Latest posts of: jmxcursi

Hey guys,

I have been working on a social network designed specifically for cryptocurrencies, with the goal of helping bring crypto to a more mainstream audience. My theory is that the average, non-tech-savvy consumer isn't going to check subreddits, coin forums, coin websites, etc., (at least not actively) since most of these resources are pretty technical (no offense bitcointak!). By explaining the key points of crypto in laymans terms and wrapping it up in a social experience, I'm hoping to build a more approachable resource for the average consumer and ultimately boost mainstream adoption.

But this endeavor has brought me to a crossroads on a few different features that I don't think I can answer myself, so I am here to get some feedback from the larger community. Below I will list the pros and cons of these features I am considering, and some tentative solutions. I would love to get your thoughts before I proceed any further!

1. Users being able to review coins. What are your thoughts on each coin being "reviewable"?

Pros:
* Users can call out the ponzi schemes and shit coins for what they are, and hopefully save some people from losing a bunch of money.
* Users can get a quick glimpse into the legitimacy / enthusiasm behind a coin. Everyone has a fancy website these days, but only a few coins actually have a strong and vibrant community.

Cons:
* People might blur the lines on what it is they are actually reviewing. For example, if you have an issue with an exchange or some other service, that's an issue with the exchange or service, not the coin. Furthermore, if you buy high and the price goes down, that's also not grounds for a negative coin review because price is up to the free market, not the coin or its developers.
* I don’t want to deter developers from listing their coins on the app due to a potential fear of receiving negative reviews (devs can’t delete user reviews).

I understand that devs are creating open source software to make the world a better place, and I want to reward them for that. The purpose of creating a profile is to help them connect with new users and grow their community, not to hurt them with potentially negative reviews, but I can’t tell which impact a coin review system would have: a net gain or net loss.

Proposed Solution:
* Rather than having an open-ended review system of 1 thru 5 stars, I'm thinking about providing a rubric where I ask for a star breakdown on specific criteria, to help steer user reviews to the appropriate topics:
  * Rate 1 - 5 on "Community"
  * Rate 1 - 5 on "Innovation / Uniqueness"
  * Rate 1 - 5 on <Insert Category Here?>
  * Provide a comment to summarize the above star ratings.

In addition, since many users will still leave unwarranted reviews no matter how hard I try to prevent it, I can enforce that any coin reviews that focus on external forces such as price, services, merchants, etc. will be subject to removal.

In your estimation, would this be something worth building?

2. "Claimed" Pages. What are your thoughts on members from the core team being able to come in and "claim" their coin profile on the app? Coins evolve over time, and in a world where there are millions of coins out there, I would become a bottleneck if I tried to manage each profile and the information within it by myself.

Pros of claiming:
* I am no longer a bottleneck. Members of the core team can take ownership of keeping the coin information up-to-date, with changes published real-time.

Cons:
* The notion of “claiming” a coin page feels contradictory to the concept of decentralization, which essentially states that no person or group of people can lay claim to a coin.

Yet, most altcoins have a "team" section on their website, which makes it relatively clear who, if anyone, should have admin rights over the page. Examples:

* Ethereum has a core team and is even "verified" on twitter: https://twitter.com/ethereumproject
* Dash promotes the core team on its website: https://www.dash.org/team/
* The Litecoin core team can be contacted directly at contact@litecoin.org

But this doesn't feel to be the same for bitcoin. Here is a quote lifted directly from bitcoin.org:

"Bitcoin.org is not Bitcoin's official website. Just like nobody owns the email technology, nobody owns the Bitcoin network. As such, nobody can speak with authority in the name of Bitcoin."

So this begs the question... who would "claim" / administer the Bitcoin page?

Proposed Solution:
* I don't have one to be honest, but I’m hoping to find one here. My heart feels like the user experience would be far better if members of the core team had admin rights over their page in order to keep the content fresh and respond to user questions and reviews. But at the same time, I could see a "Claimed" badge offending some people in the crypto ecosystem.

Any feedback you have would be greatly appreciated! Thank You!