RE: Thinking Out The Box: Curation Rewards
I'm all for active discussion and looking for new solutions. I often have a lot of those "just throw it the fuck out and try something different" ideas from time to time. I'm not opposed to what you suggest from an author standpoint, but I still feel like the issue is it offers no incentive for people to vote for each other. Say we reversed your idea and did zero reward to authors, would you still bother creating content, or would you just go around voting on others? I think balance is imperative, but asking either side to give seems to be a relentless bickering argument. I still think if we do simple math and consider that most of the content creators aren't the ones investing and holding 250,000-millions of STEEM, it's only logical that at least half of that vote payout should be going to the person taking the financial risk. I say this as both a content creator and a curator, I fully recognize that I don't hold all of that risk by having that much STEEM and feel it's fair to earn profit on an investment. On a personal level, I love the idea of a gift economy and charity, but expecting business people to shoot themselves in the foot to give other people money is illogical.
See, the whole, it offers no incentive for people to vote is the bit I mean particularly. There are loads of other social media or even just big sites in which people vote/like/comment/review all for the princely sum of nothing. Not a bean. They do it for nothing. I think that is what would happen here too.
The curation model doesn't work for that vast majority of the users of the platform.
Why should it be kept or levered even further in the direction of the big fish?
Often people will invest in crypto for the sake of the currency speculation itself. Heck some of them might be philanthropical about it and just love to vote up undiscovered content :0)
And as for posting if I didn't get paid for it. I probably would, I love writing. I stuck with it back in the days of hardfork 18 where most posts made single figure cents.
I don't know if we will see big investors come to steemit for the curation rewards. I don't even think that we need them. Eventually if successful they will come and invest because they have to. Or a horde of smaller investors who create content will invest. Ultimately there can be a demand for steem without giant investors coming in. I don't even think there are that many here just now. There are certainly people with huge amounts of so but a lot of the ones that bought it left when steem sunk to sub twenty cents.
I agree with most of this. I think it's just interesting seeing the issues that come from monetizing a social platform like this. It's like adding money into the mix adds different motives and objectives for many different people. I'm right there with you about writing through the very unprofitable times, hell I remember writing when STEEM was .09 cents and I'm sure you do too. I feel like either solution could work ultimately, but for this to be a cryptocurrency and not just another social media platform, we have to figure out the logistics of where the tokens come from and what the point is, because right now even if the platform succeeds, we have to fix the financial side of things too. I don't have all of the answers and I appreciate your perspective on this as well. Good food for thought.
I very much appreciate your perspective. I like to chew the fat over this shit as they say in Ireland.
It is a difficult issue. There is probably a solution there somewhere or at least something to try. Perhaps not even keep them or lose them but something else. I hope that they dont just tinker with what we have and do something else instead. Something left field even :O)
I agree the financial side of things needs to be fixed. What if the reward mechanism is abandoned completely; for voters and for posts? If this results in the end of blogging type of services, so what? Steem is a crypto currency and does not require a difficult reward allocation designed for Steemit and Busy like blogging anf UIs. Since we let everybody develop into the Steem blockchain and everybody can use the reward mechanism, the reward side of things is by default an issue. Zappl posts are regarded by some as always to be sh*t posts because het contains only a couple of words + optional image + optional URL. Others love them. I posted earlier about the fact Zappl should not been integrated with Steem blockchain in the way it did; ie sharing the reward mechanism with Steemit, and SteepShot. By nature these are total different services and should have had their own blockchain + reward mechanism.But that said, we will have to face so many issues due to the reward mechanism, my proposal is to discuss the fact to remove the reward mechanisms to authors and curators altogether.
And yeh, I started with Steemit when Steem was a few cents, and dropped to something like 5ct, I never stopped reading, posting; Curating. But so many others did, because the rewards were not good; And then they returned when Steem got back some of its initial value. Money s*ckers, including those who quit and came back with big wallets and lots of SP and lots of Reputation. We can do without them!
I'd upvote both of you even without any curation reward!!
Hehe, splendid!!