Waze for fishing wiki

The big questions (highest abstraction level)

Part of the «Waze для рыбалки» wiki · Status: OPEN — awaiting Konstantins' answers
Related: Vision · Interview: Konstantins


Questions 1–3 gate everything downstream. Status column tracks resolution.

# Question Status
1 The incentive paradox. What does a reporter get that outweighs revealing a rival good? (reciprocity gating, coarse-by-default, delay, circles, status, private logbook) — and what would make Konstantins himself report? ⏳ open
2 Is the core public loop even catch reports? Or non-rival data (ice, conditions, regulations, aggregate activity) with catch reports as the gated layer on top? ⏳ open — research leans "non-rival core"
3 Who exactly is the first user? Ice anglers? Riga spinning/feeder? Paid-pond regulars? Latgale lakes? LV-first or RU-first seeding? ⏳ open
4 What is the atomic report? One-tap 4-state status (клюёт/вяло/глухо/людно) + species + method, waterbody level, ~15s input, decays in hours? ⏳ open — gdebenz template proven
5 Trust model. Anonymous corroboration vs identity + reputation? What does reputation unlock? ⏳ open — hybrid leaning (see principles)
6 Public / gated / suppressed lines. Heatmaps with k-anonymity + delay; pins only in circles; auto-suppression on spawning rivers. Where exactly? ⏳ open
7 Cold start without a crisis. Ice season opening + seeded non-rival layers + forum power posters + pond owners. Which first? ⏳ leaning: ice wedge (roadmap)
8 Scope & ambition. Hobby project, profitable Latvian niche, or Baltic play? ⏳ open — market math favors niche→Baltic
9 Platform. Browser-first PWA, no registration to read, bilingual LV+RU at launch? ✅ resolved (gdebenz lesson, uncontested)

Resolved design principles (from Piotr, 2026-07-02):
- Geo-verified reports weighted higher — verify exact, publish coarse, reward the proof not the disclosure (principles)
- Community data free forever; monetize premium layers only