Fix curation rewards with less rounding.

in steemideas •  2 years ago

Currently you need 1/1000 Steem power ( 0.2cents) in curation reward or you don't make anything. This is discouraging a lot of new steemians ( brought in from dollar vigilante and brenda).

We Can Fix This

Change the rounding to .0001 ( one in 10k).

This will have three nice effects

  1. Minnows won't be discouraged those that aren't writers still want to participate. Seeing tiny curation rewards still will make them see a benefit for their voting and improve the game aspect of steemit
  2. Will help distribute Steem power to wider audience if they are voting they are working and should be encouraged to continue to grow heir Steem.
  3. Will still encourage them to power up this should help them build confidence in curating and eventually power up to improve their rewards. I think it's better to give a small reward with the ability to power it up then no award ( this is also why you start with a little Steem power when you sign up.
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:  

I agree that the minimum curation reward should be changed from 0.001 to 0.0001 as currently new users that just registered on Steemit that start with just 3 Steem Power find it very hard to really get any curation reward voting for a post.

Both 0.001 and 0.0001 Steem are not much if yuo consider their value, but it is not the value they represent, but the fact that new users with little Steem Power will see that their actions are actualy not in vain.

·

I always want to see progress. It is the same reason you want to get to the next level on candy crush. Even small rewards make it more of a game. I think it would really help and do t see why it's set there anyway. If the price actually goes up this will be even more important.

After 30 minutes feel free to upvote and we can drive real change at steemit.

Good idea but their maybe computational reasons for the limit. Perhaps someone who understands the code might be able to comment on it.