Re: Post fees and price dynamics

in #blurt2 years ago (edited)

My response to this: https://blurt.world/blurt/@jacobgadikian/transparency-report#@practicalthought/qp9jpd

Basically, the idea is to raise average post quality, and build a network of premium, pre-rendered front ends.

Certainly, I don't want to reduce the volume of chatter on Blurt, so yes, some price appreciation is expected here.

In fact, I'd suggest that you try and model out the price, sans bot farming.

I cannot tell you the numbers I arrived at, per draconian US law restricting my speech -- I've not reached Elon Musk level wealth, so I can't YOLO tweet price predictions....

But I can tell you how I modeled it.

Go to https://ecosynthesizer.com

Look up the accounts:

  • ionomy
  • probitblurt
  • probitred
  • probitblue
  • blurtlink

Choose the transfers method at the top, and click boil to see transaction histories in and out.

Next, identify bot circles. Some of them can be identified by their longer-than-usual transaction / deposit hashes, others will take you a bit more work. Of course, the bot circles are generally the ones moving funds off the chain, but some buy, and use the funds to fund their botting.

We don't ever want to stop anyone from buying and earning with Blurt. So we will never take away a person (or a bot's) right to upvote content. Instead, we will implement a feature that ensures that they can't upvote content that the witnesses/wardens view as net harmful.

We also will never implement any kind of content censorship: blurt is a stand against censorship.

Anyhow, back to the calculation.

So, we're looking to establish numbers for "aggregate liquidity" here.

You might want to get a start by first adding together the combined buy-side order books for all exchanges.

Then, do the same for the sell side.

If you wanted to geek out (and of course, you do want to geek out) you might then determine the average buy/sell price, as that will be useful to you.

Now, back to the bot farms:

Add the farms that you consider to be obvious farms together and then determine their total contribution to the sell side of the order book. Typically, such accounts sell low-- they're treating blurt as a yield farming system or so, and don't actually wish to hold blurt.

To the bot farmers, I say:

Christ almighty, if you spent half the time that you spend on your automated systems posting interesting content on blurt and other places online, you could earn vastly more money, and ya wouldn't be going around harming online communities.

But griefing/spamming is an eternal problem in online communities, and when moderation suffers, the quality of the community suffers as well.

Potentially, the wardens should just be called moderators.

Anyhow, back to that price calculation:

You should now have a set of figures in front of you:

  • Movement of blurt into and out of exchanges
  • Total powerups
  • Total powerdowns
  • List of accounts you think are farming, and who you personally believe shouldn't earn rewards on their content
  • Total buy-side liquidity (buy demand)
  • Total sell-side liquidity (sell demand)
  • average buy price
  • average sell price

If you are armed with some capital, and wish to get further educated, you may want to consider playing with the markets a little. You can learn a lot about the price dynamics that way, I know that I have.

If you take all of that information, and play with it some, I think that you can come up with an educated guess with regard to price.

Further, as an investor myself, I am quite familiar with risk evaluation.

What are Blurt's risks?

  • Older software stack means that it'll remain dependent on CEX listings for the majority of its liquidity unless we implement an IBC type solution -- but it doesn't seem that is possible due to the lack of full finality at each block. Best we could do, I reckon is to trail the LIB (last immutable block). This will be addressed in the various chains that'll spawn from blurt's coin cap, so we're covering that risk some, but B1 will always have that risk.

  • Execution risk: with tech that we're describing in the future tense, like HF4, there is always the chance that it doesn't work, or isn't developed properly.

  • Market risk: Crypto markets work on a four-year boom bust cycle that is driven by Bitcoin's halvings. All of them. If you don't believe me, do your own research and make a post dissenting this opinion, I'd love to explore it further.

"among you at the top"

Way I'm looking at it, we are all a part of a community that has the strong advantage of clear demarcation of ownership boundaries.

People who invest in Blurt, weather that be through time (creating quality content) or through money, buying and powering up blurt-- have an outsized say in conversations regarding Blurt's future.

Just as votes are stake-weighted, consideration of opinions is stake-weighted.

Before the two years of the Regent's reign has completed, we've got to improve governance. I don't like the proposal system as-is, it's got to be protected from capture, while ensuring that key stakeholders have a stake-weighted voice in matters.

Please expect "the foundation" to divest stake -- typically not by selling it, but instead by giving it to the best, most active contributors, who we feel will steward the community for their full lifespan.

In a "win" state, blurt lives longer than any of us.

Coin Marketplace

STEEM 0.17
TRX 0.05
JST 0.022
BTC 16483.48
ETH 1215.13
USDT 1.00
SBD 2.13