# The Social Norms of Flowing Cred Questions (please answer!):sourcecred:

**URL:** <https://discourse.sourcecred.io/t/the-social-norms-of-flowing-cred-questions-please-answer/760>\
**Category:** Help\
**Created:** [June 11, 2020, 11:53pm UTC](https://discourse.sourcecred.io/t/the-social-norms-of-flowing-cred-questions-please-answer/760 "2020-06-11T23:53:59Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 9

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![s\_ben](https://yyz2.discourse-cdn.com/flex032/user_avatar/discourse.sourcecred.io/s_ben/32/816_2.png) [@s\_ben](https://discourse.sourcecred.io/u/s_ben)\
**Post date:** [June 12, 2020, 11:15pm UTC](https://discourse.sourcecred.io/t/the-social-norms-of-flowing-cred-questions-please-answer/760/9 "2020-06-12T23:15:07Z")

</div>

It seems @decentralion and @wchargin have done a good job answering the functional questions of how Cred flows. A few personal opinions on norms:

> [@Bex](#):
>
> What are the social norms around :sourcecred: emoji use on Discord? When is it appropriate and when is it not?

I think this is still being figured out. There are a lot of diverse perspectives that I see expressed (in words and actions). Some are more hesitant to post and :sourcecred: . Some (like myself) do it very liberally (perhaps too much so?). There could also be some variance just due to personality types. E.g. someone may be generally uncomfortable “tooting their own horn”, or just be shy. Here is where the idea of ["Cred Historians" and Curators](https://discourse.sourcecred.io/t/cred-historians-and-curators/194) will become important IMO. Some people’s personalities are such that they like curating, cataloging, debating politics around what gets Cred. If financially rewarded for that, they could help balance needs, personalities.

> [@Bex](#):
>
> When should you use the “props” or “didathing” channels? When should you not?

Find myself agreeing with @decentralion and @wchargin generally here, in that you should err on the side of just posting. Personally, I’d like us to get even more granular with our posting. In order to create more richness in the graph, but also to help people feel more seen generally. I know when I’m working alone at my computer, sometimes all day without talking to anyone, it feels really demoralizing that I’m the only one that cares about why this task I just spent half an hour on is important. That may fight against people’s existing workplace norms, and fears of rejection (why didn’t I get a ❤ for that?! Do you hate me?!). But I think if we can get a nice, high’ish frequency flow of #didathings, similar to a social media feed, it could be a really powerful way to signal to others in the community, and help us reach consensus on larger issues as well.

> [@Bex](#):
>
> What happens if I react to my own post or a post I was tagged in with a SourceCred emoji?

I mean…kind of embarrassing if one day we ran a script to see who was liking themselves the most 🙄

> [@Bex](#):
>
> What if I don’t know if my work is already receiving Cred, should I post in “didathing” just in case? Or will that look like gaming?

I say err on posting just in case. I don’t imagine so much Cred flowing through these channels that accidentally “double dipping” will substantially sway your Cred score. Or at least it shouldn’t as long as #didathing and #props are weighted sensibly to Initiatives and Boosting.

> [@Bex](#):
>
> Do you have any other feedback on this list?

This list is really comprehensive and has generated some great, needed conversation. My one comment would be that because the list was so long, and touched on so many deep topics, I felt a little overwhelmed and avoiding posting for a bit. More “bite-sized” “surveys” might be useful next time?

---

_[View the full topic](https://discourse.sourcecred.io/t/the-social-norms-of-flowing-cred-questions-please-answer/760)._