# CredSperiment Progress Report

**URL:** <https://discourse.sourcecred.io/t/credsperiment-progress-report/206>\
**Category:** The CredSperiment\
**Created:** [September 12, 2019, 7:00pm UTC](https://discourse.sourcecred.io/t/credsperiment-progress-report/206 "2019-09-12T19:00:08Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 8

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![decentralion](https://yyz2.discourse-cdn.com/flex032/user_avatar/discourse.sourcecred.io/decentralion/32/7_2.png) [@decentralion](https://discourse.sourcecred.io/u/decentralion)\
**Post date:** [September 19, 2019, 8:01pm UTC](https://discourse.sourcecred.io/t/credsperiment-progress-report/206/8 "2019-09-19T20:01:07Z")

</div>

> [@s\_ben](#):
>
> While fast feedback is fun, and could help make SC more engaging, I would caution that research shows that intrinsic motivation (what powers OSS) is increased by decoupling work from external rewards. Have experienced this myself in the Decred DAO. This could also increase the potential for gaming (already SC’d biggest weakness), as people could play games to farm cred and cash out before moderators discover it.

These are really good points, @s_ben. It aligns with some advice [@jbenet](https://github.com/jbenet) gave me around the importance of decoupling the rewards a bit.

For the CredSperiment, I was originally planning something like 50/50 (last-week/all-time) payout ratio. But I’ve wondered lately if it would be better to keep a smaller proportion on the immediate payout, and let more of it go through the adaptive and long-term system. Your comment inclines me more to go with the slower system, maybe 20 immediate / 80 long term. It’s more conservative, and we can always go more aggressive/faster later on, as we get more confidence.

---

_[View the full topic](https://discourse.sourcecred.io/t/credsperiment-progress-report/206)._