You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Why Rewards Have to Change... (Fair warning, this is a long one)
This wasn't long at all, but that's probably me. The most hilarious thing about the argument's against the 50/50 split, and this goes for basically dozens of posts and long ass comments from numerous people, some not so sharp and some very intelligent, is that they avoid even hinting at the largest group of users on social media, let alone actually acknowledging the consumers. Grade a myopia. I mean people get all angry when I call them retards and idiots and don't spell it out for them as if this hasn't been addressed by every single person who argued FOR the split.
Yeah idiots, "but without the authors what will be curated"..
Lol... for some reason I had you muted, but anyway fixed now. I think there's some cognitive dissonance and perhaps even entitlement to sort through. Plus there's the whole comparison problem. Comparison is the death of joy, when people start looking at what other people are earning it creates expectations and when they work hard and don't earn it, then they feel slighted. We have a lot of hurdles to overcome, but I think the 50/50 split is the least of the problems imo. The fact that about 80-90% of the reward pool is tied up in vote selling is a goddamn nightmare...
To some they call it the free market, they will even reason in their savant retardation that bidbots help maintain a demand for steem, these people suffer from myopia, they can't see that curation rewards are the way to the content consumer's pockets and if they see that then they can see that without enough curation rewards there's no demand for steem, as for the "but bidbots are filling up a market niche", much like prostitution does the same thing..