RE: How Does Steemcurator01 Support Affect Authors' Behavior?
Well, there are two sides to every coin...
Basically, I think the idea of binding more STEEM in the form of SP to the system through the clubs is good. The implementation would have to be evaluated and also one would have to actively turn another screw with the existing million stake: Abuse. Because still by delegation services and stinking self-voting (also in circles) much more STEEM are drawn from the system, than is bound by the clubs.
The problem is that here on the Steem both Defi and Social Media are served, but this is not separated from each other. By "interfering" with the whale on only one side, a healthy ecosystem can no longer emerge: The normal user forgets more and more about the social aspect: give and take. In the past, a PowerUp was NORMAL - one wanted to grow in order to be able to support others again. Of the users who blogged with joy and effort, no one pulled a single STEEM from the system: One WANTED to grow. Today most are waiting for a sc-vote, if they don't get that, their contribution is worthless to them, they don't care about anything else. Some come up with tricks and cheat at every opportunity (which is uncontrollable even by the best curators if they don't want to run Steemit full-time), some honest users leave annoyed. That's the way it is, unfortunately.
To explain this in more detail would require a longer paper. So I would just like to briefly take up your counter-arguments to the "shocking logic".
the only way to increase prices is to reduce production.
Correct. But with the clubs the opposite is done: With exaggerated votes (exaggerated, because the vast majority of articles are really not worth their money ("Hello, hello, I am a dolphin" - "Hello, hello, I have translated my ignored article with an automatic translator now again into three other languages"...)) more STEEM is produced now than ever before. This big "ninja stake" was not touched to vote before. Of course the Stinc. should be happy to do that, it's their stake after all and it motivates some users to stay active. But if it is about reducing the supply on the market, then this stake MUST also be used to destroy the STEEM overproduced by abuse with downvotes.
Unfortunately, STEEM cannot be eaten, spread on bread or burned in a cauldron.
Yes, it can. At least it used to be possible. There is one account, @null. I don't know the algorithm and I don't know if it is still up to date. But in the past you could send STEEM and SBD to @null and then they disappeared. Really! They didn't show up in the wallet, burned cryptos. Burning is healthy for a strong system.
There were many projects that pushed sending STEEM to @null (funny enough, even a bid bot). Today, not a single cent goes there. Greed makes the dollar signs flash in the eyes, hardly anyone thinks anymore about a healthy, round system that everyone would benefit from growing together.
As I said, there are two sides to every coin. At the moment, too many people allow themselves to be blinded by the flashing side out of self-interest, without even looking at the other. Unfortunately, the most beautiful Pacman picture is irritating in this context.
Thank you for taking the time and effort to write such a great comment. I would like to take this opportunity to thank you for your continued support. I often notice your upvote below my posts. You are like steemcurator09 to me :)
I agree. Any solution has advantages and disadvantages. For example, clubs negatively affect charity accounts because they are forced to withdraw money. At the same time, SC01 always generously supports charity posts, which shows that the Steemit team are normal people.
Not so long ago, SC01 responded to requests for ending plagiarism and punished fraudsters. Tomorrow I will be curating content for the first time with the steemcurator06 account. One of the rules is not to give Downvote to anyone. I think the same rule applies to SC01.
At the same time, SC01 actively supports the fight against fraud by papi.mati and community moderators. I believe that the goal of the Steemit team is to return decentralization to the platform. That is, the community must fight the scammers themselves, and the Steemit team will help.
Unfortunately, the blogging community is now just an insect against the big elephant of the scam community. However, we need to keep working.
Bid bots remain a cancer of the community. They offer the authors such favorable conditions that it will never be possible to overcome them. Bid bots feed fraud the most.
The option with the @null account allows you to turn the inflation model of the Steemit economy into a deflationary one. To do this, it is enough that 10% of the amount from each transaction is sent to this account.
Maybe it can be done now. When was the last time someone tried to write a proposal? I think the proposal system is working, it's just that the Steemit team is waiting for the community to mature and initiate big changes.
In my opinion, Steemit is rising from its knees, reviving, but I can not say for sure, because I am still a newcomer. However, I see positive changes, new initiatives. Even the fruitless fight against windmills by papi.mati is extremely important. And it would be more effective if more users who are not indifferent to the state of this platform joined its Downwote Trail.
In general, I can write a lot on this topic, but little can be done.
Since when has the steemit team communicated and with whom?
Steemit does not respond to criticism
The Clubtags50-100 are not conducive, that is not gladly read by those who use them, self-criticism is not so easy, especially when it comes to money!
The steemcurator influences the opinion of most users through big votes many say that will be okay and only see the expected vote of the Steemcurator
Seit wann kommuniziert das steemit team und mit wem ?
Auf Kritik reagiert steemit nicht
Die Clubtags50-100 sind nicht förderlich , das wird von jenen die sie nutzen nicht gerne gelesen , Selbstkritik ist nicht so einfach erst recht nicht wenns um Geld geht !
Der steemcurator beeinflusst die Meinung der meisten User durch Bigvotes viele sagen sich das wird schon Ok sein und sehen dabei nur das zu erwartende Vote des Steemcurator
VgA
Sometimes SC01 answers questions, and lately they do it more often. For example, when @coding-gorilla consults about a new interface.
I agree with you that there are very few readers among us. Most authors publish a post and wait for the money. The trouble is that without a steemcurator, bloggers will leave the platform and only scammers and bid bots will remain. Unfortunately, very few users build their accounts and can support others.