You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Steem experiment: Burn post #1
I personally would say no, but something like a fair valuation of content simply doesn´t exist.
I personally would say no, but something like a fair valuation of content simply doesn´t exist.
Hey guys. Really refreshing to read constructive comments after I just scrolled through some flagging wars... @shaka, those are very interesting ideas. I think that a reward cap is a great idea. Calling it redistribution sounds really constructive as well. What do you guys think about a maximum value of an upvote which would lead to more diversification?
Apart from that, what do you think about the Steemit hierachy? We have Witnesses and that is about it. Do you think introducing other levels, like "Admins" who can decide about problematics regarding individual posts could be an approach?
Exciting times, I hope we are sailing in the right direction.
A cap is an interesting idea.
And I do agree with @shaka that valuation is a very subjective thing and sometimes it's hard to also justify why a picture of a street corner or a picture of what one had last night cannot be worth $10.
I ain't well versed in the steem witness yet so I can't say anything about that. It would be of my opinion to keep the structure as simple as possible for the time being.
Sometimes a user may have devoted a lot of energy before to build up a lot of SP or they had the foresight to buy up lots of SP when it was trading lower. They also need to be rewarded for that. So, a SQUARE ROOT of an upvote may serve as a better idea.
I plan to come up with some statistics later in my posts and look at the relationship of STEEM PRICE vs. steem newbies (minnows) upvote success rate. Stay tuned.
Thanks for your kind reply.
However, let me stress that I haven´t suggested a cap on rewards but rather a cap on the disbursement an author can receive from his rewards per post. The remainder of the the rewards would be distributed to SP holders in a stake-weighted manner
As for the hierarchy, I think there shouldn´t be any. The only and strictly quantitative discriminating factor between accounts is the amount of SP they hold or have command over. Qualitatively, it´s all about individual abilities like content creation, engagement, networking etc.
Even witnesses are users like everyone else but with an additional (and crucial) role to fullfill. Something like an "Admin" with exclusive extra-rights would be in absolute no go for me.
Cheers!
I figured it out after I wrote the reply. A cap would be a communistic approach, I still like the idea.
What about your reputation? I think there should be another possibility of gaining more influence on the platform than throwing money into your account. I have no idea how it should work but I feel the duration of your participation and your activity should be appreciated in a certain way.
Also, promotion of Steemit should be valued. Let it be referrals, view counters from non Steemit users or another concept.
Thanks for your reply (: