RE: Hardfork 21 is HAPPENING. What will change?
How exactly is the rewards curve changing? Some of us are averaging 5-6 STEEM on a good post, so it would kind of suck if smaller posters got pushed down. I know that there was talk about very small posts getting reduced payout. I'm concerned that this makes people who don't use bidbots get significantly less. I know there's talk about "well, this just impacts either end and leaves average users alone", but 20 STEEM per post does not seem to be an average user.
If you look at curation feeds like Curie, they're getting something like 9 STU, which might be 20 STEEM now but that's definitely not average.
OCD/Blocktrades gets people up to that threshold, but c-cubed does not.
Any of the smaller field-based curators (e.g. steemstem) just can't even hold a torch to 20 STEEM, if that's the break-even point.
Utopian gets good results, but they're not really a curation place.
If the shift is small, like 5% for people getting 3-8 STEEM, that's not atrocious. However, if that's a 25% decrease, those of us who rely solely on curation and initiatives like SBI for upvotes are going to really have to ask serious questions about whether we're getting anything for our efforts. Will we have to delegate to places like steem-ua or send our liquid STEEM off for upvotes from larger places so that we can hit the thresholds that keep our efforts worthwhile? That entirely defeats the point of an update intended to make curation better.
@loreshapergames The biggest vote of steemstem generates an approximate of 18 steem or close to 20 steem, that is to say "it is not enough", taking into account the level of quality of the article that the author must reach to obtain that vote. It's almost impossible!
Exactly. It's nice, but it's not anything that's going to motivate serious work to be posted to Steem.
Around 95%+ of my Steem posts I make are on other social media outlets I post as well; my statuses are the same across the board (posted on multiple platforms for increased visibility), whereas if it's a blog post, I post it all on here, then link to the blog post (on WordPress).
The remaining percentage of posts are exclusive to Steem, because they directly talk about in some way; I'm not overly motivated right now to make more posts exclusive to Steem, because - as was said before - if things don't happen after 7 days, then the window for earning potential from your is pretty much gone; visibility on the platform seems to be a bit tricky in many respects, especially for anyone like myself who has been here for less than a year.
I've received a fair few likes on my posts, but barely any comments, and I'm lucky to see even 0.001 STEEM on a post that reaches double digits. I've been starting to use the Tribes feature over the past week, seeing as it (hopefully) will increase my visibility somewhat, but also so I'm able to get some sort of reward (via tokens) for my posts, as in terms of STEEM, it's very easy for me to get nothing at all, even if the upvotes on my post reach the lower side of double figures (between 10-20 upvotes), I have a very strong chance of getting nothing for the time I put in! Not only that, it's very hard to know if there's interest in my posts or not, because I don't generally get many interactions other than upvotes.
This hard fork makes me wonder how people in a similar position to me (or lower), as well as those who are modestly above me will fare, because it really does seem like unless you're earning 20+ Steem, it's going to become a bit trickier to earn even the lowest denomination of it!
I'm in a similar boat, i don't get more than a few cents if any at all, on each post. One or two comments at most. It is a feeble existence, which may become more feeble as far as earning goes. Perhaps commenting and upvoting more will help?
Totally agree
At the moment, you are barely visible... Soon you are going to disappear off the radar completely.
The message of HF21 is Steemit doesn't want new users.
It seems so... but without new users, the value of STEEM could really go down further, and things would end up stagnating as a result because it's generally going to be the same accounts, especially after others leave!
People who use bid bots are likely to go down. Because unless the bots lower the cost of votes, it's not worth taking a 15% hit on every bid you make. Because now you have to share half with curators. You're more likely to powerup and self vote or vote on others content. In theory.
My question is this, though:
Why do bid-bots not just decrease their overhead? Once they have the liquid STEEM they convert it into SP, and the money that other people could have had by curating they receive instead.
This still does nothing to address the concerns with small content creators. How the hell do I get writer friends onto Steem when I know that they're likely to get cents on a dollar compared to what they do elsewhere and the big dogs are going to be the ones getting everything? With a week to get attention to your posts and get them up-voted before they lose value, there's no reason to post evergreen content on Steem when it could fare better elsewhere.
The only reason I'm here is because I wanted to make games and distribute them for free, and Steem seemed like a way to monetize that. Ultimately, I think that's been an absolute failure, in part due to how Steem's been faring on price (I don't believe Steemit has much control over this), but in part because the whole system is weighted toward people who have patrons.
The only reason I'm still around is for the community, but since Steem doesn't really have social features it's limited in that regard because most of the people I'm still sticking around to hang out with I'm interacting with on other platforms.
I think I speak for a lot of us who have left the platform when I say that we're demoralized and we don't have much faith in the system as it stands. To have changes that could seriously hurt people who are trying to claw their way up doesn't make sense. What portion of posts making 20 STEEM right now have done so on their own merits, versus being economically fueled?
The promise of Steem as a platform was that it would be a path to independence, and right now I don't think it's offering that to very many people. There are maybe less than a hundred people who could claim that Steem is anything more than a passion project or pipe dream for them. The nice thing about the linear system is that it's fair. I can see using a curve to weed out dust, especially if it's proven that a lot of very low value posts are bot activity instead of authentic engagement, but I'm not sold on HF 21 doing that.
Where else exactly?
YouTube or personal blogs with ads or writing churn for blogs that pay $10 a piece.
It's not glamorous, and you sacrifice a lot of your independence, but it pays better than Steem does right now and there's more likelihood of exposure outside the network of Steem users.
Now you can't tell me that your "writer" friends make even one cent from writing on YouTube, and personal blogs might net something like 10 bucks every 3 months, if they're good. Which blogs pay 10 bucks a piece for "churn" exactly?
Steem articles have more exposure than just about every blog out there since Steem is not a closed system by any means and everyone can consume the content without any kind of barrier, like paywalls or membership, and to top it all off steem articles dominate search results based on the sheer volume of content and the numerous web sites that link directly to steemit or other frontends.
I don't buy the "you make more on YouTube" or "elsewhere" at all, you know what it seems like: foot in mouth.
Have you ever worked as a writer?
With things like Patreon tied to another content creation service, people make way more than people make on Steem. Ads suck, but between ads and affiliate links you can do okay.
Also, you'd be surprised how many blogs have outsourced writing. Any small news site is going to be paying writers, as are a ton of company and media sites. $10 is the starving college kid pay, too. You can make more if you really get an audience.
Also, you can't eat off of exposure. I don't even know that you're correct about how well Steem draws traffic, because it's impossible to tell the reader/upvote ratio, but I actually suspect that I generally have a smaller readership than upvotes due to bots that are trying to snipe curation rewards and curation trails. Steem links may get some search results. Even then, after seven days your benefit for any content you've posted is gone (and I know there are ways to work around this, but they're not super user-friendly).
Steem's promise was as a way to achieve independence.
I've earned more in five hours of freelance writing than I've earned for several hundred posts on Steem (I've invested money in Steem too, though I always bought super low so I'm not in pain due to the low value).
Now, that's exceptional because it was a twenty-cents-a-word situation, which is basically the skies opening up and raining money, but I could be pulling down a lot more money off Steem than on. The only reason I'm here is for the freedom, and I'm not even sure that's worth it.
Which people and how many out of every potential thousand do that? You're saying that people make more "writing" for YouTube through their Pateron link than people make on steem but avoiding the facts: how many people do that, how competitive is it. All these blogs and content media web sites that pay their writers but which combined haven't a chance to compete with the ammount of money steem has paid content creators or the number of content creators that got paid and keep getting paid.
I seen so many things people claimed that "steem" promised them that the accompanied eye rolls are instinctual by now whenever I read such things.
BAT Tipping Jars are going to replace services like Patreon due to greatly decreased fees and ability to tip lower amounts. A 1 BAT tip results in a 0.95 BAT deposit into a Brave Creator Wallet.... Currently 1 BAT is about $0.20
Right now, BAT tipping is active on Twitter, Reddit, Youtube, and a growing number of social media platforms. It's not too inconceivable that in the very near future, a content creator will be able to post on Platform Whatever and receive rewards into a single location... a BAT Wallet (currently on Uphold)...
Some BAT nice graphics
https://zapread.com
https://publish0x.com
Probably medium.com
Some alternatives for Steem
https://www.zapread.com/Home/About
Total Satoshi spent, try not to laugh at what a failure the donate model is, and calling it donate model is a stretch since a large portion doesn't even go to the author.
Same model as Steem, only hidden.
// You get 1 Steem
// But wait, Steem doesn't pay in dollars / BTC, Steem pays in tokens. Who pays in dollars / BTC? Investors ...
Steem is a network worse than ZapRead, Publish0x, but without a system based on game theory. The fact that you can't see it means that the system is hiding it perfectly.
It's not the same model by any means, but nice try at asserting that a donation based system is the same as a stake based system.
It does not matter what it's paid in, it's irrelevant squared, what matters is how it has value and why it maintains it. In a donation system the entire value rests on people spending money/giving money, on a stake based system the entire value rests on people staking more than extracting. If they staked dollars it would be no different, same for bitcoin or any other token/store of value.
The system isn't based on game theory, at best it utilizes incentive structures based on game theory, it's based on cryptocurrency communities and social media. The "fact" that you think donating money is no different from staking money means you haven't a clue as to distinguish between a zero sum game and a cooperative, everyone-wins game.
The subsidy system as in ZapRead is even better in many ways. This is due to the fact that by voting for the content you vote only for the best (in your opinion).
The Steem system is the worst in economic terms because you give money that is not yours to another person you probably don't know. (As in socialism).
For example, I like BernieSanders, but I wouldn't give him a grant probably. But I don't pay anything for Steem, so I could give it to him for nothing.
As for Stake. In general, you freeze the funds in your account, but these funds were created from the air. In most cases you didn't pay for the tokens (but I can be wrong), like most of us. Stake is supposed to stop Steem from falling, but if the situation gets worse, people will evacuate and withdraw money from Stake, what's going on.
Hard Fork 21 is supposed to try to prevent it. There will be less liquid, more frozen.
I guess there's always some kind of loss in the system. Someone has to pay for the fact that you get tokens, sometimes for nothing.
Worse than those oddities that have nothing to do with steem what so ever? Sure.
The other one is even more hilarious :
The distribution wallet which includes all their "sponsored" authors cash outs:
https://etherscan.io/address/0xF9879bB3230f86fFCebcA652C5FB6Ec4504309be#analytics
Exactly my points!
I get regular Curie upvotes - evidently, my content is of high-enough quality to warrant it. :-)
Between those Curies, I'm lucky if I get 1 SBD per post. (I see SBD, not Steem so much - I think many others are like that too.) It's a far cry from 20 Steem!!! (Except once per fortnight - the minimum time between curie upvotes.)
I'm glad to see curation getting attention - this is a GREAT thing!!!
But I'm one of the creators (because I need to create), and we need to reward high-quality content to convince creators to stay in Steem if we're to see Steem, as a blockchain, thrive.
I suspect the thresh-hold is way too high. As is said here by @loreshapergames, a smaller shift for lower levels (3-8 steem isn't unreasonable), it would be a much more manageable change for those of us who make up the majority (vast majority) of quality content creators for Steem.
There is a link in the original post which answers this question.