You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: The Curation and Engagement Leagues 🏆 - STEEM prizes & steem-bounty available! 🎁
It seems to me, and I could be totally mistaken about this, but a good old fashioned "fabricated" feud between two or more accounts would not only be entertaining, but potentially lucrative. The idea would be to make it somewhat obvious that it's fake, but not so obvious to keep people guessing. And, somehow avoid flags. People can get on a high horse faster than you can say, "Hi Ho Silver!"
That could be really funny. You could put something in their bios about being the enemy of each other so people know what's going on. You could even introduce the feud in a post on your own profile. Maybe have a link at the bottom that says, "If you don't know why ____ is a dirty, no-good, low-down, lying sack of garbage... check out this post" and have that direct to your original post on your account. Or something like that. I'm just thinking out loud, or in text as the case would be.
"You can organize fights, but make sure the contestants know that you're not the enemy. Otherwise, you might be paying someone to beat you up and take your money. Go to middle school and you'll find people to do that for free."
-themanwithnoname
Yeah. I'll have to think on that for a little while longer, but I like the suggestions. Introduce them from my own account and set theirs up so the profiles indicate their enemies. I think that would work.
I'm not sure which I would choose yet, but since they're basically superhero and supervillain, normally the names would give it away. But on Steemit, that doesn't automatically give them away, now does it?
I would imagine, though, through the course of their spat back and forth that any readers would get the idea.
I might wait a while to do this, though. Maybe until after Hivemind/Communities hits. I'm not in a terrible rush to get something like that set up, though I have been thinking about formally introducing characters in some fashion, perhaps through my own blog.
Plus, I'd like to be a bigger account before I start rolling out the big guns. Or better said, what I think will be the big guns, since the stories for the characters are nowhere near production yet.
I think you're fine to wait if you want more time to build the idea and the characters. Nothing wrong with putting out a good product.
I don't think the characters would necessarily be revealed as the superhero/supervillain right away. You could work on the backstory first so people get to see it evolve. Or you could jump right into it and then reveal the backstory as things go. You've got options.
Is Hivemind still a thing? I haven't head anything about it for a while.
Well, yeah, Hivemind is a thing. Or at least is was as of 11 days ago. Last post about it is here.
This paragraph talks about how Hivemind 1.0 is already in production.
And this one talks about what's next.
Haven't heard anything else since, but they haven't had an update for almost a week, so maybe we'll see something soon, in addition to why the blockchain froze last night, or better said, why the witnesses didn't have consensus.
And, it sounds like HF 20 could be happening anytime, since they're hoping for early Q3, which I believe we're now in. Unless they do it differently than calendar years.
Hopefully they take the rewards issue into consideration first. I'd like to see them not just give the early curation rewards to the biggest accounts. That doesn't sound like a good plan to help steem grow.
Anytime? I'll start holding my breath now. ;)
See, that's just it. I haven't read the code, and I haven't seen anyone else read the code and say, yeah, that's what's going to happen. All I've seen is a reaction to a sentence that refers to doing what Steemit was meant to do, getting the rewards to the most valuable content, and that being construed as rewards meant to go to a specific post being redirected to the bigger accounts buying their way to the top of trending.
And then, every time I mention that the 30 minute window is slated to be closed to 15, and who knows how that's going to affect early voting, it gets ignored. No one addresses it. So, anyway, I wouldn't hold your breath.
It's not a good plan for STEEM growth. It's either high incompetence or collusion, take your pick. And lying if the latter, because they're selling it as a great thing. I don't see why the curation rewards from any source ever went to the author in the first place. What was the purpose in that? Especially when you have big SP complaining that 25% curation rewards aren't enough, mainly because actually percentages tend to be closer to a shared 18-20%. It's like every time we turn around, there's something else that just plain makes no sense, unless you're trying to drive people away. Then it makes perfect sense. :)
That's a really important question. It seems like if you want to encourage curation and move away from authors self-rewarding that you would increase the curation reward. Then a person would have to use multiple accounts to get the self-reward, and then transfer the rewards from account to account.
As it is, it's very easy to self-reward. Rather than continuing to give away curation rewards, they should move to 30% curation reward and that always stays with the curators. The authors doesn't get any portion of that amount. Then you'll have encouraged curation.
I have been using the current system to vote for favorite authors, like you and a few others at the 0 minute mark so you get more rewards for your posts, but I'm going to change that with the new system. I don't want to take rewards from the curators and give it to the vote buyers.
It just seems like the elite at steemit are very out of touch with the regular struggles of the average steemit user. It seems they just don't care. Again, use some of that stake to raise some capital and hire someone to help with that. Seriously, for $60,000/yr you could have a customer service person and a customer engagement representative.
As soon as I think somethings is starting to go better, Steemit finds a new way to muck it up.
Or old ways to muck it up that we're just barely finding out about before they change it to something new to muck it up with.
I don't know. It's getting hard to find new ways to say it, but for as much potential STEEM has, and for all that is actually going right with it, there's all of these other "What The What?!" things going on that you'd scratch your head raw on.
I think we found that out with the freezing of the blockchain last night.
Who knew that you could actually try to give yourself $38 million SP? Who knew that could make it through whatever safety protocols there might be for such things? I guess the only thing that was known is the blockchain would freeze up before it would allow the transaction to take place. Otherwise, no one knew it was going to happen until it did, because the blockchain is too complex to know all of what might go wrong with it until it does.
I'm not a dev. I don't think I'd ever want to be one. I would think, though, that seizing up the blockchain every time someone manages to perform a transaction that gets by the built in filter preventing such transactions wouldn't be great for business, just as all of us magically giving ourselves 38 million SP isn't good for business.
But, apparently, I can't have my filter work and the blockchain not seize up. It's one or the other, and I should be happy it's the latter.