A Simple Way to Strengthen the STEEM Economy
View this post on Hive: A Simple Way to Strengthen the STEEM Economy
5 years ago in #steemit by clayboyn (70)
$13.72
- Past Payouts $13.72, 0.00 TRX
- - Author $10.64, 0.00 TRX
- - Curators $3.08, 0.00 TRX
Although I like the idea of incentivizing burning of STEEM, I have recently argued in The Sustainability of Steem - Is Freemium Broken? that ads are ultimately not what users should want, even though it might make the platform (more) sustainable.
The problem is that the goals of advertisers are always different than those of users. Placing irrelevant posts into the feed will always degrade user experience. And if the posts are not irrelevant, then they don't need paid promotion (they need recommendation, better organic reach).
Interfaces might act on the incentive of taking a cut of the promotion, but it will still be just fixing of one freemium model (the current, based on speculators) with another freemium model (based on ads).
Posted using Steeve, an AI-powered Steem interface
That's a solid point, ultimately there's nothing from stopping a company from getting an account, making a post about their services and botting it up trending now I suppose. I'm very much interested in fining sustainable burn mechanisms for this blockchain and it feels like being told "wait for communities and SMTs and pray that steemit inc saves us" just doesn't sit right with me. The purpose of blockchain is decentralization obviously and maybe it's just really starting to sink in how centralized we actually are, because even if we create solutions and the top twenty witnesses are on board, we are essentially left with "fork or don't fork."
Lately I've been thinking a lot about what behavior on Steem supports sustainability (and the price of STEEM) and I ended up with curation. Curation could make people power up, which takes liquid STEEM out of circulation and decreases supply. But curation is broken and always has been - that's why we are trying to fix that at Steeve. But I will re-iterate these thoughts with burn on my mind, I totally forgot about this option. Thanks for bringing it up!
Posted using Steeve, an AI-powered Steem interface
Not sure it is as simple as that. I still think that promoting posts "artificially" is handy, particularly for new users. It is pretty hard to build up your list of followers without getting to Trending or Promoted, unless you are lucky enough to be resteemed by a Steem celebrity. So it is actually good for new users to be able to promote their post and get some attention. And IMO Promoted is way more clear than using bidbots...
Posted using Steeve, an AI-powered Steem interface
I hate to be a party pooper but the problem is not to much steem but rather to few people.
As far as down voting by your "elite caring community" and all this group control stuff talking in chat, makes me feel like this comment section has been hi-jacked by the control freak "community".
Encouraging more down voting is 100% the wrong thing to do if you want steem to grow.
I'm guessing you either didn't read anything in the post, have an issue with someone that commented on the post and are trying to triangulate me into some unrelated bullshit, or are just going around with a chip on your shoulder due to something that happened on the platform, but literally nothing you said relates to anything I said in the post and just sounds like griping and projection to me.
I clearly said in your comments section and the first line is about your "entire post".
The problem is not to much steem = burning tokens is not the answer. Unless ofc you want to kill the social aspect of steem.
The biggest problem that I see is that curation has been broken and there is no interest in fixing it, because STEEM is not meant to be a social platform, it's meant to be a blockchain that runs dApps and is designed specifically to run social dApps. Ned thinks that Oracles, SMTs, and communities can solve the problem of broken curation and spam content and many other issues that I have issues with.
I agree that in theory it's possible those additional features will fix my biggest issue with the platform and the bulk of our economic woes. Burning STEEM is counter inflationary and just makes good business sense to me, but we don't have to agree on that, I'm just offering solutions to problems that I see.
Ultimately we need incentive for people to hold tokens and while Resource Credits isn't perfect, it's a step in the right direction in my opinion. I don't think flagging is the issue that it's made out to be, it doesn't censor anyone as you can click "unhide post" and all it really does is cancel out rewards.
Is it annoying when that happens? Sure, I've pissed off people and had weeks worth of posts flagged to zero out of spite. My posts are still on the chain though and no amount of flagging or disagreements is going to change that. Building an entire "gift economy" and expecting the majority of people to go around and donate their stake like charity to let the beneficiaries of that charity devalue their investment by powering it down and selling it because there is no incentive to power up is a much bigger problem.
There's a reason most of the really large stake investors on the platform either self vote or sell votes, it's the most profitable thing to do. I think fixing curation and making it the most profitable fixes the self voting and vote selling issues as the best content would offer the most rewards for curation. The issue there is we have basically been told to wait on a development that may or may not be coming. Until that happens, we bleed money, so I'm offering a suggestion on how to stop the bleeding and increase the value of the platform.
Is liquid STEEM the real villain? No, but burning it is a potential solution to one of the real problems we have that we could implement without waiting on developments that could never come. Steemit Inc doesn't have the best track record of delivering, so I'd rather be proactive and educate the community on these things.
Thanks for the clarification and hopefully my clarifications help clear up why I'm suggesting this idea (again for like the hundredth time) and hoping it doesn't fall on deaf ears.
I've been an advocate of burning steem too. I wouldn't mind seeing some promoted posts in my feed if they were marked as such - because I know they burned STEEM to do it so I do indirectly benefit.
If the bidbot hate is strong - UIs can discount the effect of bidbots on what they show users. That doesn't stop the bot users from making profit sometimes but it does dampen organic growth of their account.
Ultimately I think the biggest problem we have is that we have a theoretical attention economy built on top of an economic model that doesn't support that. We desperately need to fix curation and the previous response I got from Ned was that communities and SMTs could do that. The real question is whether or not those things will ever actually come to exist.
This is fascinating and I'd like to hear more about the idea. I had not heard of a "burn mechanism" before Steem Monsters; it seems to work quite well for them.
Well we do have one for the blockchain and subsequently steemit.com, the problem is since bidbots came along, no one uses it. I totally get it though, the Promoted tab is kind of a dumpster fire of shitposts most of the time, but believe it or not there was a period in time about two years ago where people used it and you could find quality content there. I think revamping the mechanic and putting it to better use could really serve the community.
So people paid to promote their posts, and the money went to steemit inc (or was simply reabsorbed into the rewards pool)?
How weird that they would have let something like that go. I would think that could've made things much more sustainable these last 8 or 10 months.
The fee doesn't go to anyone. It gets transferred to @null and it disappears.
https://steemit.com/@null/transfers
It's a burn account, so it destroys the token as soon as it gets there. You can see a few people still use it. The value created is by removing supply and creating scarcity.
If hadn't already seen the Steem Monsters example, I would think that was a terrible waste l to "burn" money. I think I get it, though.
Economics is so weird.
It's almost like biology, huh, where stuff has to decay and die in order for growth to make any sense?
This was suggested more than a year ago in a post by Steemitblog where they asked for user input. They then acted like they were possibly going to implement some of the suggested features...then went into maintenance mode and did almost no changes.
I think that this would increase the amount of Steem burned...but where they placed the promoted posts would have an extreme effect on that. They could include them in trending, but few even read trending anymore. They could also put promoted posts on the top of pages and interspersed in our feed. They could even put them at the bottom of posts themselves when you click into them.
They could also have promotional features for different interfaces that take a percentage and send the rest to @null.
I think it's a mistake to completely abandon all funds from advertising, burning them. Front-ends need to finance themselves. If they don't have a massive stake that they mined early on, they have to take a percentage of posts, or use advertising, or find some other way to raise funds. They could also do a hybrid model.
I think that perhaps choosing to burn part of the fund taken from users to place posts throughout the site for advertising purposes has real merit. It would help the health of the coin. Of course, only steemit can survive burning all the Steem it gets promoting posts.
If I ran a front-end, I would consider using ads, including traditional ones, as well as Steem posts. Depending on how lucrative that was, when combined with an optional percentage of posts, I would consider burning some, possibly automated by a bot, promoting posts through @null that were advertised through the site.
You are right that it sucks that interfaces get nothing and it is just burned. I have a feeling that not many will decide to implement it. It does support Steem, which in the end improves the position of everybody on Steem, but there is no direct advantage for an interface to use built-in Promoted and populate the site with it, right?
Posted using Steeve, an AI-powered Steem interface
No, not really. Which is why I made the suggestions I did. Maybe you randomly have some posts from promoted, with a lower chance, and still have a tab for them, but for the most part advertise posts that have bought advertising directly from your site.
seems like a much better idea then open marketing :-)
I think steemit lost control when bid bots came. If you really wanted to get results from Promoted bid bots where the way and still are in order to rank high thats where the results come from plus you make the steem back.
There is just far to little in terms of income being generated from steemit. There legit is like nothing all thats happening is Ned and the gang selling off mass amounts of steem every money depleting the system. A business can only operate that way for so long.
Income streams need to be placed on the site that make it a profit or at least break even it should never be negative.
Right, I agree 100% that some sort of revenue needs to be generated to offset endless spending. Their economic model is to increase the value of STEEM and profit from that, which is really the way it needs to be as we need their incentive to perform to be tied to the value of the currency. If the blockchain didn't operate like that, then they would have no purpose for holding such a large stake. Burning the tokens increases the value by raising scarcity, which is what I'm suggesting. Other than them bringing in ads, which I'm sure you've seen ads in the crypto space which are all scammy as hell, there really aren't a lot of ways to generate revenue without increasing the overall value of STEEM.
sure there are, there are legit a good amount of us enraptures on here and I am sure many more would come if they knew they could promote their ads and services on here. Pretty much they would be changing everything over from Youtube, blog, instagram etc over to a crypto site and steem honestly has all of those at the moment.
I say totally get rid of the trending pages etc since they are just fluffed up with the same people all the time and really are not doing what they where meant for. Instead have a paid area for this bump up the promoted section a bit.
Revenue comes from small business gaining exposure its what every social network uses. There is no reason why steemit couldn't do that in some form but not be abusive with it because we as voters etc have the rights to say what we do and dont want in here including flagging bad spammy advertisers.
Massive potential here it just needs some adjustment, think tanking and work. I really dont get what we got out of this last year that 70% of the steemit work force was working on? I dont think I saw a damn thing really
Well gauging by this comment:
https://steemit.com/steemit/@ned/re-paulag-re-ned-next-livestream-this-thursday-dec-6th-at-11am-cst-20181204t163117297z
It's clear we didn't get nor do they feel we're entitled to anything from them. For half the stake on the chain though, I think many people tend to disagree with that assessment... It is what it is, if things don't change, the price clearly shows where things are heading.
I believe Eon was working on something like this, but don't quote me on that one. I've been a big proponent of this idea for the longest of times, but obviously steemit.com is basically done with development.. so its up to the other dapps.
Eon was on that pull request. I actually had one of the devs point to me to that pull request when I first thought of this idea a while back. Clearly great minds think alike. :P
I think the idea is good, we should propose ideas that are attractive as you are.
Another idea is that people who use dapp as Dtube can advertise and promote with steem at a lower cost to promote it but that money comes from the companies, it would be an investment to the platform.
Speaking of marketing post paid with bitbot only benefits its creators because it is not effective to advertise and very expensive.
I can contribute more ideas at neuromarketing level for your idea:
As smart:
Depending on the tag you use, be promoted in the feed of people who use more a specific tag
Example:
If Jim wants to promote his post with the crypto tag, its content will appear longer in the people who use that tag more.
I have many ideas to contribute to this, I would write a lot lol.
Well that's the interesting part is that is essentially how Promoted works. There is a "Promoted" tab for each different tag. When you promote your post it's promoted in up to 5 different tags. I'm not sure how complex it would be to code it based on the tags people normally post in, but that's certainly an interesting idea. Hopefully this idea will gain some traction.
If everything can be discussed, the most important aspect that you should take care of but a lot is:
That the announcements do not cause problems to people, some psychological parameters have to be done for that.
never check promoted, i consider it a joke
Agreed, which is why I'm suggesting what I feel is a better solution.