You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: 1% lifetime referral reward on Steemit - does that sounds good in your ears? Suggestion for the DEVs and the witnesses - implement this please! Then we will make Steemit.com known to every person on this planet in no time!
Up voted for the thought and you looking for a solution. I actually believe this has a potential to do harm to the platform mostly on a PR level. I explained why when I replied to your reply to @krnel.
I like you trying to think outside the box though. Keep at it.
Thank you for the upvote.
I think @dwinblood and @mindhunter need to read the definition of the word ponzi.
My suggestion is an incentive, you guys are a little confused :)
Not Punzi. Ponzi. Very familiar with the definition. Also you need to read closer. I didn't say it would be a Ponzi scheme. I was not talking about my beliefs, or yours.
Steemit has already been called a Ponzi scheme by some big names when it was doing well. I was one of those defending saying it is not a Ponzi scheme.
This would give them more ammunition to bring that up again, and then it would in fact be closer to a Ponzi Scheme.
Most Ponzi Schemes are
Join this program it costs X
Sell our product and everyone you sell it to increases your income
The product you are selling is the same product you paid X for...
I have argued that steemit is not a Ponzi scheme because you don't have to buy anything, and in fact they give you starting currency and you can immediately start working towards making money without even paying a dime.
The 1% incentive you are talking about is closer to how a Ponzi scheme works, but it is still not a Ponzi.
I did not say I believed it would make Steemit a Ponzi. I haven't read @mindhunter's statement so I don't know if he did. I stated it would be a potential big PR issue because other people would talk about it being a Ponzi scheme.
They already have, and some of them were pretty prominent speakers in the Crypto world. That has mostly stopped, but there was a time when steemit was shooting up like a rocket that this was a common debate on steemit, reddit, facebook, forums, and anywhere else people were talking about steemit.
I wrote this post yesterday... and it is kind of ironic this is coming up since I was talking about the comments I made the most money off of on steemit, and I have my best example in this post, and it is me fighting the "it's a ponzi" statement using poetry.
https://steemit.com/chaospoet/@dwinblood/my-other-account-chaospoet-and-the-early-days-of-that-incarnation
We need an real incentive structure for promoting steemit, it does not exist as it is today.
We are heading for steem = 1 cent, mark my words.
Sure we are heading there. Yet correlation does not equal causation. There are many factors. What incentive does reddit, twitter, facebook have? There are many ways to provide incentive that does not mean giving people a monetary incentive.
That is kind of a last ditch effort if you can't think of anything else.
Steemit is in beta, and they are hard forking and trying things. We hopefully have a lot of the BUGS and changes worked out before a mass of people join. At least those of us here know what is going on and why certain changes are being tried.
I am not against 1% for incentive reasons.
I just don't think we are at the point where we need to worry about that. Yes, steem could hit 1 cent or lower and since it is mostly beta so be it. We are all early adopters. If we get it out of beta and it has issues that could cause PR firestorms worked out (some huge name gets bad and starts trashing steemit for something we could have handled before they join). Then the price of steem will rise on its merrit and value without needing to offer 1%.
Could I be wrong? Sure I often am.
As far as this being Anarcho Capitalistic.... It was founded/created by Anarcho Capitalists... but it is a system and most definitely is not.
The down vote is an incredibly obvious reason why it is not an Anarcho Capitalistic system.
This is someone that if they have more steem power can take away any monetary value other people wanted to use their steem power for based upon purely subjective reasons.
That is not Anarcho Capitalism. The founders are Anarcho Capitalists, but this system is not quite there yet. In all actuality it will be awhile before a true Anarcho Capitalist society EVEN DIGITAL could exist due to human nature. Anarcho Capitalism assumes people will respect the rights of each other. They will form contracts, etc. Yet they would not be able to do anything remotely like a down vote that cancels out someone elses in the community. (EDIT: I said in a community. In a company with a contract they certainly could. That is the challenge here. Steemit and shares is a company trying to be a community, and they don't quite fit together completely yet. We need some out of the box thinking and tweaking to accomplish that)
The most Anarcho Capitalistic thing about steemit at the moment is that you can voluntarily choose to use it, or not use it. Yet this is true of all other sites as well.
The founders though have claimed to be Anarcho Capitalist. I make the same claim that this is what I most identify as.
We dont have the same principals on steemit as on "reddit, twitter, facebook", so you cannot use those non-monetary incentives on steemit. Thats at least my opinion, that I think I have made clear today in this post and on steemspeak..
Anyway I sent a email to @ned and @dantheman with this post... hope they hear my prayer... I really think this incentive is important for steemit's success.