Increasing the curation rewards to equal the author rewards
So clicking a button or setting an autovoter takes as much skill, sweat, and effort as creating a post?
Ridiculous.
Increasing the curation rewards to equal the author rewards
So clicking a button or setting an autovoter takes as much skill, sweat, and effort as creating a post?
Ridiculous.
Nope, it doesn't, and in an ideal world we might just go right ahead and give 100% to authors.
But in the real world we need a system with sound economics in order for authors to be rewarded at all and that requires the curation share to be higher (indeed maybe even higher than 50%, but we are hoping for various reasons that 50% is high enough to work).
Think of it as a necessary evil if you prefer, rather than the straw man of someone making a claim about equal skill, sweat and effort, because no one is making that claim.
Best answer @smooth.
Cg
I have to disagree with your position. Buying the stake that backs up the vote does cost in real life (or at least it should) and keeping your resources staked also has opportunity costs. There must be some balance and right now we have a 3 to 1 ratio in favor of author rewards vs voting. Content creation does not carry the financial risk of losing the value of an investment. A 50/50 split seems fair in my view as long as the right content is rewarded.
What I am not in favor of is reducing the rewards pool to fund the SPS, the funding should come from the portion of the inflation that is allocated to SP "interest". As a stakeholder am willing to forgo that income stream if it goes to projects that end up increasing the value of my holdings. According to some witnesses they are discussing that option (and I hope they give it a serious consideration).
While buying stake would be a useful contribution, the vast majority of stake was simply mined by those that have it now, and they use it to extract rewards from the pool by casting huge votes with that unpurchased stake. I'm not aware that any of the 35 whales on Steem now bought 1 satoshi of that stake. They extract ~90% of the rewards content creators make possible anyway. Content creators receive but ~10% of rewards.
I don't agree that SPS requires any mandatory funding. If proposals can't attract funding due to their virtues, that's a damn good reason not to fund them. The whole idea of the tax is simply to force funding of proposals by making it too complex to prevent bad proposals that no one would pay for otherwise from being not funded. Ancillary is that the tax being based on content creators rewards makes all the funding come from creators and none from the whales, while the whales will receive the vast majority of any increase in value such funding generates. It's a regressive tax on the poor and 90% of the financial benefits of that tax will go to the rich.
That's just an asshole move in my book.
So earning enough money to have a significant amount of sp (let's say 10-50k) is easier than creating a post ?
Not everyone who clicks on the vote button has invested $10-$50k... However I see your point.
Put it this way, without content, there is nothing to vote on.
Cg
"Not everyone who clicks on the vote button has invested $10-$50k... However I see your point." => Those who matter a tad bit do. Content creators don't care about 1 cent upvotes
And without investors there would be no upvotes and no money for content creator. This is a chicken and the egg problem.
I don't see it as chicken and egg, because the content exists whether the investors are there or not.
For instance, if people feel they'll get a better deal with Voice, or even Facebook, then that's where we will produce our content. Investors will always follow the content.
The reason big investors haven't made money, isn't because of a reward pool share, it's because the price has either tanked since investing, or stayed stagnant.
That is due to the fact that there are no longer enough users to keep things moving along nicely, plus of course the bidbots are hogging the majority of the pool.
So you can up it to 90/10 in favour of the investor, and you still won't make any money.
Cg