Show HN: Updn – HN/Reddit-style site where stories, votes, tips use Bitcoin

Yet this site looks only marginally more alive than, say Digg. You've provided a content /aggregation/ site that you now have to pay for in order to actually contribute or effect in any way. It isn't really about the amount or the method in which you pay, it's the fact that you HAVE TO. Reddit is constantly mocking itself and the karma system because people are scamming other to get worthless internet points. Now you want to try and tie a dollar value to that and think that you're innovating?

Granted I think some of your ideas are actually interesting. Creating a micropayment system for content creators (Note: not content gatherer) to allow more independents to thrive is a wonderful goal. You however seem to be creating exactly the opposite, where money can be quite literally thrown at a post in order to force it into visibility. More so Updn (not sure about valME) has a cost associated with down-voting. Enter Company A which drops, say, 20$ to put in hundreds or thousands of upvotes for a press-release. Users would effectively have to pay to get an advertisement off their front page in order to find anything worth a damn.

My final point will relate to your philosophy and as such is totally subjective. I honestly don't understand where your remarks about "something for nothing" actually relate in this post, but I find them borderline absurd. You brush aside those who create for the sake of creation, like I would imagine the tens of thousands of coders and designers who frequent this site do on a daily basis.

You seem to strive to bring together as many soundbyte worthy ideas as possible to entice people into using a product that, it appears, no one wants to. The the space of a few paragraphs you mention: overthrowing advertising, supporting independents, copyright legislation, encouraging youth, Ann Rand-esque philosophy, distribution of wealth away from corporate entities, and copyright lobbying. All in all this sums up to something slightly less than a bad joke.

Yes, any content provider can throw money (via fake accounts, advertising, etc.) at their own content to increase visibility. That's why advertising works. On sites like reddit and FB, it costs the content providers effectively nothing to manipulate votes. On sites like valME and Updn, there will be a (minimal) cost. It's a small barrier for manipulation, but a barrier nonetheless. That, alone, should reduce vote manipulation significantly.

valME also has a cost for downvoting. When you downvote on valME, it costs you 2 karma (and your downvote removes 1 karma from the content provider). This should significantly reduce downvote brigades as there's now a barrier to downvote.

Because moderators (and everyone else) can now see who is voting and in what direction they are voting, users who manipulate voting will be more obvious to everyone. Mods can then change permissions (both for domains and users) or use the modqueue to remove posts. (If mods remove posts and comments, like Upde, there's a public trail and a reason required. Additionally, the posts are taken out of the community's queue but still are accessible in the "graveyard" to prevent censorship.)

You're correct - many coders and designers do create for the sake of creation. More power to them. But you can't live off that. There is great content out there on various blogs and, if they don't have a donation button, the most I can do to really reward them when I like something is clicking on some random ad so they get the credit. Technologies like this, with the cost of a penny or two, don't put up a large barrier for content creators, and it gives them an alternative to advertising. It also gives them the potential for a huge upside when people really value their content.

The market here isn't for content providers of memes or 140-character comments. It's for higher quality content providers. I'm not sure why you're scared of the idea to find alternatives for rewarding people who give us value.