should be the original creator, the XIO dev team, Zach, Jörno but not someone who just started a thread on this in the forum.

This also includes this topic here “Collecting pitfalls of XIO Social” is comparable to a call for feedback.
I don’t think me starting this thread should lead to any bonus for me.

From that point of view I would like to draw the line in between posts that are
(1) not connected to the current roadmap, pipe, actions of XIO and can be classified as original ideas
and
(2) those that leech on existing ideas and are as such additions to existing formats.

I have a strong preference to abandon this rule “Citizens can now jumpstart a topic of their own and earn 10% of all credits their topic generates.” and instead value individual contributions. Fair and easy.

I agree actually. I understand why they did it: to encourage discussion, but you raise great points. I think it could be solved by just giving the person 3/9 credits for making the topic (how much depends on the topic - whether its average or great). This is the same as normal/great comment.
I think we would have to test it though. Will people still take the time to make new topics if it gives the same reward as a normal comment?
Alternatively 6/18. I don’t know, it’s a lot of fine-tuning.

We also gotta remember that the final amount of credits does not matter. Just the order, so if you are first and you have 100 credits or 200 is irrelevant. This presumably will make people try to pass the other towards the end of the month. We might find people waiting to make topics, till the leaderboard is updated so they can see what is highest number and what they need to beat and then they will “spam” the forum in the last week to undercut someone else at the last minute.

Well, it could be done with a lower % bonus, what do you think?

The evergreen part is about the idea, not the post itself

In this, i totally agree. Quality over quantity, always. Except during marketing campaign though :joy:

Yes… As it is, it’s becoming a demanding task keeping up with all of the comments kif one is interested in the conversation, like I am). If citizens numbers will go up, and post frequency increases, it will be difficult to keep a quality conversation going

Moderators give credits based on quality, and low quality comments give 0 points, so that should be covered. But a lot of low quality comments means a lot of work for our moderators