Let the economic rules of Steem stay as they are until the SMT's arrive, it's the only thing that makes sense.
If there is no clear vision of what Steem is then it makes no sense to make any changes to the economics of Steem right now wether it's an n^1.3 reward curve or 50/50 reward/curation.
Ned has said that his vision for Steem is to get a 100.000 entrepreneurs on the blockchain in 5 years.
I personally agree with this because I believe there is more value in apps/communities and its users (example: Steem Monster players are users (with money), not content creators) than there is in individual content creators.
But not everyone shares this vision.
Some will say that Steem is a blockchain that should reward content creators for work and everything should be catered to reach that goal.
I think the current model is sufficient to cater both parties for now. It could be better for either party but it works more than well enough before SMT's come out for now to risk to change it and to derail what's build on top of it.
Some history
This is how it used to be way back in 2016.
Everything was catered for content creators at the start and not investors or entrepreneurs.
We had a n^2 reward curve, 50/50, 100% inflation and a 104 week power down.
What should have been a level playing field for everyone ended up being a upvote fest for a few authors.
And it's so easy to understand why.
Almost nobody that has a lot of STEEM is interested in sifting through hundreds of post finding that gem that should be rewarded.
Instead of doing that a few selected authors where chosen instead and everyone piled their vote onto these authors regardless of content. It was the easiest way to share a 50/50 author/curation reward amongst Steempower holders with the least amount of work. It could also be easily automated with a vote bot.
These specific posts ballooned up to insane numbers.
I also don't think there was any foul play happening behind closed doors either with secret meeting or anything. It just happened naturally because like water humans tend to take the path of least resistance.
It had nothing to do with quality of content but it had a huge downside. Everyone not into the chosen group got absolutely nothing besides a spare vote here and there.
This all changed after the Experiment when 2 big whales decided to step up and downvote posts upvoted by other whales. The result? The voting power of all the other users went up. Things become more 'linear'.
I think this experiment led eventually to the linear reward curve we have today. Everyone was given an equal power according to their Stake. It was introduced in HF19. It was 23/5/2017
Linear rewards also gave breathing room for Apps now released from the strain of n^2. And man did they arrive.
They finally could build a reliable business model based upon linear rewards. A solid knowledge of what they would need and get to succeed and no longer had to fear that content created through their app would not be upvoted by whales and therefor not earn them anything in beneficiary rewards.
Some apps needed the help from Steem inc in the form of delegation to get started. But many did it without.
And this platform grew to what we know it to be today with the biggest community in crypto.
Believe me when I say it's much bigger and better than what it was. Even today.
Back to today
We are in a 10 month downtrend in the whole crypto space.
The argument for change in the reward model has no doubt to do with this.
If STEEM was $4 nobody would care.
Yet, STEEM is not $4 but 80 cents.
Do you believe we are the only project in crypto land feeling it?
Just like many projects out there STEEM got a real pounding but unlike many of those projects on this blockchain development has never stopped. Only increased even in this downtrend!
And all of this under the current reward structure.
Development drives innovation and it's happening every single day on here. It's just slower than you want. It always is.
But it happening regardless.
Right now with STEEM MONSTERS showing the world what is possible if you build on Steem without relying on content creators at all!
Why change the rules now? To cater who? Content Creators? investors? developers?
It's a mistake. Things are fine as they are.
The current rules are more than sufficient to carry us to SMT's. Which are closer every day now.
With SMT's apps and communities can choose whatever economics they and their users need and it will be different per different app and community anyway. It's yet another reason why risking changing the economics of STEEM right now is not a good idea.
Let the economic rules of Steem stay as they are until the SMT's arrive, it's the only thing that makes sense.
I am part of witness @blockbrothers.
Please consider us for your witness vote if you think we deserve it here:
Vote for @blockbrothers via SteemConnect
Set blockbrothers as your proxy via SteemConnect
We are the creators of Steemify a notification app for your Steemit account for iOS.
Get it Here:
There is certianly some disagreement on this :)
Some want changes now, saying that STEEM/Steemit wont make it to SMT.
I think it's worth looking at 50/50, but like you, in an SMT where it's safer.
50/50 is good for the dapp models, as post earnings are low but many have a good SP to bring in further SP via curation.
@ats-david wrote recently,
I would think that you personally would like to relax on the blogging, and allow your SP to do the work (via delegation or curation) in the future.
Interesting times :D
The problem with that is that curation doesn't do anything for mass adoption. By its nature only major stakeholders can play that game. Everyone can get author rewards, non bloggers included. There is no reason why only bloggers can receive author rewards, people get them for selfies, videos, anything.
Monetizing dapps via curation rewards makes no sense as a model. The dapp in that case is basically just a vessel for voting. Success has little to do with the quality or popularity of the dapp and is just a method to monetize delegated influence.
Huge disagreement. Especially after reading this line of arrogance:
I'm livid! And I'm laughing at the same time.
The music, the artwork, content creators who earned here and spent their money there, content creators who wrote promoted the thing, more things on this list, and more, and more. I mean, I could easily TRY to talk about the proposed changes, and I did leave a comment here but I doubt it'll make sense to this guy because he's off on cloud nine somewhere flying high I guess and has no clue what he's talking about. I feel like flagging the post! Doing something stupid! LOL! This post must be a joke... or I'm dreaming... or I need to go for a walk. Something. If anything makes me want to quit this place, it's this arrogance I read here today.
I'm sorry but I'm not sorry. This is ridiculous.
You know one thing really hits the nail on the head and is something I have been thinking a lot...
Damn right!
Haha! yeah that would help!
I feel like changing any of it will put too much power in to too few hands it will create a top down system that only benefits the people at the top even with the SMT’s in place. If these changes go in to place every user at my level will go bankrupt on this block chain and even some of the app owners.
I agree with u that we should not rush into changes till SMTs are out. We must give time for any change to see its pro and cons.
Yes!
This was a very awesome and informative post! Thanks for this great information. I wasn't around back in the day, but I can see how based on your explanation it would have been much harder for someone like me to make any profits. Definitely not what I had always assumed was the case.
Depends man! You could have made a ton if you were picked up!
I agree with you. Thanks for the history lesson. It should be stored someplace so we can reference it on such occasions.
As for the reward ratio debate. Let's give the creators the choice of deciding the ratio. Let's make a slider from 75% to 25%.
This should be doable without much code alterations. Enhanced publishing and payment methods, maybe enhanced json structure and that's it...
Posted using Partiko Android
Completely agreed.
amen to that...!!
Definitely vibe with your logic! I consider myself a stake holder in steem a future, so I’m all about doing what’s necessary to evolve as this space continues to grow
Posted using Partiko iOS
I agree that it is still too soon to consider more changes before fully understanding the changes made already. The focus should be how to leverage those made and the better onboarding and support to new users with the account creation and Resource Credit economy. As we get better data, we could then look to additional adjustments needed to move forward.