I like Craig's idea for the method. I have a question though. Do you see the 10% coming off the referred member's payout, or being made of new minted STEEM? I think only the latter would work. The former would leave us with members who get paid less per post just because they were referred. So if it's the latter, do we increase the total amount of STEEM or is it had from a reduction of current levels of STEEM, a tax, as it were, on the whole system.
The best way is that when the referral program starts 10% of the rewards pool goes to pay referrals, how the devs technically implement it is up to them, but I am sure they are smart enough to come up with the proper code or mathematical formula to make it work
Like a general tax spread across the whole system then. Better than targeting one group or another. And yeah, it would have to be constantly readjusted or there could be incentive to keep referrals low so as to get more of the pie for less work.
I like Craig's idea for the method. I have a question though. Do you see the 10% coming off the referred member's payout, or being made of new minted STEEM? I think only the latter would work. The former would leave us with members who get paid less per post just because they were referred. So if it's the latter, do we increase the total amount of STEEM or is it had from a reduction of current levels of STEEM, a tax, as it were, on the whole system.
The best way is that when the referral program starts 10% of the rewards pool goes to pay referrals, how the devs technically implement it is up to them, but I am sure they are smart enough to come up with the proper code or mathematical formula to make it work
Like a general tax spread across the whole system then. Better than targeting one group or another. And yeah, it would have to be constantly readjusted or there could be incentive to keep referrals low so as to get more of the pie for less work.