RE: Steem Bot Colored Dreams - 50/50 to Save Steem?
I'm not sure if you read the whole post or just the title @cryptopie. It's a much more complex issues than the idea that you're just gonna lose 25% more of your rewards!
But will, 50/50 change anything? If these proposed changes can make curation a better ROI than delegating to bidbots then there is a chance, as this is the only thing which might restore faith and bring huge numbers of users back (and keep them retained) to steem.
There are only two factors that historically drive up the steem price; a bull market and a massive influx of new users.
My hope is that if curation is made more profitable, communities and curation entities (like curie) will be able to offer better ROI through delegation to their manual curation efforts than vote buying services. This scenario would cause a virtuous cycle, where passive investment helps encourage and grow the community.
This is key. If everyone who currently delegate to bidbots jumped ship to delegate to curation guilds and communities because they could offer better ROI, pretty much all active steemians would realise an increased chance at higher payouts' on posts. Despite giving up 50% of their post payout, 50% of $20 is a lot more than 75% of $3. But would it work this way I'm envisioning?... I'm not a hundred percent sure and that is a valid concern.
50/50 would only improve the overall user experience of steem if that scenario I describe above could be made to happen. Otherwise, you're right, 50/50 just becomes a way for whales to make more money off each other leaving everyone else worse off.
The curation guilds need to do some calculations to see if they could theoretically offer comparible Return on investment for delegation as vote buying services do. Because if they could with a 50/50 model... It would be a game changer. You have to also take into account the positive impact on overall steem price if vote buying services were squeezed out in favour of a steem that rewards based on the quality of content.
slashing a post's reward to a half will be painful for the author like me and I just might use a bidbot to compensate for a loss of profit.
It's pretty much impossible to profit more than a dollar, occasionally, from bidbots... most of the time they return negative ROI unless you time bids perfectly and risk large amounts on large bids. A lot of variables to get right. Bidbots are like gambling.
P.s. You're right that steemit.inc can block or approve pretty much anything with the stake and influence they have but this proposal has been presented on steemit.inc's blog. That fact should not be taken lightly. It means they wouldn't block it if a majority consensus of witnesses agreed to it.
I don't think whales will diversify or improve their curation efforts with 50/50 curation, it will just be a way for them to circlejerk more. The proponent of that idea is kevinwong the owner of etherpunk account here.
@raj808
Again that proposal can go through if steemitinc wants it to get voted on consensus. I may not understood it fully but 50% curation cut is too much .
It's not a question of whales diversifying. Whales don't care about anything else other than their own profits. It's about offering them a way to profit that also builds/supports the community while improving user experience. A large amount of whales profits come from delegating to vote buying services. If 50/50 allowed curie and other curation guilds to pay whales the same or more for delegating to them then whales would move their delegation... simple as that. They will move where the money is and if that creates fairer vote distribution then it's a bonus because even the most selfish person can recognise the value in the over all price of steem rising. Which is what would happen if this platform offered new and existing users better chances at decent payouts on posts based on the quality of posts.
As I said above, it all hinges on communities and curation guilds being able to offer better ROI for delegation than vote buying services. The only way that is possible is through 50/50 because curation guilds make most of their operational costs through curation payouts.
I hope this clarifies what I'm trying to explain in this article.
Whales will continue to circle jerk with their active stake (the sp they don't delegate away)... But that's not the point. That will never change. I'm talking about the huge positive effect it will have on all of our steem experiences (and by that I mean post payouts) if the huge stake that whales lock up by delegating to vote buying services, goes to communities and curation initiatives. Both communities and curation guilds run non-profit and their whole reason for existing is to reward quality content and active steemians. If whales can still make their money in a passive way by delegating to them they'll be happy and it will unlock millions of SP to be used to reward everyone, not just people who buy votes!