If rewards are 50/50, why would a whale go around reading content when people are more concerned.about money? I think 50/50 rewards will increase the use of curation trails and auto upvotes.
And 50/50 rewards still benefits the author more because you are getting 50% to you while 50% is divided amonst curators.
In my opinion, this still does not reward the best content. Upvoting the best content will exist when it is most profitable to do so. As of now, people upvote shitposts because there is no.worry of.being downvoted. Bid bots exist because nobody goes around downvoting these posts based on disagreement with the payout. We need this in order to make bid bots on crap content very unprofitable. I think the interface is one problem (like and dislikes are psychologically confusing for DPOS) and downvotes are not incentivized at all.
I have an idea for a new voting interface that does not change the blockchain code, but i am not a.developer and therefore cant do it myself.
Posted using Partiko Android
Edit: Agree to disagree. There are two other measures to complement the 50/50. its not just about the 50/50. And you said “why a whale would go around reading content”, better to think in terms of what curation services will offer.
A whale wont vote on the best content. Higher curation rewards will incentivize them the curate more. If.thats the case, its easiest to set.up an autovoter/curatikn trail and vote for the same.people to make things more.efficient as opposed to do all the hard work of finding posts that are most deserving of upvotes. I guess it would technically work if the curation trails were like curie, but it might make things too automated imo. That could be fine.but.I dont know.
Arent the rewards superlinear already due to dust?
I agree. 50/50 curation just incentivize more automated voting and for content creators just to pump out content mills. Basically just post the same thing 4 times / day. 2016 was all about content mills on here . Guys like me didn't do so well who post all kinds of different things.
Upvoting the best content needs to be the most profitable action. Why search the blockchain to give a 100% upvote when I could just upvote some bullshit 100% and get the same financial result? A whale should realize that upvoting crap will be a waste of VP and time because their $20 upvote will turn to $2 if people use their stake to downvote content. As of now, the interface heavily discourages downvoting/returning steem to the reward pool.
Posted using Partiko Android
Personally I don't know if there is a total answer to this besides a focus on partial reward going to content that is engaging. We could say that YouTube has a similar curation problem because spammy ridiculous stuff can rise up and go viral
Posted using Partiko Android
Probably not. People are trying to game every system. However, youtubes algorithms shits on steems as of now. Money is involved for everyone and we cant just tell everyone to stop being greedy. It is far more difficult for crap to go viral on youtube. It used to be much easier, but things are improved upon. Once you change something, youll have some negative consequences that didnt exist before but its a process.
Posted using Partiko Android
Personally I feel like the crypto economics on STEEM are too far off from something that can be a more usable system but it can't be the only thing attempting to support the whole ecosystem.
If I had the money to build another platform I would essentially utilize the same thing it is in its current form but tweek a few things and make certain features a tiered system to where you have to reach certain power levels to unlock certain features. Then there would be the additional revenue from the internal and external ad engine.
Even if the crypto rewards were always partially skewed because of the stake weighting people wouldn't care as much if they precieved that they were doing well for the type of content they were posting.
Just like we see when the market surged. Most people weren't really talking about any negative aspects because the good times were rolling.
Unfortunately this system is a death sentence during a bear market because the inflation is too high in comparison to other coins such as Bitcoin and EOS and people are trying to live off the earnings here.
It is just a funding mechanism for other projects essentially but that is a dangerous game because anyone who powered up outside money suddenly has to try to earn more than it is losing in comparison to other crypto projects.
In my opinion it is so close but yet so far away.
Sure they can do that. In fact some of them already do that.
So what.
Which will make more profits, continue to circlejerk without a care in the world, or potentially land an early curation spot when someone like @neilstrauss publishes a never-before-seen unedited draft to the Rolling Stones Magazine.
There are other rules that can negate circlejerking too if Kevin's proposal goes through.
Posted using Partiko Android