Suggestion for Masternode-like Incentive System for Investors

in steem •  10 months ago

This is a quick note presenting my suggestion for the better incentive structure of Steem. A core idea is introducing masternode-like staking incentives that provide both liquidity and profitability to investors.

Current Incentive System

ictstr1 (2).png

Highlights

  • All SP holders obtain 15% of the total reward
  • SP holders those who curate additionally earn 18.75% (25% of 75%, vary by vote patterns). Therefore, they obtain 33.75% in total

Problems

  • Significant proportion of reward for SP investors is given to Steemit (currently about 25%)
  • Investors are forced to curate, or they will have much less financial benefits. This brings about poor-quality curation, or even voting bots that merely spend voting power to any contents.
  • Investors who hold STEEM for liquidity also have disadvantages.
  • Consequently, two extreme results. Investors (who don't want to actively participate to Steem community) easily become lazy curators and distort our contents discovery system. Or passive investors give up to invest in STEEM due to much disadvantages.

Suggested Incentive System

ictstr2 (2).png

Highlights

  • No SP rewards
  • Curation rewards is about 20% of total rewards (33% of total contents rewards, 70%)
  • Saving is re-branded as like Staking
  • Minimum staking unit exists, similar to masternodes. If the number is 5000, staking 4999 STEEM does not provide any portion of rewards. In the same vein, staking 9999 STEEM provides same rewards as staking 5000 STEEM
  • Some moderate delays (e.g. 3 days) to un-staking, same as saving balance

Benefits

  • Investors have more rewards than now without doing meaningless vote
  • There will be more demands for STEEM to fill the minimum unit of staking
  • Investors also have greater liquidity
  • Dedicated curators will have more influence and contents discovery system will works better
  • Overall, this modification is expected to raise STEEM price, then make staking more attractive, then again increase STEEM price; virtuous circle

한글 요약본

현행 시스템은 스팀파워를 갖고 있으면 총보상의 15%, 거기에 큐레이션을 하면 18.75%를 더 받을 수 있는 시스템입니다. 이는 보팅봇 같이 무의미한 큐레이션을 조장하며, 결과적으로 큐레이션도 망치고, 잠재적인 투자자들도 몰아내는 폐단을 가지고 있습니다.

제 제시안은 마스터노드와 비슷한 개념으로 최소 스테이킹 단위를 토대로 하는 리워드를 신설하고, 거기에 대한 유동성도 충분히 확보해주는 것입니다. 이를 통해 단순투자를 목적으로 하는 사람들은 스테이킹을 하도록 하고, 헌신적인 큐레이터는 컨텐츠 필터링을 하도록 함으로서 스팀 매수수요 창출과 컨텐츠 필터링을 모두 개선할 수 있습니다.

Authors get paid when people like you upvote their post.
If you enjoyed what you read here, create your account today and start earning FREE STEEM!
Sort Order:  

We need to incentivize passive investment so that investors feel welcome and not everyone feels forced to participate in the content aspects. I would support some version of this proposal.

·

They already can do this. Buy steem or steem dollars and hold it. then sell when price rises. I don't believe taking money from people who actively contribute and rewarding those people with a lot of money is a good solution. I'd rather see 1 millions users creating content than 10million people holding steem to earn passively off the backs of the poor working class who post.

We already have that.

·

I think as other users have pointed out the numbers need some tweaking. We're finding that large investors avoid steem because of the time investment, staking at these returns won't change that. However I think that if the minimum stake required is lower than on other platforms we might see attraction from small-time investors. It would still draw steem liquidity out of the markets, and a low required vesting amount might make this more attractive to users in countries where steemit is gaining traction.

Staking shouldn't have such a smaller time window to cash out than powering down does, and it's debatable whether or not powering down should take as long as it does considering how volatile the markets are.

Steem is very centralized, I think gearing our coin towards small to medium investors by having attractive options for staking small amounts as well as increasing the value of active curation slightly will only increase its adoption amongst a broader pool of users. I think a play of facing the coin more towards developing markets might pay dividends if we continue to see acceleration of economic growth from the nations where steemit is growing explosively in popularity. Instead of making it attractive to existing wealthy investors from wealthy nations we could make it something that people from countries where incomes are steadily rising and middle classes are forming could ease into steem and benefit from in its growth the future, and the gains would be reciprocal.

I think the crypto markets are already flooded with coins operating on the concept of "the rich get richer", we need to differentiate ourselves if we want an edge.

·
·

^This absolutely

I believe Steem is indeed becoming centralized (specifically in how rewards are distributed) and bid bots tend to lend to the problem which puts the low stakeholder working hard to create exceptional content at a great disadvantage.

Hopefully, the whales wake up and smell the coffee but am glad there are some actively considering solutions to the problem. Your comment was very thoughtful. Following you now. :)

Loading...

hey mate,

pardon if this is a bit off topic…

I made a post today regarding a large-scale idea to advance Steem’s development, aiming to get this in front of the audience who’d be in the position to do something with/about it, and it was recommended to share with the witnesses (hence, this share):


The $1 Billion Steem Development Fund: How Steemit Inc.'s Stake Could Be Best Allocated To Grow A Thriving Network Of Applications And Users...

would be great if you could have a read, and IF you feel it’d be a great idea that’d serve the community, forward to anyone in particular you know who might be in a position of influence to advance the discussion.

cheers,

Rok

Keep in mind Steem Power is what secures a DPOS blockchain. It should be largely held and widely distributed to ensure plenty of decentralization in witness voting. If SP is not valued enough, someone could swoop in, buy a bunch, power up and significantly change the witness list, possibly in detrimental ways.

·

@lukestokes , this was my feedback below. Please let me know if I understood correct?.

@clayop this seems a good idea, the only thing I see is that this will motivate people to place Steem on the savings account (rebranded), but that will be stack there for only 3 days, and in this way we loose the amount of people or percentage that are powering up for 13 weeks. Are you proposing this as a rebalance, some people may choose to have SP for influence in the community and some others on savings as investment?

By the way, did you have the chance to check Chapter 9, and review your mention on it?

Chapter 9 of 11: The Art of Giving Value - Learning from Experts of Specific Topics on Steemit
https://steemit.com/steemit/@gold84/chapter-9-of-11-the-art-of-giving-value-learning-from-experts-of-specific-topics-on-steemit-this-is-part-9-of-11-chapters-full

Regards, @gold84

·
·

this definitely is too advantageous, many whales do opt in, investing alot than getting sp, authors might get lesser vote as they see this more gainful.

·

See, this in my mind deserves 100%. You know what, seeing that thing with @traf, and now this. I'm voting you up for witness. You clearly know your stuff.

·

well said @lukestokes, i didn't see this when I first replied to @clayop, but i could not have summarize it better.

I also think "forced curation" is one of the biggest problem of Steemit right now, and this looks like a very practical solution that doesn't require a big change of current system as well.

I guess this can also discourage abusive self-voting problems because they'll have 30% less interest by doing that. Currently, abusive self-voters can get up to 90% of interest, but if it becomes 60% max, they would rather do staking because it's going to be similar to 30% of staking profit anyway if they consider the risk of community down-votings and the value of their time wasting.

Overall, I totally agree with this idea!
@ned ?

·

firstly nobody is being force to curate, thousands and thousand of Steemian powerup and don't curate optimally they curate 0-99% of their daily 20% replenish upvote, that is their right to wait to see who is worthy and how they choose to do as they please

2ndly the benefit self voting will go away in hf20, but that doesn't even matter, people just self-vote with another account

3rdly abusive selfvoting will not go away with staking (I explain above to your reply to me)

4th at 60% max author self-vote, the benefit still out ways 3.1% of staking, go see the %-percentage calculation that I gave to @clayop

5th @ned @sneak have probably covered staking in great depth when Steem was first design, probably so did @dan, redcoin uses staking......if you like staking, go buy redcoin, it will compete with Steem, and I mean this will all respect due. Our purchase is a reflection of our political belief in crypto.

Lets see where both will be in 5 years time. I will use my money to buy Steem and patiently wait and curate and support Steem and other Steemians with my upvotes and my flags.

Note: redcoin has gone up 800% it might be great to hold and stake it for some time, who knows, but since we both have about the same amount of Steem, I think our interest is probably align, and I hope to engage with you further so our discussion benefit more Steemians and hopefully Steem too.

Specific node for investors sounds good to me :)

·

It might sting right now, for any individual who has chosen to hang out regardless of being at a misfortune, however the individuals who remain presumably have more than a passing enthusiasm for the innovation. The loss of the mass examiners could be exactly what Bitcoin needs.

A year ago individuals were purchasing up Bitcoin even with their Mastercards and different types of obligation. While this is effectively observed as a terrible thought, for the individual doing it, it is likewise a threat for Bitcoin. There have been numerous money related crashes and rises in business sectors that have started with individuals getting silly in their purchasing and contributing. This FOMO purchasing and buildup have every one of the signs of an air pocket.

Angela Walch, a law educator at St. Mary's College in Texas who thinks about cryptographic money and budgetary solidness, addressed Bad habit about the theoretical idea of Bitcoin and its capability to transform into an air pocket if senseless choices continue prospering. A portion of the components to consider when attempting to locate a potential air pocket are now apparent as indicated by Walch:

  • "A portion of the trademarks to me include the FOMO thought—the dread of passing up a great opportunity and failing to be ready to get in. Individuals see other individuals profiting and they simply need to take part in it. The lodging bubble is a decent case of that. Individuals figured someone else would dependably need to purchase their home from them at a higher cost."

Quite a fresh idea. Three things shoud be adressed out.

  1. Majority of whales or dolphins would be likely to choose staking as it is more profitable and super easy so that the authors will get less votes, less rewards as a result.

  2. 3 days are too short. considering the 13 weeks for the powering down, staking is too much advantageous over SP.

  3. The investers who choose the staking cannot take the advantege of influencing the steem community through the witness voting. Smaller encouragement of the long term staking. Is it intended?

Also I reckon balancing the profits between those two will be seriously difficult. So my alternative idea is introducing an official staking account. People who choose to stake can simply delegate their power to the account. The account generates profit, and pays back the stake as SP. As your idea is also based on SBD pegged to USD, this solution could work with much smaller side effects.

·

I agree with this point as I stated in my comment above. Only for more valuable and right discussion, I would like to address a missing point.

  • Even if the majority of whales decide to stake instead of doing curation, reduce in rewards unlikely occur.

The whole reward amount is constant regardless of consumed voting power. Instead of absolute value in voting power, relative voting power would be used to determine the rewards of individual postings. I guess each voter would have more power and impact on postings if people prefer staking than curation.

·
·

Thanks. You are absolutely right. Thr reward pool wouldnt be stolen by abusing so that each author and curator will eventually get more! I missed that part.

I agree with the major intention of proposed incentive system. There are too many meaningless voting bots, which actually prevent picking up the great posting in the steem community. However, adoption of masternode seems to bring some disadvantages and worries as well.

  1. If the incentive of masternode is greater than curation, who's gonna remain to be only for a good curator that finds a good posting?
  2. If there is no more curators, steem power seems to be centralized to authors' communities.
  3. Everyone who holds steem power rather than staking steem could have bad motivation because they earn less money than people holding the staking steem. In other words, there could be more people who are willing to abuse to get more rewards to compensate their opportunity costs.
  4. In fact, masternode should do something for community. What is the role that masternode gonna take? At some point of view, there is not enough reason to be witness rather than masternodes.

Much thank you for your effort to improve steem community. I would like to point out that I like your idea. But "I think" there should be modification of percentages for masternodes' interests.

·

Since the percentage for each reward is fixed, there will be a balance. That is, at some point, rewards for staking is lower than rewards for curation. And another variable to be considered is marginal costs and benefits of users. Some users more weigh psychological satisfaction over financial profits, and hence less care about smaller curation rewards. Some others do not want to spend time and effort for curation, and may be more willing to remain in staking even the reward is smaller.
The points from 2 are based on the point 1, which I rebut above.

I support this. It would be an implementation detail, but I do feel it is important for the “savings” STEEM to still have an effect on witness voting. I am not sure either on what the appropriate timeframe for ‘vesting’ would be. I don’t think the current 3 days associated with savings balances is right.

·

this make sense now

스팀에서 제공하는 스테이킹 보상이 생긴다면 스테이킹 수익의 관점에서 스팀잇을 이용하고 있는 사람들에게 항변할 명분이 뚜렷해지겠네요.

·

그들을 위한 보상 시스템이 부족한 것도 사실이라 더욱 필요한 것 같습니다.

·
·

맞습니다. 애매한 점이 있어서 의견이 더욱 좁혀지지 않죠.

I agree, steem is heading to better society with nice idea, but self(or voting bot) is ruined its way. self and bot may necessary, however, curation must be important than self/bot voting.

Thanks for this suggestion.

·

I believe bot is necessary since we're in the age of technology. It's just that we need to know where we should place ourselves. Let's just create best content we can create and the price of steem and SBD will surely follow.

@clayop, It's elegant not just revolutionary! I think that way more of us will be benefited. We would want to stake more in STEEM. Ultimately its value will go up. This will attract more investors and put STEEM into the mainstream.

Later on when we have enough Stakeholders, we can raise the Percentage of Staking from 30% to Maybe 35% or 37.5%. Button, style, spaces, shot – classic :-) Cheers budd! 🍻

These are some nice points that you pointed out, I do believe our reward system is actually being abused, "the rich get richer and the poor aren't even noticed." I believe, 10% reward from every post/comment/etc should be collected separately and should be distributed between every user(whale, dolphin, minnow, red fish) equally. So, the money doesn't just stay between the poor, the reason this is needed because of other factors that are being abused(upvote bots), due to upvote bots , people tend to autovote whales who already earn a lot because of which it is only those few authors who keep on getting into trending and other equally deserving authors don't get the attention they deserve and are demotivated.

마스터노드와 비슷한 개념의 스테이킹 보상이 도입된다면 더 많은 투자자를 유치할 수 있겠네요.
요즘처럼 우울한 시장에서는 마스터노드가 대안이 될 수도 있으니까요.
좋은 아이디어 같습니다. ^^

Its a very informative post .. thanks.@clayop

It's worth elaborating and make further discussions

·

Please @liondani check my profile

i have some money ....about 5 k USD...
what can i do..i want to invest...i know that is the best time for invest...
can you help me by suggest me which site i should invest @clayop

·

I would love to have that much money in my pocket :)

Info based post.
Thankful such a nice post. Helpful for new steemers.

Totally agree with you 159%, the Payment’s should be a little more fair.

I am happy to be friends with you in steemet,
Warm regards..
By @ Kani77

It is wrong idea. Only activities have to be rewarded. There should not be any passive reward to anybody.

클레욥님 안녕하세요.
제가 이번에 신문사쪽에 인터뷰를 응했는데...
스팀 증인이며 커뮤니티에 기여해주시는 분으로 클레욥님을 소개하려고 하는데... 괜찮으신지 해서 여쭈어 봅니다.

더 많은 투자유입을 증가시킬 수 있겠군요. 좋은 제안입니다.

음.. 일반 작가보다는 투자자들의 수요진작을 위한 방법으로 유효할것 같습니다. 동시에 투자가 진작된다면, 장기적으로 절대보상액 크기도 커져서 모두에게 윈윈이 될수도 있을것 같네요.. 선순환의 시기가 앞당겨 지기를 바라며..

여긴 엄청 나군요.!

매우 직관적인 내용이라서 따로 시뮬레이션이 필요없겠네요.

우선 죄송하다는 말씀 드립니다!
실례일거 같지만;;
제가 쓴 스팀잇 활성화 계획 글 주소 남겨 드립니다.
시간나실때 한번 보시고 댓글로 소통부탁드립니다.!
https://steemit.com/kr/@rkmrkm99/74
고래님들이 못보시고 사장되어
셀프홍보나왔습니다ㅎ

That's really nice post @clayop . i like your post. thanks for share the post.

@clayop this seems a good idea, the only thing I see is that this will motivate people to place Steem on the savings account (rebranded), but that will be stack there for only 3 days, and in this way we loose the amount of people or percentage that are powering up for 13 weeks. Are you proposing this as a rebalance, some people may choose to have SP for influence in the community and some others on savings as investment?

Please let me know if I understood correct?

Regards, @gold84

Permission right I said to the friends steemit.

"Please help follow my account" **

Follow you very I expected.

On the attention of his I say thank you.

@ibnumar

Anladığım kadarıyla siteem de herkes yatırım yapıp para kazanmak derdin de. Gelin steem den nasıl yatırım yapılır nasıl para kazanılır bunu konuşalım ve bir ekip olalım hep birlikte tek olalim sen ben değil biz olalım

역시 한국 랭킹 1위 다우시네요.... 대단한 제안입니다

Like your suggestion

Maybe I’m dense, but I don’t understand staking. As a holders of SP, we all get a bit of “interest” on newly created Steem. If that’s done away with, who exactly gets the Stake?

Good work.

Just out of curiosity, but isn’t passive investment already solved with delegation ? There are tons of curation trails and voting bots that will give RoI on your delegation giving passive income on said investment.

Also, even if they didn’t curate, their investment wouldn’t be actually different from any other coin at the moment. The investment would be in the believe that the value of the coin would rise. On top of that, they have the option to blog, curate or delegate for extra return of investment ...

I can’t help but feel you’re trying to solve a problem that’s not there. Or I’m not seeing the problem you’re trying to point out.

Perhaps delegation for passive income is something that could be ‘formalized’ in some way or another. So that you can delegate, from the wallet, to an officious account that will handle the delegation or something like that.

It is remarkable to analyze your reward to sp holder, and I am also honored to be delivered by @donkeypong,
I am a newcomer in steemit but I understand what is in your post @ clayop, I am amazed at you, thank you for sharing ...

I like the looks of this system

I love the idea but I feel like curating should still pay more than staking because of the work done.

the more you give interesting info. the more I am interesting to do

We can try and make improvements if we have problems. The important thing is, we shouldn't stay where we are.

@clayop It is a great idea to create incentives and that investors have a higher profitability.

Thanks for breaking this down, I new to Steemit so still learning the terms - What is this "Kr" category meant for? Is it short for something? its ok to laugh at me too , just somebody answer the questions please.

I think what we need is a minimum Steem in SP to earn interest.

보팅봇 문제는 해결이 필요하다 생각합니다.

좋은 아이디어네요. 현재는 투자자와 컨텐츠 크리에이터가 섞여있어 혼돈이 많은 상황인데, 이를 분리하려는 시도가 쓸모 있어 보입니다

Its a nice idea with calculations. I totally agree with your blog. As you mentioned there are so many difficulties for the steemians. I am worried about SBD is going down and down when will it move up.thanks for sharing

·

Don't worry about steem going down. Worry about "you" or "us" not being able to create quality content.

·
·

you are right,but always i watch that some new steemians contents are good but their blog is not in trending or at hot therefore they receive not any upvote.

투자자를 끌어드릴 요소로 충분해보이는 방식이네요. 다만 저걸 해도 어뷰징 유저들이 줄어들 것인가에 대한 부분은 의문으로 남는군요.

I really like this concept.. We need a way for investors to earn on SP without having to use platform..

Masternodes are a great way to do that. Masternodes also lock up coins and take them off the market.

This is a win win situation for all investors large and small.

Nice,
Please vote me brother

Noisy, low quality curation is largely because of the change to linear rewards and the short vesting schedule. The core problem is that many of the largest stakeholders actually aren't invested in the long term growth of the network, so they got the system changed to reward themselves and people like them instead of people invested in a more long term vision.

They're turning Steem into a Ponzi scheme by directing rewards to early investors rather than contributors and need to be stopped: https://steemit.com/fight4steem/@troglodactyl/is-steem-a-ponzi-scheme-repost-payout-declined

·

Not true. Given the suprelinear reward curve, the voting bots also exist and they follow high-paying posts.

·
·

You seem to be missing the bit about the short vesting schedule, as well as the whole point of the original reward curve. With the current reward curve it is no more profitable to upvote what other people also value than to upvote random spam. It's not really a problem if bots upvote high-paying posts if they're high-paying because they're actually high quality.

I can agree that R^2 was extreme, but full linearity significantly undermines the incentives for an effective curation system.

아 보팅봇이 큐레이션을 망친다고 생각할 수도 있겠네요... 얼마전에서야 보팅봇 비교 사이트를 알고 신기했거든요. 그동안은 보팅봇이 버니랑 연결되어서 때문에 나쁜거라고만 생각해서, '이렇게 버니와 무관한 많은 보팅봇이 있다면 수익이 적은 사람들에게 참 좋겠다'고 생각했거든요. 단순히 '이득'이라는 측면이 아니라 스팀 자체의 '생태계'라는 측면에서 보면 문제가 있을 수 있겠구나 싶습니다.

뉴비들은 아직 체감이 잘안되는데
고래들의 셀프보팅은 문제가 심각한가보네요..

Follow back my friend

🙃 on my way to understand....

마스터노드가 되면 투자자들이 많이 올 거 같아요!!!!!! 완전 좋아요.
지분도 홀딩되는 효과도 커지구 :)
증인 위임도 했어요; 아 신기했어요.
마치 그리스 시대 직간접 투표하는 거 같아요....
그리고 소문자로만 써야되더라구요... Clayop가 아니라 clayop로....
스팀잇 너무 신기해욥!!

I've seen many ideas about enhancing all the things with Steemit, but they turn out to be an just.. idea. No change. i hope this idea is not on the same way.

좋은 내용 감사합니다. 팔로하고 갑니다. 행복한 하루 보내세요!

I don't understand how this will reduce poor curation problem. You pointed out two types of poor curations, but I think those are not poor curation or your new mechanism cannot fix the problem.

  1. if I use an auto-bot to upvote, I will upvote the best authors to get the most curation reward (curation reward is not just proportional to the voting power but there are rules to encourage better curations). And in general, voting for the best authors are not a poor curation.

  2. Voting bots usually get all curation rewards + a share of author reward as well (in terms of side payment). So let's say they get around 50%. Unless the profit from the staking is greater than 50%, those who run voting-bot will continue to run the voting bot.

보팅감사드려요 머릿털나고 이런큰보팅 첨받아보네요 ㄷㄷ저도 보팅드렸지만. 이미 큰큰 고래님이시라 별 도움안되네요 굉장히 전문적인 글을 쓰시네요ㅠㅠ지식에 감탄하고갑니다

Good post
My name is muhammad rizal
I'm a new member of steemit
Nice to meet you
Please followback and upvote my post https://steemit.com/plant/@riskiakbar/how-to-process-cocoa-beans-to-brown-and-benefits-of-cocoa-beans-f2b99e42a4549

아 아직도 스팀잇을 이해하려면 멀었네요!
저도 초뉴비에게 전하는 글을 쓰긴했는데..
알면 알수록 더 어려운거 같습니다!
결국에는 스팀파워인데;;;
큐레이터보상
저저보상
이거에 집착하면 더 이상 스팀잇에 글은 못올릴거 같습니다!
20일만에 느끼는 마음입니다!

플랑크톤 입장에서 이 제안에 대한 생각을 말씀드리겠습니다 내용에 대한 이해는 @yhoh님이 쓰신 글을 보았습니다 https://busy.org/@yhoh/clayop

이 제안대로면 저자 보상이 56.25% 에서 40%로 줄어드는게 맞나요?
이 제안이 투자자들의 무의미한 큐레이팅을 줄이고 빠른 현금화로 유동성이 좋아진다고 해도
저자 보상이 줄어든다면 글쎄요... 특히 뉴비나 저 스파 분들은 큐레이션 보상은 사실 거의 없고
저자 보상이 수익의 거의 전부라고 할 수도 있는데요 이 분들의 수익이 줄어들고 박탈감은 더 커지고 힘들어지는거 아닌가요?

반면에 큐레이션 보상이 18.75%에서 20%으로 상향 조정이 된다면 이 부분의 이익은 대부분
고래 혹은 고스파 분들이 가져가게 되겠죠 지금도 이분들은 스팀파워의 힘으로 뉴비는 생각도 못할 큐레이션 보상이 발생하는데요 이 수익이 더 늘어난다는 말이죠 물론 이 분들도 저자 보상이 줄어들겠지만 피해는 고래보다는 뉴비에게 더 클거라는 생각이 드네요

저자 보상이 유지되거나 더 많아지는 방향으로 가야지, 스팀잇이 좋은 글이 더 많아지고 긍정적인 방향이라고 생각합니다

제가 이해를 잘 못하고 드리는 말씀일 수도 있으니 넓은 이해 부탁드려요 저는 예전에 증인 보팅도 @clayop님께 이전해 놨습니다 부디 저스파 보유자나 글을 쓰는 저자들이 많은 혜택을 볼 수 있는 스팀잇을 만들어 주세요 새해 복 많이 받으세요^^ 스팀잇을 너무 사랑하는 @phuzion7 이었습니다 ...