RE: Hardfork 21 - Steem Proposal System (SPS) + Economic Improvement Proposal (EIP)
Posts like yours and the direction of where Steem is heading are PRECISELY why I am 100% powering down.
"Increasing the percentage of rewards that are distributed to curators." 25% isn't enough? If you change it to 50% there will be more people who buy Steem just to use their upvoting power to make 50% on upvoting anything. Already as it stands we know that bidbots have that exact same problem. Giving more money back to people who hold SP doesn't solve any of it. You provide no math, no facts, no proof of how arbitrarily changing it to 50% makes a difference. I don't care what your "opinion" on it is, that is worthless. Data. Facts. Metrics. I see NONE of that in your post.
"Create a separate “downvote pool.” Why? Data. Facts. Metrics. I see none of that showing why a downvote pool would help solve a problm. In fact, YOU HAVEN'T EVEN NAMED THE PROBLEM. What is the problem? Is it that your "opinion" is that there isn't enough downvotes? Lets just give MORE power to the people who regularly downvote abuse becauase they were here for the ninjamine and had millions of SP. Yeah, that will totally solve something....
Good grief. Steem is going to die by a thousand cuts of non-fact based thoughtleaders taking Steem over a cliff.
I like your style. All good counter points...
... then you kinda go on saying stuff like, "You provide no math!"
But read this again: "If you change it to 50% there will be more people who buy Steem just to use their upvoting power to make 50% on upvoting anything."
Think about that. Think long and hard.
More people buying steem. I'm thinking that's probably a... good thing? Yes. Yes, it is a good thing. No math needed there.
"Using their upvoting power to vote.." OH... MY... GOD! Not that! Why would thousands of content producers want people actually voting for their work?!?!?!
This is an outrage!
...oh... wait. No. That's actually EXACTLY what content producers want.
This place needs more content consumers. More content consumers means more money to the content producer. You do not need math for this. Picture a comedy show. Will the comedian earn more if the the chairs are empty, or full?
You entirely miss the point. The trending and hot tab is already filled with bid bottled posts. The bid bots will just make more money with more curation. Causing more power to be given to them. I dont need to show any math for that, go look.
There will be more shitposts and people buying steem to make money from voting is a ponzi scheme that cant last long term. When quality goes down due to shitposts how much will steem be worth.
Like I said I'm powering down because after 2 years I done
That's twice now, in one thread, where you said, your account here is dead... and you're leaving. Therefore, there's no point in speaking to you anymore. Don't let the door hit you on the way out.
You've made it clear, you're leaving. Goodbye. This is not a response to you, because technically, you're not here.
To anyone else. If you bought $100 worth of votes, would you be foolish enough to do it twice if on payday you realized 50% of that $100 went to someone else? "Hello ma'am. Will you please give me two quarters for this dollar bill?" Brief pause. "Why are you looking at me like that, ma'am?"
Are you going to be the sucker who purchases votes from a handful of accounts, when thousands of accounts would be willing to do it for free?
Then this character who is no longer with us goes on about shit posts, all while not being able to factor in the downvote portion of the plan... but it is me who is missing the point, somehow.
Huh...
I said I am powering down 100% and selling my Steem. I never said I was going to stop using busy.org or give up the group I run @informationwar.
I have been here for 2 years and basically not much has happend that is good. The signs all point to negative things happening. Steem laid off a bunch of people because they didn't sell their stake into USD responsibly every so often like they should have(cryptocurrency is a speculative assest with high risk). Steem generally is seen as a scam if you look where people talk about it on major crypto forums/reddit/twitter(I know Steem isn't a scam, just saying the perception is that it is by most).
Putting information onto the blockchain so that it cannot be censored is a valuable thing, that is why I am here. I have been in the cryptocurrency space since almost the very beginning of Bitcoin. I sold my Bitcoin for the same reason I am selling my Steem and buying more ETH/OMG/LOOM/BCH.
I criticize the problems with Steem because I want them to get better, not make things worse. Linear rewards suck. Current bidbot status quo sucks, but changing to 50% curation will just attract more people looking to blindly upvote anything to make profit.
If it changes to 50% curation rewards from the current 12% I may need to examine how well that does and possibly re-consider keeping SOME Steem, just so I can constantly make money from upvoting. 50% is nothing to sneeze at, the current 12% is something to sneeze at because it also has a 13 week powerdown period(which is also stupid now that we have Resource Credits).
I am pretty well versed on this entire thing from the beginning to the end. Just telling me to go away and stop talking is a weird response.
I didn't tell you to go away or stop talking. You said you're done. When someone with the name Truth says that, you take it seriously. Also, if you're in management or business and an employee consistently threatens to quit, you hold the door open for them. They're not a strong asset if all they do is crack under pressure and threaten to quit every time something goes wrong.
Why not just keep your SP around knowing full well you'll get more SP in return for helping out the things you support? Be the change you want to see. The more you support what you support, the more you'll be able to support what you support because what you support, supports you.
There's no point in focusing only on what the next scammy type character will be doing under a new set of rules when the fact is: Thousands of people want to see some positive change around here. They've wanted it for a long time. Nobody planned for the shit to hit the fan around here when previous changes were made. Nobody plans to fuck this place over. Nearly everyone wants this place to be successful, and we don't know what needs to be done to make it successful. If we did, we'd probably just do that. Doing absolutely nothing though? Not changing a damn thing? That just leaves us here.
Have a good day.
However, i did power down these same reasons.
Dear @nonameslefttouse
I actually agree with @truthforce on this one.
Those who self-upvote will not stop. They will receive less as an authors but more as curators. So it won't stop them.
At the same time bidbots will be growing twice as fast as they are growing now (after all their curation rewards will double).
Yours
Piotr
Yes you are write.
Until you can just open free account if you have 5,000 Steempower and this always again after your resource credits was refilled you just make different accounts and vote with one the other account.
For the bid bots it's even a good deal, because they get more curation reward for their votes.
"Write" or "right"? :)
right … das nächste Mal beauftrage ich das jaki01-Übersetzungsbüro bevor ich einen Kommentar schreibe :-)
Here is the weird thing. @steemhunt actually has solved virtually every single perceived problem mentioned above and nobody is talking about it. I think I'll b writing a post on this. I made this poll and you can take a look at the responses: https://dpoll.xyz/detail/@vimukthi/are-you-more-of-a-content-creator-or-an-investorgamercurator-how-do-your-perceive-hf-21/
oof
Dear @truthforce
I hate to say that, but I see it exactly the same way. Those who self-upvote will not stop. They will receive less as an authors but more as curators. So it won't stop them.
At the same time bidbots will be growing twice as fast as they are growing now (after all their curation rewards will double).
Yours
Piotr
Buying votes for 'promotional purposes' is a farce. People buy votes because the vote seller offers a potential ROI but no guarantee. Explain to me who would buy a vote if the seller was to get more and the buyer nothing? For what purpose would someone buy a vote?
Dear @nonameslefttouse
I absolutely agree. It'a a farce. However upvoting published content to trending page gives people hope to get some exposure and traffic.
That's obviously my own opinion.
Yours
Piotr
Which is why people should be curating and voting quality up to the trending page, instead of all the crap paid programming we see there today. Thousands left because they had no hope of ever making it here. If I can go out and buy the trophy that says I'm the best golfer in the world, I don't even need to learn how to golf.
I do think that everybody starts with the same mindset, just like politicians. They start with the idea writing good quality posts (or at least the best they can) and curating good posts! But when there account grows, their mindset changes and do find a more effective way to increase their steem power. As a result they will be manual voting less often.
The lesser SP an account has, the more they will do manual upvoting.
I do also forsee that voting bots will change their business case into curation bots! Probably they will vote on the posts from people who do delegate SP to them. In that case the users don't need to buy votes directly but them will get them because they delegate. The profit the bot makes with curating will be shared under the delegators.
I did start around 1.5 years ago. And still I am not earning much. I do feel that they bigger accounts, besides a few exception, aren't manually curating, which brought us in this situation!
Personally I do think that the 50/50 split will discourage a lot of authors to write posts. In HF20, they would earn for instance 1 steem, while after HF21 this would be dropped to 0.5 steem. Most of us do have probably a limit which they do find it worth it to post, so lot's of them will dropp out. The bigger account won't do the manual curating, they will probably keep on using tools like smartsteem or delegate to curating bots.
In this scenario, one can think that more people will vote on more different post from more different authors but I doubt it.
I myself haven't been discovered by lots of whales or Orca's. So in my case value of my posting will stay the same, but they return 25% Steem, SP or SBD. While I do want to look at the bigger picture, because a strong steem is good for all of us, I will keep on writing, but lot's will just stop!
Cheers,
Peter
me too, powering down. You fucking people SUCK.
From one artist to another, I just want to suggest you give it more thought and some time. You need eyes on your work and by the sounds of things, this plan could help with that. Right now, many potential curators choose to be paid to look away. The proposed changes offer incentives to get paid to look.
In the arts and entertainment world, these changes are much like offering a standup comedian a smaller cut on a slow night because the venue is offering consumers drink specials. The drink specials are there to fill the house, the performer ends up earning more by accepting a smaller percentage because the seats are full. Had the venue not offered the drink specials as an incentive for people to show up, the performer would have taken home far less money, even if offered the full cut, because the seats were empty.
We have too many empty seats here at the moment. Too many performers, not enough content consumers. Everyone is in the back, waiting to go on stage, to perform in front of an empty house. Back room is packed. Something needs to be done to change that, or we go out of business. I've been saying this now for a very, very long time. If it works, it works. If it doesn't work, it doesn't work. Personally, I prefer to see people succeed. Standing room only. People hanging from the rafters.
I guess the downvotes are there because every venue needs a bouncer to handle the drunken riffraff.
You hit the bulls eye
interesting. The hard forks have always reduced the value of my account. I am sick of it. I see you have been on here about as long as I have. I don't see where they have ever done any good. It's pathetic. I already actually powered down a while ago and had done nothing - that's why I am plankton instead of a minnow 3 - which I could never get beyond - but even powered down, I am making more money now than I ever have on a regular basis - but it's more to do with having found my community in eco-train than these idiots antics which have basically drowned us... and the google ads make it even worse.
I used to ask why, rather than purchasing votes, why don't these folks just flag my work into oblivion, for free, because the end result is the same.
Me publishing a post that includes art is much like putting up a display behind my shop windows. People are to walk by and notice it, then maybe step into my blog and browse around. Unfortunately, since they started selling votes, I put my work up behind the windows, and some asshole comes along and plasters shit posters and advertisements all over the glass, meaning people can no longer see what I've done.
I went from working my ass off, starting with nothing, working up to having the odd organic trending post from time to time... to nearly losing it all. That was all due to the people being paid to look away, and those offering the incentive to earn by looking away. What is any form of art and entertainment without the eyes and ears looking and listening? The views come first, then the money. That's the only way this business works, and thousands of years of history prove that, but somehow these folks who don't really know much about the arts and entertainment or its potential to generate billions yearly concluded it would be better to earn a few hundred or maybe a few thousands measly dollars selling votes. Blame the platform, blame those in charge... but let's not forget about the actions of the people as well. I'm looking at a lot of those folks who are getting paid to look away, and they're not even here to see me staring at them. An attention economy.. LOL! And these folks pay people to look away. Common sense says that's sabotage.
You are making a lot of sense. I won't lie I just passed my first year on steem. I have grown my account with the use of bots and vote services due to the clear fact that they looked like they worked. But only once a week so I go around looking at posts. I spend all my time running my blog and working with bots cause it was the best way to grow it. I talk to the people that enter my stuff but that is about it. This change would cause me to want to pull back my delegated steem. To start to look for content I like to vote for. The only issue I see is moving it to 50% won't work well with the rule that the biggest account to vote for it first gets the biggest cut. I really wish they would address that to just the biggest cut of the pie, not no one who votes after gets any of my pie. I never really understood why that was here.
I started out here years ago, with nothing. I've made a little over 1500 STEEM by manually curating content. It would have been more had a not been inactive for a total of about ten months, spread out over nearly three years. For me, with 50/50, I get a raise. I never tried to maximize curation rewards either. Simply voted whenever. I'm a content producer first though; that's the main reason I'm here. I'll benefit either way. If my post values drop at first, I could just make that up with curation rewards.
I don't agree with such a drastic drop in author rewards. But that was a very nicely point argument.
LMAO!
As someone who spent the better part of two years as a curator on steem, the curator system is broken. 25% of curation rewards goes to who ever gives the quickest biggest vote. Curators don't get paid enough, it's possible that his proposed solution isn't good enough, but it's for sure that good curators make very little for their time.
Yes, and that could be solved if we had a system that was similar to how Witnesses work. A Curator Council type thing, where people vote for curators. Curators would get extra rewards depending on how many votes they had, bad curators would lose votes.
I think the fact that bad witnesses get voted out and good witnesses voted in proves that type of system largely works already. It could do with some adjustments of course.
That's actually what we're trying to do with the HoboDAO. But it will be specialized for decentralized journalism. However, nothing prevents any communities from copying our design and doing it for art, music or whatever.
Good stuff! Good luck in that endeavor!