Skip to main content
MANIFOLD
Will you be able to DM someone through Manifold this year?
29
Ṁ140Ṁ1.1k
resolved Jan 3
Resolved
NO
Pros: - The ability to DM cool people and get a response is one of the things that makes Twitter so successful - Maybe could piggyback off a Discord or Twitter integration?? - Move more content and activity onto Manifold directly; never have to leave the site. Cons: - Could have a lot of technical complexity (esp if Manifold does group DMs, or Discord-like channels. Could start without though) - Pure social feature, not directly related to trading or M$ - Although... perhaps to cold-DM someone you stake a M$ cost, and then if they think you're wasting their time they keep the M$ instead of returning it...
Market context
Get
Ṁ1,000
to start trading!

🏅 Top traders

#TraderTotal profit
1Ṁ30
2Ṁ28
3Ṁ22
4Ṁ20
5Ṁ18

People are also trading

Sort by:

yes please don't implement this, it's a big moderation burden and it's quite hard to do a signal-tier DM application

no because how tf are you gonna moderate that??

This stuff is way too complicated. Instead I suggest bringing back loans.
I think lack of private messaging makes the site feel more transparent in its social dynamics; everyone can see what anyone else sees (even though people might have outside avenues of communication with one another).
predictedYES
@Angela Yeah, I actually think the "everything is public and transparent" is kind of an important property of Manifold, and I'd actually like to preserve that in an ideal implementation of direct messages. In my view, the value of a direct message is not in its privateness, but rather in its ability to get the attention of the person you're messaging. Which is to say, I'd be happy to have 99% of all my DMs be listed for anyone to read; it's just that most of them are quite boring/irrelevant to most people. I'm curious how one would design a public, but attention-conserving, DM system. Maybe the "inbox" tab on your profile is just fully publicly readable, the same way the "bets" tab is currently readable!
predictedYES
Then there are other economic mechanisms you could imagine embedding into a chat/mail system to respect user attention: - Messages cost M$1 per 10 words to send, and pay out to the recipient (or the group pool) - Recipients can fine senders M$100 for a spam/unhelpful message, or tip for an especially helpful message - Users can only read through M$1000 worth of messages per day
Nice, but not a core feature. An easy way to set up basic messaging functionality without implementing any heavy features is just to have a "send message" field on each person's profile, and have messages go to their obfuscated email address, a la craigslist. Replying to the email sends a message to the other person's obfuscated email address.
I appreciate the thinking! I'm still very curious what a true social network with attention costs correctly priced would look like. I don't know that DMing is a high-priority feature, but I think between now and the end of the year we might find the use case for it.
I don't think this is needed. People can publish their social accounts in their profile and there is a discord. People that don't want to be DM'd can just stay away from both, and I think that is a nice feature. You also have the public replies as a way to have a public conversation. I think it would be better to spend time on some other feature.

People are also trading