Give people zapping sats more rewards than those that zap CCs

[huumn]

There's not much incentive to zap sats currently, so a lot of people don't even bother attaching a sending wallet.

I'm not sure what ratio to apply but maybe a 2x multiplier for sat zaps.

[ekzyis]

lol you created this at the same time as https://stacker.news/items/945624

[ed-kung]

Personally, I think this makes it harder to claim that "For everything you do on SN, CCs are equivalent to real sats". I'd prefer a different solution for incentivizing people to attach sending wallets.

[huumn]

lol you created this at the same time as https://stacker.news/items/945624

That surprised me too

[ed-kung]

Also, not sure if you're measuring it by the # of people with guns, but I think there might be some syncing/refresh issue for the badges?

For example, optimism isn't currently showing a gun badge but he was just able to zap ek some sats: https://stacker.news/items/945624?commentId=945633

Also, siggy47 isn't showing a gun badge but on this recent post, https://stacker.news/items/945172, the recent comments have been receiving sats from him.

[ekzyis]

optimism isn't currently showing a gun badge but he was just able to zap ek some sats

For the server to know you have a wallet attached (and issue a gun), you need to enable device sync in your settings.

I need to add this to the FAQ.

[ekzyis]

I'd prefer a different solution for incentivizing people to attach sending wallets.

@ed-kung, thanks for the feedback! We talked about it internally and we came up with the following idea (copied from our internal chat):

Instead of less rewards for CC zaps as an incentive to zap sats, would it be dumb to just not allow CCs to be zapped? So if you receive CCs because you don’t have a wallet etc., it’s always your own fault?
I think this is also the main issue ppl have with CCs, that they see them as "hot potatoes." I think they are fine paying SN with CCs but they don’t want to pay each other with CCs.

I probably haven’t thought this through, but it feels like we can solve a lot of issues with this (small?) change at once and I think the small sacrifice of UX for people without sending wallets is worth it to improve the UX dramatically for everyone else.

Our conclusion was that we want to wait for more data once #2059 is deployed before we do such a dramatic change. We want to know if the problem is actually sending or receiving sats.

What do you think?

[ed-kung]

I know one big area to change about CC's is probably zap forwarding. I know I stopped using that feature because I don't want the person I forward to to get CCs instead of zaps.

The other thing maybe to think about is device sync and how many people know about it / use it? I think @huumn mentioned that most mobile wallets aren't able to be attached as sending wallets. My setup uses a desktop wallet + device sync so that I can still use SN on mobile. But maybe the steps to do that are too involved for some, or they aren't aware of the option?

The other thing I'm not sure about is how many people are just primarily on mobile. That's not something I'm familiar with because I've always been a full desktop kinda person, but these days I wonder how many people are engaging with bitcoin/lightning primarily through mobile.

[ekzyis]

Sorry, I forgot to reply.

We have plans to fix the forwarding (#1895) and to integrate device sync better (part of my work for #1495, see #2092 for example).

The other thing I'm not sure about is how many people are just primarily on mobile.

>50% of our users are on mobile: