You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Are you ready for a 20% decrease in Author Rewards?
Apparently, Bernie disagrees. haha..
I actually think this would have an opposite effect. Instead the "wealthy preserving wealth" this would lead to those that "abuse" the system the most and those that earn most from inflation to pay for the benefit of the STEEM blockchain.
It would be very interesting to see what the payout and inflation distribution looks like right now.
Folks that earn something like a dollar per post wont be as effected as the folks like chbartist or haejin.
This could actually be beneficial to the authors since it could potentially return proof of brain (if done right) since it would eliminate bots and vote selling from the equation due to reduce demand for bot votes. Something to think about.
Apparently so. I would love to hear his thoughts on this.
This doesn't touch those who earn from inflation.
I bet that chbartist and haejin are in the top :D
Sorry but I fail to realize how would this return proof of brain.
Bot/upvote selling automation would be gone or severely reduced returning proof of brain. Circle jerks that currently exist would take a 20% cut (as will everyone else) taking a part of their "abuse" earnings and using it to benefit everyone.
Those looking to only earn passively will find that curation is the preferable profit maximizing option, now that bot use is reduced, instead of upvoting yourself 10 times a day since that takes effort and can be countered much easier by other steemians with flags. (Not everyone has Rancho SP)
....
etc.. Thats where i see this going. How ever you twist it, its a much better situation then what we have now.
interesting view from 2 points, and i think you really don't think it like that, but you just did not look at it from that side.
Folks that earn something like a dollar per post wont be as effected as the folks like chbartist or haejin
put it in the business or state perspective. you have people that earn 20.000$ a month to people that earn 200$ per month. you cut from all of them 20%. who will feel it more?
it would eliminate bots and vote selling
punishing everyone to solve a problem of few.
also interesting question is, how many whales are needed to push who will get the funding?
Wer not talking livelihoods here. Wer talking a dollar a day. And youre comparing apples and oranges when you try to compare government with DPOS blockchains.
... Solving the problem of everyone.
...."How many whales or witnesses" is a technical question that will probably be solved once we get there.
i was just trying to show that small acc will suffer the most. and we can agree that progress and development of small acc is slow to non. if there is a cut of 20%, development will be slow to non - 20%. question is, do we need new people here, now and do we need them to stay. and will this help in short or long run. And is steem a social network.
"punishing everyone to solve a problem of few" miswrite here. it is everyone's problem but not everyone is the problem, and the solution is to punish everyone because of that "few". but maybe that is the only way to solve that. i don't have enough knowledge about that. never tried to game the system, maybe i am just stupid like that :D
I dont think small accounts will suffer the most.. hehe. I dont think small accounts will suffer at all. Im a small account and i wont feel the change one bit.
The largest earners that take the most from the reward pool+upvote sellers/bot delegators will suffer most.
"punishing everyone to solve a problem of few".
I dont agree with the word "Punish" but if i would concede and call it a punishment i would say that youre punishing the most those that invested the most and those that are abusing the system the most.
maybe you are right.
i will still earn my nothings - 20% :D
off to do some night work as steem will not pay for my food :D
Of course that those who would take the bigger hit here are the ones earning 20k but consider that there are 100k of those earning 200$ compared to 100 who earn 20k.
So who earns less in the end? From an individual perspective, of course it's the 20k peeps but collectively it's the small fishes who lose the most by a magnitude of 10x.
The real question is: "Is it a smarter move to take a direct hit strait away in form of a 20% reduction of author rewards across the board or should we rather let the additional inflation dilute our stake over time?"
Quite frankly, one.
you missed my point or i missed yours. thing is that small acc will suffer more (or feel the cut more) even it is less steem (money). progress of small acc will be slower at least for 20%, and the progress of them is really slow as it is.
maybe the smartest thing is to not take from anything (don't HF it) until there is a proof that i will be beneficiary. blocktrades are a high stake holder and they have much more interest to see steem moving forward, and i think that there are enough of high stake holders that could to a test run (how much would that sistem make steem better) and if all that work makse steem jump 10-15 places up and does good for the price, then i will have no problem with cutting the peace from everybody