Steemit Reward System 2.0 - It is Time to Evolve
Source
An inability to adapt in the face of adversity is to invite one's own demise.
It was true of the Dinosaurs. It was true for the Dodo.
We might be witnessing this truth for Bitcoin if it fails to pull something out of the bag in the near future...
...And it'll certainly be true for Steemit if we (and by we I mean 'anybody' and 'everybody' who is or could be involved in Steemit upon any level) fail to collectively realize that the platform is heading towards a precipice.
Source
How Did We Get Here?
One could go as far back as one wishes to on this one - but it is important to state first and foremost that attributing all the blame in the World isn't going to fix the crisis that Steemit faces.
We 'can' indulge ourselves in an acidic form of 'Coulda, Woulda, Shoulda' - but in no uncertain terms I shall tell you that this is one instance where being right or wrong is less important than fixing the damage that has been done and may yet be done.
One could talk of the infamous pre-mine of STEEM and speculate over the impact that this undoubtedly had upon the initial supposedly decentralized platform's epicenter of power.
One could talk of the short-sighted and yet encouraged practice of self-voting by all levels of users that was 'designed' into the Steemit platform.
Source
One could talk about the 7 day reward period that basically favors those who post materials of time-limited worth - such as cryptocurrency-related updates - while raising a middle finger to original content of relatively timeless worth (such as novels, or even sharing of scientific breakthroughs).
One could talk about the lack of in-built protections to prevent users from being flagged into oblivion at the whim of anybody with no more right than the self-assigned virtue of having the might to do so at their disposal.
One could talk about the massive issue of plagiarism - which many users are guilty of upon some level or another.
Source
One could talk of the flood of users from all kinds of places - and more specifically - the kinds of content that are put out. This can tie into the previous point.
One could tie into the rise of heavy-weight rivalries that play out upon the Steemit platform like King Kong and Godzilla having a romp about Tokyo.
Source
It is important to recognize the validity of all these points.
However it is far more helpful to recognize the importance of such with respect to choosing our next step rather than to seethe over the shortcomings of the past.
With the above in mind - I can propose an alternative.
Yes... I did say 'alternative'.
Source
It is Time to Forge a New Chapter in This Journey.
It is time to design and implement the changes that Steemit (and the dreams that have been linked to Steem) needs to survive.
Steemit Sustainability Becomes a Consideration.
Now while some people 'do' hold the sustainability of Steemit to heart, way too many people lack an understanding of what that means and why we should head down this path.
Source
What it means: Regardless of how Steemit scales, Steemit will always thrive.
Why it is important: Without it Steemit will diminish and perhaps die.
Is all clear? Good!
It also means a new system and level of rewards redistribution.
Building the Pro-Common Purpose of the Rewards Pool.
Once upon a time, adjustments were made that resulted in a greater pressure being placed upon the rewards pool.
As a result we saw Steemit's worth rise while the Rewards pool diminished.
Source
It is time to rethink this trend.
Through building a pro-common purpose for the rewards pool, a further channel of wealth cycle is introduced - one that utilizes a portion of the pool to provide accelerated purpose for varying levels of new accounts.
I would like to see a more refined model than the following to come to life but the following concerning new users is a beginning:
Source
New User's Journey (0-250SP):
Initial Delegation of 15 SP
A weekly increase in delegation of up to 15SP
Calculated at 1SP per Post up to five + matching of rewards on post (up to 2SP/ post)
To a maximum delegated reputation of 100SP + (Reputation x 2)
This ceiling may rise and fall from week to week - with a projected maximum of maybe 220SP (100SP + 55 Rep x 2).
Inactivity Penalty: During any week where a user posts less than 5 posts, Delegation may be withdrawn by a maximum of 10SP (or 2SP for every post fallen short that week).
This may be counteracted by simply performing well on those posts as per the earlier calculation.
Easing into Orbit (250-500SP):
Once 250SP (sans delegation) is reached the balance begins to shift such that the up-force begins to diminish - but the ceiling is raised to a maximum of (150 + (Reputaton x 3)).
New User Established (500SP-1000SP): At this point the 'ceiling' begins to diminish by a % equivalent to the proximity of the user to the 1000SP mark. All other factors remain the same. At 1000SP - delegation via this source reaches zero.
Special: References to SP are in reference to the value of SP had a user transferred rewards to Steem Power. Users who simply walk away with the STEEM or SBD will experience a rude awakening.
Source
My personal experience is that it takes a good 6 months of regular effort to amass the 500SP required to gain access to a vote slider. While gaining access to it is hardly the 'endgame' goal - it is a landmark event that makes one feel more like a fully-fledged user of the platform.
With new users covered, lets get to the meat of regular user rewards.
Breathe New Life to Posts More Than a Week Old
In my view, part of the problem concerning the way in which the rewards pool is being used (and abused) concerns the fact that all posts have a seven day reward period.
It is my view that the time has come to cast this aside, in favour of a more complicated but more sane and forward-thinking system. It shall be necessary to break this down in points.
Source
Rewards on Posts are Listed Primarily in Steem & SBD, not Dollars
It is well-known that seeing pending rewards diminish is a soul-destroying exercise but more importantly it gets people thinking in Steem rather than dollars.
Of course, in the 'Wallet' section of the website, allow users to get a 'current estimate' of worth in the currency of their choice. For 50/50 posts - show both values in a (SBD/STEEM) format (yes, with different colours - which reminds me - introduce colour text formatting to Steemit!).
Flags Affect Reputation but Not Payouts
There exists a ludicrous situation where users are justifying the use of flags upon other peoples posts because they are being too richly rewarded. They have gained some traction through asking people to think of flags as down-votes and therefore acceptable for use even when users did nothing wrong...
Source
While admitting that this sort of comes down to personal philosophy - it is highly doubtful that those who purvey of such reasoning apply it to either those that they like or to themselves.
In other words their views suffer in the 'Consistency' department.
On the other hand, I personally view flags as a means of correcting bad behavior as an indirect means of encouraging good behavior.
I've never flagged a user. Some users deserve to be flagged. I am consistent in my inaction.
Source
Apportion Rewards for Long-Term Cycling
Every post ever created has multiple leases upon life.
In association with it is all the SBD/ STEEM ever attributed in relation to it.
However to casual external users (those who do not plumb the blockchain), the reward totals get reset to zero at various points - with rewards attributed to the individual's reward tally.
This occurs after 3 days, 7 days, 21 days, and every 90 days following this.
Yes - this is a residual income system. It is what Steemit always should have been but fell short.
Source
As per normal there is a profit motive that encourages curators to keep plugging for the best content.
And yes this will require a rebalancing of rewards that are presently designed to be reaped a mere 7 days in.
Common Time Bracket Weighted Curation Stake
The point of curation is to bring read-worthy content to the attention of a given community, right?
So let us, to a point, do away with a first-come-best-served system that heavily discriminates in favour of the first!
Source
Instead, let us determine time brackets as follows:
0-15 minutes = Up-Votes Disabled (Username & Post Age also Hidden)
15-30 minutes = Shared 1st Stake (Username also Hidden)
30-60 minutes = Shared 2nd Stake (Username also Hidden)
1-3 hours = Shared 3rd Stake (Username also Hidden)
3-6 hours = Shared 4th Stake
6-12 hours = Shared 5th Stake
12-18 hours = Shared 6th Stake
18-24 hours = Shared 7th Stake
Over 24 hours = Shared nth Stake
Disabled Up-Votes - Blunting the dominance of bots and opportunists comes this measure. It is modestly presumed that a reader dealing in meaningful curation will need a few minutes to read content. Too many up-votes occur for reasons other than recognizing the value of a given post in question. While this behavior cannot be eliminated - it sure can be mitigated.
Shared Stakes Getting in first is less important than pitching one's support during a given 'stake bracket'. Brackets essentially take a portion of a post's rewards and distributes that among those laid a stake upon it.
While there will remain an advantage to curating sooner - the differences with regards cousin curations in the same bracket shall be much less pronounced.
Residual Stake Since persons can (presently) only upvote a given piece of content the one time, I do see that persons who get in on a given bracket will also have a residual claim from that point forward.
Source
Figure Out a Post Exposure System Both More Equitable and in Greater Service of Data Seekers
Trending... Hot... New... Promoted...
'Home'... and Resteeming...
These are the only built-in mechanisms by which a user's content can reach others.
Let us refine and expand upon this.
If its not a time-bound category (like 'new') then mix it up - a lot!
Source
Posts 'can' be sorted by any of a variety of criteria:
- How much they've been up-voted (in total or within a period of time)
- How many times they've been up-voted
- How recently they'd been posted
What is missing here are a few more criterias
- User Reputation
- Estimated amount of effort that went into the post
- Estimated originality of the content.
Or more refined criteria such as:
- Hybrid weighting of post-value, recentness, and reputation
Source
And lets talk about the filtering currently at play. Is there any reason why a user cannot follow certain tags that may or may not be in the limited 'top paid' list?
Lets decide to get our acts together! Its due to oversights such as the above that so many posts fail to even see the light of day.
As mentioned before, the brackets system provides scope for reducing appraisal of a given post by virtue of familiarity alone. A period of posts not showing who wrote them should help with that (and lets face it, some users have their posts rewarded just because they posted them...).
The same bracket system permits for posts to be cycled and displayed in a manner that does not always show the most recent first. Posts tumble in this fashion as individuals go through them - wondering which ones were written by a reputation 70+ user and which by a newbie.
Source
Of course - people still have a degree of cognizance with regards their 'Home' page - where their followed individuals' posts aren't similarly blacked out (but still would appear so in other sections of the website - until past that initial 3 hour period).
This is a start but a lot more could be done.
The post tagging system could be improved upon to finally provide the reshuffle that is well-needed.
Popular Tag Cycling
One reason why the tags do not change much is because they are measures primarily in terms of rewards. In this way, less "important" tags simply don't get exposure.
Through a simple cycling system whereby tags placed on the front page change every single time the page is loaded, with weighted preference but not exclusive domain for well-rewarded tags, different kinds of information come to light.
Furthermore, a means of adding tags to a given custom view page would allow users to create their own special interests-focused lists, listed above next to 'promoted' - and multiple lists one could have - one focusing upon news and current events while another focusing on nature and gardening - for instance.
Source
Uh Huh... And How Does This All Solve Rewards Pool Rape?
Well... first of all this is not 'only' about reward pool rape - even if it is a big issue. A simple solution toward mitigating that is ceasing the allowance of self-up-votes (d'oh). Of course some might counter that the whole 'residual income' thing is just as bad if not worse. Just because something is desirable does not necessarily mean that it is sustainable.
The key here is to set the balance just right.
Also, ironically, and perhaps the hardest sell within this post - I propose that a cycle-back to pool be calculated upon capital gains per post.
Let us suppose that a single post generates $1,000,000-worth in up-votes.
Source
No, I've never seen anybody earn that much on a post - but lets call it 'thinking ahead'.
Cycle-Back - Reward Bracket
50.0% - $100,000-$1,000,000 & Beyond
35.0% - $10,000-$100,000
25.0% - $1,000-$10,000
15.0% - $100-$1,000
10.0% - $10-$100
05.0% - $1-$10
02.5% - $0-$1
Yes, this looks a lot like a tax.
Like a tax it serves as a 'wealth redistribution mechanism' that serves to reduce the draw of the heaviest drawers capital gains per-post - and it is automatically calculated as amounts rise and fall (since that leaves a less bitter taste in the mouth). Yes, the above would ideally be rethought to be represented in STEEM/SBD rather than $.
The taxed value goes toward pro-common purposes like propping up new active users and also for helping to sustain the residual cycles of income...
Source
This also applies to curation rewards...
And also any rewards on subsequent cycles (although, as mentioned before, cycle-back is calculated upon every reward period.
So, to give an example - Let us suppose, for the sake of simplicity that a post has been around for 40 days.
In the first 3 day period it accrues $250 in gross rewards
($0-1= -$0.025, $1-10 = $0.45, $10-100 = -$9.00, $100-250 = -$22.50: Total Cycle-back = $31.975)
In the subsequent 7 days it accrues $50 in gross rewards, and
($0-1= -$0.025, $1-10 = $0.45, $10-50 = -$4: Total Cycle-back = $4.475)
In the subsequent 21 days it accrues $10 in gross rewards.
($0-1= -$0.025, $1-10 = $0.45: Total Cycle-back = $0.475)
Net rewards following the three hypothetical reward cycles:
$218.025 + $45.525 + $9.525 = $273.075
Source
And there are more cycles to come. What will bring rewards? New people who come across the content and find it to be vote-worthy. With the reward cycles system posts would no longer be completely dead.
Now - all that remains to add to 'this' portion of the mix is to allow users to bring more visibility to these older posts if they so choose - and you'll have the beginnings of something a lot less inefficient than the 'post-and-leave-to-obscurity' approach that Steemit presently adopts.
This is not a full solution but it is a mitigation.
It may well still require for value to be added to Steem via another means so as to better balance the rewards pool books.
But something should be clear.
Source
Yes we can.
As an aside, I may not be a particularly capable blockchainer but I am a reasonably capable thinker. I am increasingly interested in delving beneath the surface. If you have a project that you can see me contributing to then this is not a bad time to let me know.
Well this is one reason why I was a little quiet these past days. :c) I like to think things through even if I have a good idea of what I'd like to say - and this topic has long since been on my mind in some form or other.
Do you have any feedback or comments? Perhaps you can think of further enhancements?
I look forward to addressing them down below. :c)
Also, if you found this post interesting and would like to share this with your followers and friends then a resteem is always greatly appreciated.
Sincerely,
Previous Post: First Impressions & Philosophizing Over Another Dell Inspiron 1500 Series
If I was @ned I would invite you down to Steemit Inc as a guest, pay your airfare and hotel.
I'd have you work with the development team for 2 days to come up with a better specification where the developers could explain to you the constraints of what is technically possible and what is technically not possible.
They'd also work with you in finding ways to combat new users that are created by bots and will dump spam on to the system and upvote their other bot accounts.
...when that is all done, it would probably cost Steemit Inc $1000 for 2 days of your time, but it would be worth it in the long run.
Have you made any efforts to contact Ned or Steemit Inc?
If its too hard to contact them electronically, I'd send this post with a short cover letter attached by postal mail to them, and you might actually get it read better that way.
I think 80% of what you suggested is quite plausible and good. I think 20% is impossible to achieve (technically, with 3 second block times)... as well as some of it could still be exploitable by bots and bad actors.
But if you're 80% good on your suggestions, it would be really nice for the dev team to work with you on this particular issue on a one-project isolated basis.
If he made that offer, would you go?
That is a very flattering assertion @intelliguy! :c)
I am genuinely curious as to which aspect of that which I've said above might prove impossible due to 3 second block times.
Oh yes, I am aware that the above does not eliminate bad actors, bots and voting circles (side-stepping any removal of self-voting) from abusing the system. Yes, I can think of means by which they can be significantly mitigated - although I have yet to think up anything I'd consider a full solution to such.
No, I have never attempted to contact @ned or Steemit Inc.
I do peruse of the #steemdev tag...(?)
I like to be heard and noticed but not to gate-crash (unless I'm royally annoyed).
I would accept such an offer, yes.
That being said, I would suggest that it would be significantly more economical and practical to arrange for a few days of remote collaboration (presuming that there are no European events that Steemit Inc plans on attending). My physical presence would do little to further the blockchain and the 6-hour time-zone-difference isn't so bad. :cP
I would be happy to set aside a few days to the matter (with reasonable compensation), 'if' @ned and Steemit Inc are so inclined.
Thanks again for the major vote of confidence! :c)
If there were ever a post worth several $100s or more in payouts I would think this would be one, but I see it is not unfortunately.
Your analysis shows you must have a much deeper understanding of all this than the vast majority of users, myself included.
One of my first conversations about Steemit I remember concerned limiting abuse of the system with ideas of disabling self voting and bots, and to have a form of tax, "bad word" beyond certain levels, but I was admonished that such things were not consistent with the open system of cryptos.
Without some consistent consensus and governance that is as yet discouraged I do believe this system will eventually fail, and be exposed for the "pyramid scheme" that so many cryptos are accused of being.
I think many of us believe (or perhaps we want to believe) initially that Steemit is different and actually a place that can do good, or as in my case, at least a place where I can share some creativity and photography that some other like-minded may appreciate.
Don't get me wrong I do believe this is a great outlet for creativity and I do think there is potential (and here's the big butt), BUT what I have seen in my short time on Steemit is that those who may have been here longer or learned to game the system faster are really the only ones who are prospering...so far.
My perception is that there are far more people, who understand the system or not, and abuse it than there are those willing to play fair.
At this point seeing the ugly whale wars Steemit begins to look much like a wonderful experiment demonstrating the principle of a few bad apples ruining the bunch.
I can speak to the real world lunacy of having to deal with unyielding idiocracy of those on top with power and wealth, and the self-centered arrogance and blindness that comes with it. Defending that position can become more important than survival itself.
I have to admit to beginning experimenting with bots and such in my novice understanding of this all to see what difference it makes. I thought I heard that it helped those who upvoted you as well as yourself so that it wasn't a bad idea. And quite frankly still don't understand what I am doing, just copying some of what I see seems successful when I randomly run across it.
Hell, I don't even understand how to use Discord or groups. I just got into this because my son said I needed to get into cryptos and now I know what my Mom feels like when I try to teach her how to use a smartphone for gods sake...but I digress.
To make a long useless comment even longer though I really do hope your ideas can find some traction with those who may be able to actually have an impact.
I'd hate to see this really good idea be destroyed by a few self righteous or self serving yahoos who just happened to be lucky enough to get in early enough to manipulate and control the system with their extreme wealth.
That, by the way, is also one of the main things cryptos were created to avoid I believe.
Thank you for your time and well thought-out post. I will look forward to following you.
Thank you @ohicklin:
I had really thought that this post had slipped too far deep into that fog of 'will never be seen again' to gain feedback - and so you made my day. ^_^
You would be surprised at how many 'deserving' posts make a pittance and, inversely, how many shovel-posts by the more 'influential' get showered upon.
Then again, judging by your comment - maybe not. :c)
In any case I have learned to "manage my expectations"...
Thank you kindly for your compliment. My knowledge of the way Steemit works is limited to my observations and information picked up this past seven months - but even new users would have an easy time telling that 'something' is not right.
I would not 'quite' put it at 'pyramid scheme' status - as while the Steem ecosystem is enriched by new users - it is able to thrive without fiat input (or so I think). Yes, it does favour first-comer by virtue of its design but it makes sense that persons who have invested early will have a first-comer advantage - even if at a much lesser effort level than newer users.
I've not ever touched a bot (although I have touched @qurator as a steemit-based service - which kind of counts) so I couldn't tell you much other than that it doesn't take much effort to see that paying to get curated is somewhat of a hollow exercise. Lots of people do it - and many consider it legitimate.
Taxation is a topic that stirs emotions due to the negative connotations it has - and its association with governance and crypto's tendency to posit itself as being uninvolved in governance can fuel disagreement. That being said taxation, lie many other things, is simply a tool that can be used for better or for worse. I like to think that the above is an example of for better - but the jury is still out on that (they have mostly yet to arrive).
Your comment was not useless, in my opinion. Thank you kindly for sharing it. :c)
And thank you for your efforts to keep people thinking about improvements if possible. As you say it doesn't take long for newer users to realize not all is necessarily well. I just hope there can be some improvements before too many are turned off by the negativity that becomes apparent after a while of exposure to the system.
All in all I still believe there is great potential for creativity to show itself here.
I like the way you think my friend, I wish that I could understand the math parts, as many times as I’ve been told I can’t grasp it. Of course I’ve been told not to upvote anything of mine, not to use bots, to get curied don’t let it get above $3 blah blah .. all I know is my work still hasn’t gotten the attention it may deserve but whatever. The whole flagging and pool thing is crazy, the fight of the whales and gaining power is exhausting. I’ve received help from many and it’s slow going. At this rate even at 6 months I’ll not have much. The choice will come with should I move to another platform like Reddcoin that promises better Interaction and fairness, along with full acces to purchases via debit card, or wait through the idiocy I see on Steemit? The power struggle is crazy and I’ve noticed more and more people putting bad content out and it being overlooked. I see people claiming to be investment gurus, I do a background check and it’s full of BS, yet it’s getting curied. I dunno. I’m at a loss right now. Great writing, food for though, well written as always and I love the graphics. Bravo! xx 🦅
Hey there @eaglespirit! :c) Thank you kindly:
It sounds like you have gotten some pretty decent advice overall. :c)
I'll be clear though - I don't take it against any single user for opting to self-up-vote. I just see it to be a pointless and purely self-serving exercise (and there is a definite positive relationship between self-up-voting an long-term rewards. I do believe in personal responsibility however and so I commend you (and any other user who opts out of self up-voting). :c)
Getting Curied is definitely helpful for new users. Such initiatives help to bridge the blind areas of Steemit (and I truthfully miss the boost that I used to get (there is a definite a whole relatively windless period once one hits 53 Reputation.
I had never heard advice to prevent anything from getting above $3 - this is new on me. /:c) I do on the other hand have the impression that its better to have a few bigger votes than many tiny votes (as that hurts one's odds of trending).
In terms of reputation you have had a lot more success than myself in the couple of months you have been on here. :c) You will be fine - but your friends will help you a lot! Its kind of how Steemit can be made to work. It always rewarded vote cycles.
Thank you again @eaglespirit! Take care! :c)
Hi @pathfinder, my good friend and so wise, I just noticed as I did another pass through of your post the interesting near naked robotish female. LOL
Sorry, I got distracted. Okay so, thank you so much for the upvote and kind words. You spend so much time on you’re posts and they are very detailed. I wish I understood half of it. I’m not against people upvoting themselves either, I just don’t do it. I agree with you. I think I was just mentioning all the people who had told me not to do as it is considered bad mannners on Steemitbloggers that might actually push people with more upvote power away. I think that’s where I was going with that rant. Sorry. Plus I had just saw someone sheister getting. Curied And din love to bust that one up but i’ll Leave it alone. People should do more research if they are promoting someone is my point. It’s not hard to figure out if someone is a real estate scammer these days.
Anyhoo, it’s the Currie rules, they’re very strict. I think it’s really $10 though and not $3. That’s why we have to go and read ourselves and educate ourselves or find trustworthy people like you to discuss these things. Thank you for all you do.
You are at 56, I am at 52 soooo that means you have more rep and what you are putting out is more recognized. Are we here at the same time? I started 11/27/17. 😛😁
Oh... I thought long and hard about including that image but I figured why not, its an awesomely funny one and perfectly represents the dangers of getting lost in abstraction. :cP Most people would get distracted in such circumstances 😛(borrowed! 😁).
I am sadly a perfectionist. On the other machine I have a new post all ready to go except that I have yet to find a suitable image to fill the single remaining slot in the post. I got to sleep rather frustrated but I'll be sure to post it later - and hopefully something else from on this machine in the meantime.
Yes, the curation practices of various entities but especially individuals tends to be rather questionable. My own curation practices are far less good than I'd like them to be.
Also... I started out circa 06/11/2017 (so the 4 point difference in reputation is well-covered :cP)... but time on here is less important than other factors. Some topics, for one thing, are less favoured than others - and Steemit rewards focus (and I am anything but focused ^_~).
Thank you again for the feedback and your up-vote also. Have a great day! ^_^
I loved it! you are such a good writer and the photos are perfect! So very funny.
Can't wait for your next post, looking forward to reading it. No frustration, tho I do the same thing. LOL
Curation Curation Curation ... it's killing me.
June 2017 Nice, 4 points uht oh.
The focus makes me cross-eyed.
No worries on the feedback and up. Anytime! Blessings.
xx. Eagle.
Thank you for the high compliment @eaglespirit. :c)
I do enjoy the feeling of bringing a good post together. ^_^ As of late its proven more tricky - and I have resolved to keep my next few posts "short and hopefully sweet" - so as to not too greatly hinder my game jam ambitions this weekend. :c)
I have a habit of taking on challenging tasks. ;c)
Do not worry about the 4 points. It shows that you are having a more positive effect upon your readers - and that is great. :cP I'll bet that you'll have surpassed me by the end of February. ^_^ We shall see.
Wishing you well!
We shall see, I keep reading more positive posts like yours and this cheers me up. To stay consistent, make friends, and those are the ones that will support you through it all. Regardless of curation, whales, dolphins, etc. I guess we all want to make it "big," and be seen for how hard we work. Especially, if it is as detailed as your above. I have gotten some play, but I am in 5 small curation groups, so the payout is nowhere near $100 a pop. Maybe we will both get there, I think you before me. You deserve it. I go into this much detail sometimes. You do this all the time. Big hugs to you and have a lovely day!
Reading positive posts is definitely a good idea as it helps to set the tone for your day. Only some of my own are positive however (and resisting posting negative ones is one of the lesser reasons why I've slowed down as of late).
Yes, it is certainly nice to feel assured that one's reward shall be commensurate with the effort and value put into one's posts. Shall that often be worth $100 a pop? Unlikely - but it would be nice to aim for such with a reasonable assurance that one's efforts won't be completely overlooked in favor of talent-deficient sixty-second memes.
I honestly try not to dwell upon the notion of 'deserving' as otherwise the fury that would result might paralyze my posting pattern. :cP I prefer to keep knocking on peoples' skulls and whispering into their ears. ;c) Maybe some day things will work better.
I personally hope that you surpass my success thus-far! Shine on!
Thank you very much and have a nice day. :c)
I like it, but will someone that has the power to change it, like it? How much trouble would it be to make all these changes? I guess we'll wait and see how this goes over. Can we get a search bar on the blog page while we are changing things?
FYI: The 5th line up above your king sitting on the bags of money, "eave" should be "leave".
Thank you, @johnwjr7. ^_^
A search bar is a great addition - as is a tag-filter (have all tags ever used by the user listed at the top and activate/ de-activate all/ each at a whim), and of course an option to filter out resteems, would all be very welcome by most users - I have no doubt. Great call! :c)
It is my hope that those with the power to make a change will see that the benefits out-weigh the disadvantages. Everybody stands to benefit - and those content creators who are inclined to worry about how this will bite into their short-term profits may need to take a step back to take stock of the broader picture, both of the community as a whole - and their own long term benefits also. :c)
responded this to your comment on my post, but also added here too for reference...
I went through your post and the ideas you suggested to help mitigate some of the "issues" faced by STEEMIT. The problem is that those tactics can all be relatively easily circumvented through the use of fake accounts. As for BOTs, what you also have to understand is that from the perspective of the STEEM blockchain, even STEEMIT.com is a BOT. I dug up this old comment of mine when the topic was brought up on another post last year. Hopefully it helps better clarify the situation:
Thank you kindly for heeding my invitation to give this a quick look.
In truth my timing could have been better, as my next 72 hours shall be highly learning-work-and-snacks intensive. I did find your pointer that Steemit is practically a bot perusing of the Steem blockchain to be thought-provoking - and I thank you for it.
This being said, I will need to reconsider the above with this in mind (as I am not yet decided on whether I'm sold that the above-mentioned tactics can indeed be relatively easily circumvented through the use of fake accounts - I'll need to think about that some more, come Monday).
Thank you again - not least for your time.
As an aside - I never got back to this point. So much going on.
I remain unconvinced - but for as long as I fail to revisit and delve in depth I am hardly in a position to lay any challenge to the claims made by the original commentator.
Hmm - there is a large amount of work that i have been chewing through in this blog: for this alone I raise my hat to you! I like the identification of a number of issues. The big one for me is blatant plagarism - but i won't go into that now. You appear to think that new Steemit users need more support to keep going, but the ones with the dedication to keep going just need a bit of faith and fortitude and the benefits will come. Also, the wealth distribution system needs to stay simple and i will read it again later, but the one you have devised does not appear to be simple.
There are some other inportant points you have made: fairness of the flag system included. Might I suggest that this major presentation could be broken down into parts and presented as separate topics that are smaller and easier to consider. You may look to do that in the future and use these at the witness presentations. I would like to see action come from this and not just words...
Good luck 😊
Thank you, @mysecondself01, both for your up-vote and also for your very thoughtful comment. :)
Yes, plagiarism is a very hot potato and it can come in many forms. My personal grey-area failing is my use of other peoples' images without seeking their permission beforehand. Sadly I would take forever to finish any given article otherwise... and I know for a fact that many would lose interest in reading my materials if I were to opt not to include them.
Fortunately I have found a peaceful compromise with myself which involves posting links rather than images (which Steemit interprets as an image) - and always including a link to the source image - but some bother to do a lot less.
In my view, one effective way to deal with plagiarism would be to update flags to include a flag categorization. This would also provide users with a good idea of what is or is not acceptable grounds for flagging.
Well - with plagiarism categorization the flagger is required to include details of the plagiarism alleged.
Each post flagged goes upon a queue (with flagger reputation a factor in order). That queue gets assessed by humans (with the assistance of bots) to determine the validity of the complaint. Such complaints can be rejected or accepted in part or in full.
A post fully rejected is stripped of its rewards (100% cycle-back) while partials can result in a lower cycle-back and a rejection may or may not impact the reputation of the flagger concerned.
Yes... I have a tendency of thinking up complicated methods. Simplification is welcome :c)
As an aside, the nice thing about a 'cycle-back' is that some of it may well recycle back to the poster in a future reward period for that or other posts.
As for my inability to bring about action myself... my words I like to think of as a beginning. If further actions are required of me then I will seek to indulge them - with a helping hand from those more in the know. :c)
Thanks again.
You had a lot of stuff there I'm trying to take in :D
I agree that the curation structure should be changed because the current system doesn't incentivise user to upvote "quality content" per se, rather what is to be expected to collect lot of rewards, and that is usually authors who are popular. And popular doesn't necessary go hand in hand with "quality", whatever we perceive it to be.
Current system would work IF quality work always found good rewards, but the system currently doesn't work like that especially with poor content discovery methods which are almost nonexistent (excluding busy; there's some, and it's whole better than nothing). More distributed share of curation rewards I think would get people to actually vote the stuff they think is good rather than what is profitable. It needn't be equal proportionally but at least changed from the radical decrease. And that timebracket system of yours seems pretty cool to me: something that spices up some of that upvoting game from the "first voter advantage". Even though it's quite complex, I don't think a regular user really cares about the specifics knowing that his/her curation reward will in any case be worth more than 0, compared to a post earning hundreds of upvotes in current system which pretty much nets 0 curation rewards if upvoted by a small user.
You definitely have interesting ideas that are long thought out with the "taxation" which funds the new user delegation.
But flagging... I'm not going to think that further whether I agree with it not affecting payouts; I'm just getting a headache from the flagwars when trying to figure out what to think about it 🙈
But it's certainly something to consider.
Oh, and I also agree that the payouts period to be extended from the 7 day period. I'm sure there's a way to make this happen somehow.
It took me long enough to reply. I intended you no disrespect, just as I never intend on disrespecting @valuedcustomer when I sometimes shy away for a week before replying... :c)
Well, thank you for a brilliant reply (and the up-vote too!). :c)
This may be seen as an amalgamation of suggestions coupled with pointed observations that needed stating.
Yes, I absolutely wish to incentivize higher quality and original content - and the above is not a full package towards solving that - but may be seen as an adequate starting point for such.
I really appreciate the feedback. I just wish that more users noticed that this post exists - which is indicative of another problem with Steemit - exposure-deficiency. ^_^ Thanks again!