Thoughts On 0.17 Proposals - Part 2: New Features

This is a follow-up to my previous post that included my thoughts on the simplifications planned for the next hard fork.

You can find the original proposals in this @steemitblog post.

In this post I will be discussing my personal views on the proposed changes that were described as new features.

Multiple Arbitrary Beneficiaries to Reward Payouts

This is an exciting development for a few different reasons. Most apparent are the benefits to third party interfaces and applications. It will provide an incentive for the production of interfaces like Busy.org, which will drive innovation based on the Steem blockchain.

Currently, third party developers can generate revenue for their project by posting updates and announcements. And enthusiastic supporters might be inclined to donate Steem/SBD to help the project along. However, many projects will incur ongoing operating costs that may put a strain on this model. This feature helps provide a revenue stream for such projects that can make them viable as long as they are in use.

I have personally wanted to see a feature like this for quite a while, although I had something else entirely in mind... I think that this feature will unlock possibilities for user collaboration that will strengthen the community by encouraging users to develop relationships and work cooperatively with one another.

Obviously this functionality could all be done by hand currently. But cutting down on administrative tasks like calculating and transferring shares will make it easier and more enjoyable for users to engage with eachother in this way.

Independent Comment Reward Pool

Of all the proposed changes, this is the one I'm struggling with the most. I certainly support the goal of rewarding comments better than they currently are. I think that active comment threads are indicative of a healthy, thriving community with high levels of engagement. And I think it is in the comments where users are able to use the site in the familiar ways that they use other social sites. If posting is driven in large part by the pursuit of rewards, comments come from a desire to connect on a personal level or exchange ideas and express themselves. This is the sort of self-reinforcing activity that is at the heart of successful social platforms.

I have two main concerns regarding this change that both relate to the location and visibility of comments...

One reason that comments are rarely highly rewarded in the same way posts are, is that any given comment is only going to be read by a fraction of the people that see the top level posts. That's totally expected and natural, just based on how people interact with internet sites. Comments rarely benefit from the sort of pile-on effect that successful blog posts see, because blog posts have the benefit of being featured on trending lists and generally higher exposure across the board. Their audience is limited to a smaller subset of the user base, consisting only of people who have decided to engage in the comments of any particular post.

Under the current system, where both top level posts and comments draw from the same pool, comments are not competing with each other so much as competing with all posts and comments. After this change, comments won't be competing with posts... they will only be competing with other comments. However, not all comments will be created equally. Comments made on already popular posts will be at a distinct advantage.

Currently, there is a rough equality among comments across posts. A vote on a comment left on a top trending post is worth about as much as a vote on a less visible post. It's my concern that after this feature is implemented, comments left on popular posts will benefit from the additional exposure and receive higher rewards as a result. The danger that I a see is that people may be encouraged to comment on trending posts, rather than a broader range of posts that fuels engagement across the platform.

My other concern regards abuse. Abusive upvoting to secure post rewards is mitigated by the fact that as the payouts on posts become significant, they become more visible and they are more likely to be identified and flagged. Since comments are buried within posts, abusive and collusive voting patterns will be much harder to notice and police. It represents a potential attack vector that can be used to inappropriately obtain rewards. The payout time is extended when large stakeholders vote on posts in order to provide the opportunity for a response to this form of abuse... but comments are less visible and easier to bury and obfuscate, so I worry this will become a much greater problem.

I don't think either of these concerns represent fatal flaws. But I do hope that they are considerations when the dev team is implementing a comment reward pool.

Separate Market and Rewards Balance from Checking and Savings

This sounds like a pure improvement to me. The change will improve efficiency and scalability. It will also have some benefits in terms of the congitive load of users who are trying to reconcile their account balances. If funds from various sources are segregated upon delivery, tracking inflows becomes easier and decision making regarding finances is simplified greatly.

I would hope for the sake of my fellow users that there are no limitations or barriers imposed on accessing the funds in the new rewards balance, in terms of frequency of transfers or delays in accessing the funds.

---

Thanks for reading my thoughts on these proposals. I hope that this is a meaningful contribution to the discussion around these changes.