Oddbean

Talked with @OpenMike today about the trickiness of #v4v and how as a user and a creator it might be nice to have a ‘suggested value’ to give to help guide users to an appropriate amount. Is anyone doing this? Are there #v4v people who would push back on this idea?

For my own understanding, will you verify I understand the difference? #v4v will obviously go down in certain circumstances. As a fiber artist I can make a quilt for let’s say: $100 in fiat money. Depending on my level of skills I can charge various prices per inch for a client. Some will say: $500 for a quilt? I can get one at Walmart for $100. Me: sure but who & what are you exploiting? Then there is #p2p which brings in the transactional value of long term wealth making the price lower for longer holders. … If all is accurate above I see nothing wrong with Creator suggesting: minimum #p2p but *ALWAYS* with the understanding that more is appreciated. …….. Which goes to #WOT ( web of trust ) so if someone is being exploited it will be able for the CREATOR to know they can raise their prices. Possible? Am I understanding?

Digital content doesn't have a shelf life, as example an album my dad was on from 90's that has gotten way more play now than it did then: https://lnbeats.com/album/483dde8e-7e94-59a7-8eb0-2b0dc64a87bd

Nothing precisely like this but there's a NIP for sats goal and on Amethyst, you can set a goal for zaps & check zapped amount % to goal...(Zaps can and do happen over and above the goal. It's only an indicator)

The price is always set by the user in #v4v. They're the only ones that know how much value they got out of your product and how that translates into a monetary value. Sometimes that's only 100 sats and sometimes it's 1,000,000 sats. Once you start suggesting prices, you're essentially putting a maximum price on your product. You're telling them that your product is only worth a certain price when it might be worth a lot more to the user. Similarly, users who can't afford your suggested price or don't want to pay it will pay you zero rather than something.

the rss namespace does have a part for "suggested value" in the value tag, but really we just let our listeners lead it. People really love the numerology, things like 420 or 6969 or 1111 2222 etc. The question we pose each episode is essentially "what value are you getting out of the show? Return that in some way." Value is super subjective and it's hard to tell someone else what is the "right amount," that's why we just trust the Bowlers to know what value is appropriate. Some people have big stacks and some have small stacks, but it's all value. No floors, no ceilings is our philosophy.

@ericpp nailed it above. #V4V means the producer decides what value they get out and are granted the freedom and responsibility to return it. But value comes in many forms! "Time, talent, treasure" gets thrown around a lot in the Podcasting 2.0 community. Not everyone has fiat or sats to contribute, so they might create art / jingles or volunteer to help with an event. Hell, I've received value in the form of a place to crash on a long road trip, maple syrup, tshirt designs, etc. Value 4 Value takes trust but grants ultimate freedom to the people and is free from the bias, censorship and lameness of ads/sponsors.

v4v means no ceiling and no floor. You make something that is of value, I in return give value back. That value takes many countless forms, even giving my time to listen to something is an exchange of value. Over the past year or so value for value seems to have been equated as only streaming sats and that is not true. Value is sats, time, artworks, voicemails, sharing with a friend, hanging out in the chats, coding up useful scripts, spot checking rss feeds for errors, etc. If you suggest a minimum that's what people will give you. "My value is worth a cup of coffee"