New Ad Slogan: Steemit... Where The Rich Get Richer!

in steemit •  5 months ago

Before you get into this post, when you see someone try to argue against it, just ask them this simple question:

Are the people that have the highest earning posts going to be earning more money because part of "everyone else's posts and votes" will be given back to the pool for distribution to the rewards to the most valuable content?

A Dirty Subject

I'm not going to pretty this post up... Because it is an ugly subject and doesn't deserve being made pretty. If you don't want to vote for it because it isn't perfectly formatted, that is ok with me. All I care about is getting this message delivered.

I have never seen as tone deaf a company as Steemit, they are so out of touch with their "average" users its really a shame. They think their technology is so good that they don't even need to listen to the normal users. They cater to the money people, and make sure they stack the top 20 witnesses that support what is good for the rich. Here is just another example of where this is happening.

Hard Fork 20

I read a post yesterday by @tcpolymath titled:

This has been a demonstration of optimal posting strategy under Hardfork 20

I won't rehash his whole point but I will condense it to the simple way that I think.

What Is Changing

First, they are changing the way people earn money here. The company and the top 20 witnesses (ie witnesses backed by money in the system) have decided that they are going to take money from the posts and give it to the "pool" to be paid to "the most valuable content." This is hogwash speech for give it to the people that have the most money and can buy the most votes (ie the rich).

Let me say that again...I want this to sink in.

Right now either the authors or curators earn all the money from the posts. Without making it complicated, the fact is that EITHER THE AUTHOR or THE CURATOR gets paid from making the post or voting for the post. Do you understand that? Simple concept really, either the people that make it get paid or the people that like it and vote it get paid. No one else gets paid.

What will change, you might ask?

Well if they push through their brilliant plan then neither the author nor the curator will get paid if a post gets voted on in the first 15 minutes. But those votes will count and will be paid to someone. Guess who?

Who do you think they will reward with those votes that were casts in the first 15 minutes, come on you can say it?

I kid you not, it will go the the people that have the highest value post. Who are those people? Well they are the ones that can drop $100s of dollars per post. They are the ones that really made a name for themselves and anyone around here for any length of time know exactly who they are!

But wait it gets better...

All Curators Now Pay The Rich Guys

Not only are they taking the money from the people that voted in the first 15 minutes and giving it to the rich guys, they are also taking a piece from all those other votes AFTER the 15 minutes as the early voters steal part of the curation from the later voters. Think of it like the early voters are unwitting dupes that are working to collect curation of later voters for the rich! The moneyed interests wants a piece of everything!

So no matter what, if you vote early you are just handing money to the Jerry Banfield's and Haejins, but if you vote later because a guy has a good post, they will take even more of the money from the curators that later vote the post and also give it to the Banfield's and Haejins!

And what does this incentivize? Well basically you should put out posts that suck so that none of the rich guys get the efforts from your hard work. And if you vote but don't want to pay the rich guys, then you will only vote after 15 min and only for posts that don't have any votes yet. If they have votes, then they will be sending your money to the rich.

Cover Story For This Reverse Robin Hood Maneuver

What is their cover story? IE what is the "valid" reason they say they are making this change?

Well they say it is designed to stop self-voting. That is the reason that they state is a cause for alarm and causes the degradation of the system? Are you kidding me? Seriously? So you are going to take the money from the good authors and legit curators and hand it to the shit that litters our trending pages? Can you guys even say this with a straight face? How can you look in the mirror in the morning?

Omgosh, I couldn't even believe my eyes today when I read the post. I am floored, simply floored at the arrogance and the tone deafness with which these people run this place.

I love the platform for the people that have been here and for the potential of the technology. But if these kinds of decisions keep being made, then @ned and all the money types, you will get what you deserve. I have seen many companies succeed and fail in my 33 years of investment experience. I have managed several $100 million companies myself. This one is clear as can be. The management of Steemit and the top 20 witnesses are going to regret making this decision. If it goes through, then don't let it be said that I didn't give you notice of the failed thinking ahead of time!

Submitting My New Ad Slogan First

In anticipation of the new Hard Fork 20 rule going in, I have created an ad campaign tag line already:

steemit where the rich get richer.png

And here is my awesome banner giphy that we can also add all over social media sites to attract more users!

My "highly recommended" witness votes will now be added to my posts. I hope you add them as your witness and to your posts too!

@steemcommunity
@danielsaori
@yabapmatt
@steemgigs
@jackmiller
@noblewitness
@comedyopenmic
@curie
@qurator
@swelker101
@ats-witness

image

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:  
·

hahaha... you get the upvote now for that... lol... I have been trying to hold out to save my VP but that is seriously funny @cryptkeeper17!

·
·

Well shoot davemccoy hang on to them upvotes! I don't need them. I know that when I hit post there is likely some hairy material going out, but oh well.

Amazing job on the post, vintage @davemccoy post, 100+ votes, 100 comments, and lot of fun and insight!

·
·
·

you received an up vote from danlupi with voting power of 67.30%. Estimated dollar amount of $2.1

·
·
·

You got a 11.52% upvote from @emperorofnaps courtesy of @cryptkeeper17!

Want to promote your posts too? Send 0.05+ SBD or STEEM to @emperorofnaps to receive a share of a full upvote every 2.4 hours...Then go relax and take a nap!

·

so god damn fitting for the whole situation

·
·

Ohh yeeaahh--freaking loved Randy Savage! What a pimp.

·
·
·

you received an up vote from danlupi with voting power of 67.30%. Estimated dollar amount of $2.1

Loading...

Not trying to start an argument but I am curious about what you think will happen if the power of the upvote is shifted more to minnows instead. This is my take.

Support for steem blockchain comes primarily from people who buy tokens, not people who earn tokens. That means that in order to become an investor in this system, you must invest your own money into it, otherwise you are just a player. Minnows do not invest money, but instead, invest their time to create content.

If there is a reduction in the amount of rewards for curators (there by shifting the rewards more towards the author side), then minnows have less of a reason to upvote to collect rewards, and more reason to create content for rewards. I don't see an issue with from a theoretical point of view but in practice, you have a point. The rich just get richer. But they are also the ones who spent a great deal of money investing in the platform. Theoretically, they should have the maximum return.

In practice, there are so few whales that their (the whales) behavior is counter productive to the theory. Part of this is the nature of bidbots, but more so then not, it is the barrier to entry and the lack of upvoting by whales of minnow content.

The two primary reasons for that is that minnows will statistically not buy steem in the amounts an investor will (otherwise minnows will not be minnows), so they can only rely on content creation for rewards. The obvious problem there is that most users (whales and minnows) create shit for content here to begin with.

So how will steemit dev team deal with it? Easy, its less about the platform of steemit, and more about maximizing steem blockchain to support real usage, and that means putting the power more favorably into the investors hands.

@hrissm, whats your take?

I am repeating this message from another post.

HF20 hardfork explained with one picture.

·

That pretty well sums it up!

·
·

hahaha... I hope that is silver then it would be absolutely perfect! I know you know what I mean Arch ;)

·
·
·

That's what you all get. For the rest of the few...

·
·
·
·

hahaha... that's hilarious :P ... and so true... Steemit... Where The Rich Get Richer (TM)

·
·
·
·
·

Yep, your new slogan hit the nail on the head. Only Steemit could come up with a solution for the problem that is worse than the problem itself. Ha ha.

·
·
·
·
·
·

I thought that exact thing... They couldn't have made a worse solution to fix a problem... I don't know how they can hold their heads up and explain it without laughing. Just how dumb do they think we are?

·
·
·
·
·
·
·

Apparently not all of us are dumb. Especially TCpolymath. Other of us are still uninformed. I still don't understand the rewards pool. I know that if people vote on my posts that I get a portion of that amount. I don't understand how that applies to the rewards pool though.

For instance, with rewards that are returned by flagging, does that increase everyone's post payout value? And it's just that mine only increases a little because it's not worth much? I can't actually track which votes cause the value to increase other than looking on Busy and seeing that "a-person" voted "x-value" for my post.

And if Steemit, for instance decided to vote for people at 100% power 10 times per day, would that actually decrease the amount I would get at payout? I was already given certain amounts of rewards by other people. Would Steemit's votes for people other than me really lower my payout?

Sorry, I haven't really looked into the rewards pool much. I've been more focused on making sure that I was getting posts out at least once per day.

·
·
·
·

I'd rather have one of those. Could I change my pick? :D

·
·
·
·
·

lol... me too :D

·
·
·
·
·

lol... me too :D

·
·
·
·
·
·

Ok, @palikari123, @davemccoy and I would both like gold forks. Can you get us tracking numbers on those? :P

·
·
·
·
·
·
·

Sure, follow the instructions and you shall receive!

·
·
·
·
·
·
·

@themanwithnoname lol... I'm still waiting... He gave his reply and it wasn't very nice ;)

·

It gets better the second time around. Probably more fitting with this post. 😂

·
·

lol... yes I think it fits the more belligerent post for sure :P

·

hahaha... I'm trying to save my VP for a newbie and minnow contest this weekend, but I have to send you to the top on that one! :P

·
·
·

·
·
·
·
·
·
·

You two are super dorks. 😂

·
·
·
·

·
·
·
·
·
·
·

lol... it is for sure DDC :)

·
·

Excellent context ddc

hay @davemccoy, I read this post last night and it concerned me. But i didn't want to reply till I had some data. Now that I have looked at the data i am not too concerned. I have put the data into a post and I would love to hear your thoughts and feedback

https://steemit.com/analysis/@paulag/hf20-exploratory-data-analysis-on-proposed-payout-changes

·

I'm going to check it out right now! Thanks for the tag here Paula! :)

Very good post my man. I noticed Asher isn't in your list? Will you share your reasoning?

·

Hey @johndoer123... because @abh12345 is a .... LOL... He isn't on the list because he is disguised as @steemcommunity! He and @paulag make the fantastic duo of @steemcommunity and they are still at the top for sure ;) ... So don't worry about me still liking and trusting Asher, I give him 1000x my full endorsement! :)

And hope you are doing well @johndoer123, I haven't talked to you in a bit but have seen you around for sure ;)

·
·

Yeah, doing good but aggravated. Actually I've spent some time figuring out how EVERYTHING works behind the scenes here. It has left a bad taste in my mouth. Combined with steem prices falling right before this HF20 deal AND noticing quite a few of the big accounts powering down, has caused me to begin my search for something else. I am going to powerdown, so I can get out if I want, without waiting. Have you ever heard of/looked into YOURS.ORG? I'm just starting to look at it.

·
·
·

I haven't... And one thing that I want to tell you is that I am still sticking in there. The reasons are 2 fold... 1) I really do like the people I've met and to me its a community and 2) I like the technology behind steemit and think they might succeed despite the people at the top.

If you do leave, I certainly wouldn't blame you and as far as the money part that is always a personal decision. I never second guess people investing however they like. But I do hope you keep your passwords and keys safe and remember them, because you have earned a spot here and one day if we ever get bigger we will be able to reward you. Right now unfortunately we can't. All the people you know, I know too. Unfortunately we weren't here early enough to have enough accumulated to give you some help and encouragement.

But one day that might change and if you keep your feet in the water just by checking in every so often, I think you will find some of us diehards that will always consider you a friend and welcome you back with open arms!

If we lose you it will be a shame because you are one helluva guy and its been my honor to even connect with you and see your big beautiful heart!

ps... the funny thing is I just bought my first steem a week or so ago! I actually love the fact its come down, but I get your point. It is risky given this shit and the lack of transparency too!

·
·
·
·

Well said @davemccoy, @johndoer123 is one of the good guys!!

·
·
·
·
·

I agree completely @sparkesy43!

·
·
·
·

Dangit...I'm not going anywhere.🙂 Just a johndoer vent moment. Sorry about that. But thank you so much for the supportive words. It's the great people here, like you that keep me from leaving. I love all you guys, and gals.

·
·
·
·
·

Awesome, that is very good to hear! I don't want you to because now it is just getting good... Don't let the people at the top get you down, one day we will have some representation there and be able to work to help each other!

And I agree 100% with you, I'm here for my friends who are some pretty awesome people in my opinion!

ps... I left you a message on discord, so if you could reply when you get a chance that would be awesome!

·
·
·

Just had a quick look at yours.org. Interesting. I wonder how well it will do though as you have to pay for upvotes with your own cash.

·
·
·
·

Yeah, once I figured that out, it didn't seem that great. I'm not sure how that one will go over. Nice meeting you here though friend!

How long do you think it will take before bots owned by (I think you can guess) are automatically upvoting every post within the first 15 mins to ensure that the powerbrokers get their cut of everything?

·

lol... do you think they would've thought about this? hahaha... and on top of that, they can also downvote anyone on "their" own posts in the first 15 min, then hit it with 1000's of $s on bots after 15 min and get back to the top again. They are going to create an even more absurd game.

·
·

Some have already thought very much about this, Thus the reason everyone is getting random followers from total new accounts, and multiple of creation on the same day. You will notice some of these already voting on your post at 0 min.

When I was first reading about HF20 on, I think it was @tcpolumath's post the words "highest value post" were what stuck out the most to me. I understand a little bit better about the post payout and rewards after "tc's" explanation.
Along with this and in response to a comment below, doing away with the self vote is not something they will give up. it benefits them in a number of ways, the two most important, they can give themselves money whenever they want, and can make redfish and small minnows throw away their votes and potential reward by convincing them to self vote. A small minnow or redfish, anyone without sufficient vote power to cast a $0.02 or more vote , on themselves have only succeeded in burning up one of their potential rewards.One of the reasons I tell new users to wait until their post is at a payout level of at least $0.03 before voting for themselves.

I think the "old guard" are getting worried about the up and coming new guard. Witnesses need support from the stakeholders, there are a lot of them that see that they are doing things that are contrary to growth, and investors want growth potential, not stagnation. I do not know what the turn over in the top 20 witnesses has been in the last 6 months, but I am sure there have been some changes. Let us hope it continues and the poor choice can be stopped before it is implemented.

·

Awesome to hear from you on this subject @bashadow! As always I like to hear your thoughts. I also like it because you always have a more experienced perspective than me, and you (unlike others in the older classes) aren't afraid to tell it like it is! I completely agree with you that much has been wasted over the last few years on dust votes from the newbies and minnows that didn't know any better...

And I hope you are right about the "old guard" getting changed. That is some straight up ridiculousness they are trying to sell us with that solution. If they want to take away the author rewards, then whey not just give it to the curators of that post? Wouldn't that make a helluva lot more sense?

·
·

Some minnow but mostly Dolphin accounts are getting the notice, people are paying attention to the people that are actually trying to help them. The whales are not getting any notice. The rich have always been afraid of the middle class, thus the stranglehold many countries have put on the middle class, steemit is no different in that. Take a good look at what dolphins/orca accounts are being harassed by botnets, opt in this opt out that, oh you buy votes, oh you don't buy votes. I saw what happened a couple days after the @steemcommunity post from paulg, I read that post, I looked at the list, I gave my feedback on that list. Then I saw that something happened, knee jerk reactions on the part of several people. large behind the scenes mostly people. All because she was doing her job, enough said on that it is on the post in question.

the problems @deliberator is having with so called transparency, which is a laugh, You read TC's post, there is a war going on, a war of "look at me I am still relevant" see jerry banfields laughing stock post and whinny my butt is hurt post. it is not just him trying to remain relevant, but others also.

The crash to steemit is coming, but I think they think they are going to win, I do not think so. The Orca's, Dolphin's, Minnow's and redfish, know we outnumber them a thousand to one.

·
·
·

@bashadow I hope you are right and you know I have valued your opinions for a long time! Thank you for taking the time to give me a headsup and a good analysis of how you see things working!

Well @davemccoy, this sounds like a giant clusterf*ck to me. Actually, it sounds like what happens when a group of people who became instant accidental millionaires get together and try to figure out ways to make their millions grow with complete disregard for the system that GOT them aforesaid millions, in the first place.

A bit harsh? Perhaps... and then perhaps not. Sad, though... I still believe in this community, and I continue to claw myself up the ladder to... somewhere.

=^..^=

·

lol... I agree completely! And the only thing I can say is that I think all these things will turn out to galvanize the community even more. It is like the real world, as people become more and more detached from the average person, things will change on the next major move down. I'm hoping we continue to grow and stay a good community (of cats and humans alike)... that way one day we can be there when the time is right for change ;)

·
·

The way I look at it as that as long as our individual stakes are growing faster than the built-in inflation rate of the Steem token, we are "gaining ground." It becomes a matter of patience and perseverance...

The troubling thought is that they end up "screwing the pooch" so badly that the price of Steem declines beyond repair.

=^..^=

thanks for a good assessment, Dave!

I've up upvoted it and Lniked to in my blog.

please also read my own blog post on the same subject:
https://steemit.com/steemit/@vimukti-ananda/thoughts-about-rc-same-old-parable-of-talents-principle-employed

·

I will check it out now! Thank you for sending it to me and for the nice words :)

All hail stinc!

At least they are consistent, every hard fork has something for the rich at the expense of the poor, im going to start taking bets on it.
Any takers?
Im giving two for one!
Anybody want to bet that stinc makes a change that doesnt benefit the rich at the expense of everybody else?

·

@freebornangel hahaha... I doubt you would get a single taker... Even from @ned himself! Even if you gave 100 to 1 odds, they would still not be able to break their habit! I know @sparkesy43 wanted to be tagged when you showed up, you opinion was highly sought after! :)

·
·

Thanks for your kind words.

Stinc may be elitist scumbags, but hey, they are gonna stop rounding down .019 payouts!
So, we got that going for us. 0.o

No takers, yet.

Seems like it is more important than ever to get in those witness votes. I am having a horrible time with that. I voted for 3 or 4 but when on the vote page it still say 29 votes remaining.
Even on Steemworld my witness tab is in white out. Wonder if anyone else is having trouble?
It seems to me that there are enough redfish/minnow accounts here to have a real impact if enough were to vote in community minded witnesses.

·

I see you contacted me on discord... I will walk you through it on there... Yes it is a good thing to get your witness votes cast, if nothing else but to show them we don't approve of them.

I will reply on discord and tomorrow we will walk through this and get you all set up ;)

·
·

Thank you so much. I have been fiddling with this for weeks. I thought my votes were cast. I got really motivated to get mine in several weeks ago when I stumbled across a witness with some ideas that would defiantly be very bad for tiny accounts like mine.
Maybe if a lot of tiny accounts vote then ideas like that will remain just ideas.

Why not just disable the ability to self vote

·

because that would take away their argument for supplementing their incomes at the top... didn't you see the new tagline? lol :)

steemit where the rich get richer.png

·
·

I saw it lol. I needed a reply to open the door to my knock knock,
Basically, you have a strong circle jerk team at the top who have too much control, The only way to win is to create a better circle jerk.

·
·
·

@jan23com lol... I think you are right about the circle jerk at the top... And I also agree about the better circle jerk... we just need some time, but we are growing by the day ;)

·

Because then people would just create secondary accounts and upvote the secondary accounts instead.

How do we know this? Because that's what used to happen in a previous hard fork where you weren't able to self upvote.

·
·

It does not matter what system used. the result of manipulation is the same. That was the opening comment. Should not be taken as my sole view. The voting for oneself can be done by so many means. Sure buying a vote is essentially the same thing. My reply to the original comment I made opens the door to these solutions if any want to assist with the change they want to see.

·
·
·

You asked why not just disable the ability to self vote.

I answered because it's not possible to stop it. putting up simple road blocks that can be easily circumvented is just a waste of time. It's better to try and find methods that help incentivise good behavior.

While some of you guys were programming by age 6, you may have missed this day in history class. Give it a read, substitute the words Boston Tea Party for downvoters of blatant racketeering, British Parliament for the very top few that are the king makers of steemit. Just the first paragraph, that will give you an idea what this community will be thinking about your idiot response to 'highest valued content.' Which of course will mean buying upvotes will be illegal on here because we need to in all good faith find the best content, and that will be easy with the upvoting/downvoting we have here then right? So the guy with an asshole, and a pocket full of money won't automatically buy way to the trending page in a high stakes game of posting poker by steemit. Unbelievable! Yeah read the link geniuses (in all seriousness--geniuses except when a dollar sign is involved).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intolerable_Acts

·

Intolerable Acts
The Intolerable Acts was the term invented by 19th century historians to refer to a series of punitive laws passed by the British Parliament in 1774 after the Boston Tea Party. The laws were meant to punish the Massachusetts colonists for their defiance in the Boston Tea Party protest in reaction to changes in taxation by the British to the detriment of colonial goods. In Great Britain, these laws were referred to as the Coercive Acts.
The acts took away self-governance and historic rights of Massachusetts, triggering outrage and resistance in the Thirteen Colonies.

·

awesome Crypt... I knew you were a deep thinker... And look at that, you also summoned up the wikitext dude... You are like Merlin and Socrates all rolled up into one!

After reading this, all I can see in my mind is a picture of starving children next to a picture of a fat guy eating a glob that barely fits on his giant fork.

·

how about this, family guy, john goodman eating with his family, eating the entire feast himself...

·
·

hahaha crypt, you are on fire tonight :P

·

lol... Thanks for the vision @creativetruth! If I added some pics to it, I couldn't have come up with any better vision :)

Sounds more like Hard Enslaving Fork 20. If it will happened then no much future here for small people.

·

lol... sadly I agree with you @marinaart... You have correctly described what this fork will do... Its already bad, but this will make the slavery so much more obvious. I am still shaking my head that they could even think of these ideas and not realize how us normal people would react.

·
·

Only when they content will dry out they will start to think about small users. Without small posts in the main stream of steemit scam of milking will get on the top very fast. In other words- you can't hide the shit in the small room :)

·
·
·

@marinaart lol.... very well said! hahahaha 😭 (and so true!) 😀

Steemit merupakan platfrom yang sangat bermanfaat dan sangat beruntung bagi mereka yang sudah menggunakanya, terimakasih telah berbagi., Sukses terus untuk mu

·

what language is that so I can translate :) ... I want to hear your point of view :)

·
·

"Steemit is a platform which is very beneficial and very profitable for people who use it. Thank you. Continuous success for you." Translated from fadil94.

·
·
·

terimakasih telah membantu saya dalam menerjemahnya

You know what happens when you vote someone in the first 15 minutes?

You find out the extent of their troll powers. Expect rage comments and downvotes in return.

·

ohhh we will see all kinds of ways to game this one... It will be epic watching how people find ways around this one!

·

I will definitely check it out... I see where you are going just from the title... I usually don't like any taxes, but shit if they want to take from us, then isn't what's good for the goose also good for the gander?

Well, that sucks! I'm probably going to have to get a loan for $10,000 and buy SBD. Then I can just bid-bot my posts up to a million dollars each.

·

That's how you do it Blondie! The only problem is if you buy $10k, they will buy $100k... We gotta sneak up on 'em when they aren't looking ;)

·
·

Perfect. I'm going to buy $100k of SBD and then there won't be any left for them to buy. Ha ha.

·
·
·

lol... Go get em Arch! That is definitely something you would say in the movies too :D

·
·
·
·

"I buy the gold so they won't be able to"
-Arch Stanton

·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·

"Don't act like you know me. Either you know me or you don't. If you don't, don't act like you do. If you do know me, please tell my wife where I am because I'm totally lost and can't get home."
-themanwithnoname

·

Until I flag you for disagreement on rewards!

·
·

Ha ha ha, I forgot that part. :D

·
·
·

I do, do that when I sell my vote, btw. Ye shall be reviewed and possibly rewarded extra or you may have your vote removed and your post flagged if it is plagiarism, paid way too damn much, abuse, hate, etc.

·
·
·
·

I think a number of the vote-sellers have started doing that. If you are plagiarizing and get caught, they'll remove your vote and then blacklist you. Thanks for helping combat spam!

I am totally stealing that banner

·

lol... its yours! Just remember where you got it ;)

Yep @davemccoy I read the same post and it made me laugh with discomfort at the ridiculousness of this. Every which way people can be prevented from growing on here is being perpetrated. To get rid of the ants, we nuke the city. To get rid of the brownouts, we launch a freaking EMP bomb. I would rather see that reward go out into the ether, to @null than see the same power set load up while the guinea pigs keep running on the wheels trying to catch up. I have said this many times on here, steemit has such a brilliant idea on here it's not even funny. But if they don't starting making honest, good faith efforts to improve its' obvious flaws it will get passed like it's not even moving by something that will cater to the will of the user. Mark my words, it will happen much sooner than a lot of us think as well. Two or three simple rearrangements and these problems could've at least been addressed and have gone a long way to improve via some compromise by those sides on here that are being taken... But Steemit brass kissed the ring once again, or at least some part of the whales' anatomy.

"FOR AN OPEN SOURCED DECENTRALIZED PLATFORM WE SURE HAVE A LOT OF CLOSED-DOOR MEETINGS."

·

You summed it up better than me Crypt... That's why I ain't buying what they're selling as the reasons... It is a complete red herring and meant to distract the people. The bottom line is they could take the money from the authors of the posts and give it the curators of the post.. that would make some sense... but no, they would get their greedy little paws on it if that happened!

Love your analogies! You capture my sentiments exactly!

·
·

Way to call it like you see it @davemccoy, being honest and out front with your opinions makes it very easy to have an intellectual conversation about the perceived good of the entire platform. How in the world did these people sign off on this, thing is I have a very hard time believing much of a number of people were involved at all. Very well stated sir!

·
·
·

@cryptkeeper17 thank you very much! I think we are very much in sync on this one... that is for sure!

Here's the worst part, now instead of flagging someone, just give them your full vote at 0 min. This will take out all their curation rewards.

·

lol... so true... I wonder when the brains that came up with this plan will figure that one out :P

I'd be interested to hear what @freebornangel and @jlsplatts might think of this

·

Steemit - hey if it’s good for the bots it must be good for everyone.
This whole thing sound so far out in left field that I wouldn’t think that someone would have the decency to even come up with this.
Hey if it’s good for the bidbots and their owners, we should not complain right?!?
F-That
Pardon me I don’t normally do that.

·

All hail, stinc!

·

@sparkesy43 I saw a reply from @freebornangel earlier...I'm just now getting to my replies, but I will tag you when I get there! ;)

·
·

Thanks. I spotted it earlier.

If you are saying is true, my god this sucks. I shall look it more myself but if this is true well a huge divide will occur well there goes dan chan prefectish track record of chains not chain splitting. Steem Classic any one?

·

oh yeah, wow.

·

lol... I am happy to have you check it out.. And I would love for the version of what I see happening to be wrong. I think it will kill any respect for this place if they do what I have read they are doing... You can start with the post that I linked above and check it out... If you find I am wrong, please let me know!

·

Can witnesses do that? Then we could finally support the right people to manage the blockchain and future forks.

·
·

it would be cool in one sense... That would be something I would love to see.. The community and content guys in one direction and the rest can do what they want.

·
·

Anyone who wants to can do that. The question is whether you can find enough people to go with you to have a viable community and functional witnesses.

·
·

They could but you need the support of exchanges/money to do it. That way the fork chains have liquidity. Then have community support so the chain is used and does not die. This is how Ethereum Classic survived

Isn't it funny how two people could write about the same topic but take on two completely different tones? I wrote about HF20 as well but my post is far milder. 😂

·

I will have to go read yours then... You are always nicer than me anyways! And on top of that, you will also get the votes because railing against the man usually doesn't pay :P

·
·

I am sure your fans will be along. I have small community support, but happy it's there. :)

·
·
·

yes you do... I'm happy you have your support too :)

You just scared the sh*t out of me...
I haven't really been following up. I had read about HF20 months ago, but I guess the technical details never really got through to me.
Until you just explained them in a very simple way here. Thanks for that.
I definitely have to go out and do some more reading on the topic. It's hard to believe they would be this stupid and dig their own grave. It would be such a shame, all that lost potential...

·

lol... I'm not sure which scary thing I said got you going, but just remember that steemit is more than they realize... Its also the people here, our friends, and as long as we can work together and help each other then whatever they do won't matter. Sure they will f with the price, but eventually there will be a reset if they take too long to come to their senses!

Anyways, always good to see you and I'm sending you over a doc here soon so you can put your mind into making it better ;)

·
·

Since the beginning I was convinced SteemIt would eventually die because of all the flaws in the system.
I wasn’t expecting it would happen so soon, because let’s face it: if they get this through, STINC is commiting suicide. PEople will leave en masse.
For me, it stopped being about the money a long time ago, but I don’t think I could simply go on when everything that is unfair here now, will become worse.
I can’t stand people having lack of respect like that, and I sure don’t want to play their filthy game. No matter how I love the community and the people here, I won’t allow them to play me like a puppet even more...
I know some people think we can beat it if we all stick together, but honestly...? No way. Look at society, there’s simply no way to win from the big guys that have all the power (=money).
But for now, i’ll keep believing in miracles for just a little longer.

·
·
·

Just hang in there... I believe you will be very happy you did by the end of the year... If not, I might join hands with you and leave here myself! I think there are a few amazing things going on and just because they suck, doesn't mean that we won't find a way to make something magical happen... In other words, we don't need them as much as they think we do! ;)

·
·
·
·

We’ve got a deal there :0)

Congratulations @davemccoy!
Your post was mentioned in the Steemit Hit Parade in the following category:

  • Comments - Ranked 6 with 148 comments

My understanding is that the change is instead of >75% being given to the author in the first 30 minutes, the portionthat was to go to the authoris now returned to the reward pool thus removing the incentive for authors to get <75% of the rewards by self upvoting early and/or using bots. Can you send a link to the explanation that says the funds will be distributed not back to the rewards pool but a separate pool?

·

Here is the comment, I pulled it from with the relevant text.

In order to eliminate this unfair advantage, the unused portion of the curation rewards will be returned to the rewards pool instead of being awarded to the author, thereby increasing the overall percentage of rewards that will be paid to curators. This will better serve the original mission of the curation rewards budget: to ensure that the Steem blockchain distributes rewards to the most valuable content.

The point is they are taking money from the post and curators of the post, and giving it back to the pool which "rewards the most valuable content". My assumption judging by the trending pages is the "most valuable content" will be from those same guys that create those lovely gems and then upvote the hell out of them.

So my question is, why are they taking ANY money from the post/curation and giving it to anyone other than the author or curator?

To think we are going to get our fair share is ludicrous in my opinion. The "reward pool" will be raped as always. Only this time we will all contribute with just a bit more with a piece of our posts and curation.

And yes you are right the piece that was going to go to the authors will now go back to the pool. My point is that taking money from every post and ensuring it goes to the guys with the most money seems like an ass backward way of stopping self voting. Just my opinion @idikuci!

ps... if they want to stop the spammers and the people that rape the reward pool, then they can do that anytime... But when @fulltimegeek tried to stop them, he got no help at all from the big boys.

·
·

Ok, what you mean is that because the big fish get higher payouts, then their payouts will get even higher because the reward pool increases in size.

But I still see it as everyone is in the same boat. So the big boys now can upvote themselves at 0min and take 100% of their upvote. That option will be removed from them. And they won't take money from every post and just give it to the guys with the most money. It will only be taken from the post if you upvote in the first 15 mins. So don't upvote in the first 15 mins.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not for this new system. I think delaying the 75/25 split by introducing a time delay is pointless. Because quite simply every bot is now able to just delay the vote. To be honest, this new system means that I will vote a lot less because I tend to vote early, I vote when I see it.

But I'm sure someone will build a front end that delays the vote for you so you can upvote whenever you want and as much as you want and it'll upvote on your behalf at an appropriate time.

I know it's your opinion, I'm trying to understand it, that's all.

·
·
·

Did any fcuking body read this?

Ain't no-better now for big-fishes reaping self-upvotes and self-curation, but this half-ass broken effort due to the linear model will allow for 10,000 little minnows to harvest curation from mega big self-upvoters

·
·
·
·

How about we just fcuking pay that first 15mins curation reward to Flaggers?

hehe....that would be sweet to see how the dynamics starts changing.

·
·
·

@idikuci I agree that this isn't going to be something that we can't deal with. It will get dealt with as people change their behavior. My only real issue is the simple point that the money from the post should stay within the post. To take it from either the author or curator and give it to the other one is fine in my book... I'm not going to say what the magical formula should be. BUT, if they take the money from any post and then add it to the pool, then it is simply giving more money to the guys that already game the system. They will have this figured out before it even comes out.

For instance, if I want to hurt someone, I can auto upvote them at 0 min and take away the incentive that others would have to curate them... It just creates another loophole that can be exploited in a different way. And the fact that they didn't solve the self-voting issue by simply switching it to the curator of that post tells you that their are either being led by some of the rich guys or they are in on it. There should be no reason ever to take money from a post (except by the market method of downvoting)

·
·
·
·

But you can't just give 100% of the rewards to the curator. It means then that everyone who can will build a bot to upvote everyone else's post at the 0 mark and get 100%. Turning every post into a self upvote opportunity. The author will see a $100 post and get $0 because it all goes to the curator.

I think as a method to provide a disincentive to authors self-upvoting at 0min this is a good solution.

The other alternatives:

  • Upvote amount goes to curators, won't work as above
  • Authors portion is disregarded, won't work because then when upvoting at 0min, you can upvote as much as you want and only the part awarded to the curator will be taken out of your VP.
  • Feeding a flagging pool, as DJ suggested I think is a decent alternative.

I really don't think this is such a bad solution. And not because I've read posts from any one saying how great this new method is going to be. If you believe it or not, the only posts about this I've read are this one, and tcpolymath's post. I found out about it actually from holger80 who was reading the code in a github update and sent me a link to the github repo which I then read. So I've thought about this for probably a week or 2. and here's what I think.

If you believe the reward pool is currently being distributed fairly, or the the distribution algorithm can be (in the future) improved so as to actually reward good work, then putting more money into the reward pool isn't a bad thing. Everyone's post will now be worth slightly more.

In theory authors get 75% of the rewards, but because of the current bias in the voting system, authors actually get around 82%, (don't ask where I go that figure, I remember someone somewhere saying that stat for the sake of argument let's assume it's correct). So if people don't change their voting behavior that additional 7% will actually be redistributed to all the other posts. Of which 75% will go to authors (5.25%) and 25% will go to curators (1.75%). So All the big wigs with a large amount of SP will get 1.75% less than they were before. for a $1000 post that's $17.5 less. For a $20 post that's: $0.35.

I'd say it's a pretty fair system... in Theory.

·
·
·
·
·

You can give 25% to the curators in total but weight the distribution away from the ones who voted in the first 15 minutes.

·
·
·
·
·
·

Should have said that in your post.

I think that's a decent alternative. But it still doesn't make the system they've proposed a bad one.

·

"Returned to the reward pool" is a popular way of obfuscating distributing more money to posts with lots of votes. That's entirely what it means but people who use that term want you to think they're helping you.

·
·

Right, But rewarding posts with lots of votes is the foundation of the steem blockchain. That's what this entire system is built on.

More votes = More rewards.

·
·
·

If you think of the economic population of Steem as two hands spread out, like you're describing the size of a fish, with a big peak for whales on one end and a big peak for redfish on the other, everything that "returns to the rewards pool" serves to make that gap wider. That's not a good thing.

·
·
·
·

Wow. Hard and I guess, not so hard, to believe. Such a bummer for a newbie like myself putting out quality content. I guess I’ll trudge on until it seems even more hopeless to gain any standing here.

Meh, I know tons of whales who are charitable with their stake. I think that I'm rather charitable when I have the option to simply pay myself in lieu of rewarding random people for posting blogs that don't really return the favor. I understand that, that is what makes things tick here, which is why I do it, but you're always gonna have your greedy folks. We're human, just civilized animals, and if we can pay ourselves, we're gonna do it.

For example, the last 30 days, I've cast ~325 votes. 1 vote was given to myself at 50%, which was just to mitigate a flag that a butthurt user gave me.

I sell my idle vote power on Smart Steem so that my idle VP will be at the disposal of the community if they'd like to buy it, but otherwise, I give. I keep my vote settings at "Only vote if your VP is 99% or above."

tags are epic

·

Yes they are. It sounds like the tags are describing a natural disaster or something on that scale. Obviously that's hyperbole but yeah I just noticed them after this comment.

·
·

lol... thanks @cryptkeeper17... as one of my deeper thinking friends I'm glad to see that you gotta kick out of the tags... Sometimes the truth is sad but that doesn't mean we can't poke back a little

·
·

I went with #metoo as one of mine. I feel violated.

·
·
·

Bhahaha the hyperbole is outstanding!

·
·
·
·

I feel like they are really going to Munson this one up.

·
·
·
·
·

Yeah I can't help but feel Munson'd out here, "ya know, up a creek with no paddle."

·

lol... Thanks @pukirocks! Its nice to meet you and I like meeting new people for the first time! If you need anything, just ask! :)

I started steemit just before HF19 and it's been hard to get traction since the switch. It seems like HF20 will get even harder to improve one's account.

So, vote for posts after 15 minutes and it should be with posts that have no votes yet? Or not vote at all?

This is hurting my dead brain cells lol!

This comment was made from https://ulogs.org

·

yes if you don't want any of your curation to go to the pool where it will go dis proportionally to the big guys. That is a total extreme though... if someone only has say 0.03 voted, then you could vote the post after the 15 min mark... The bigger problem is on a popular post, if a lot vote it in the first 15 min then it will mean lots of the curation will just go to the pool.

·
·

Oh, my g. I wonder what comes next.

Greetings @davemccoy! Your post was chosen at random and was resteemed because you are one of our followers. Enjoy your free resteem!

If you wish to stop receiving this comment, please do unfollow us.

By upvoting this notification, you're supporting @Shareables.

Shareables - We resteem anything we find shareable. Always strive for quality content. Go on express and harness your blogging potential!

God bless from us @Shareables!

And by stealing it, I mean that is the only way I can afford anything around here. Shit, sorry I voted you before 15 minutes. Hope jerry can use your reward to buy some more lavender scented douche.

·

lol... I understand... How can I charge you when you have nothing left? hahaha.... And I knew you couldn't resist giving money to your best buddy jerry! :P

You can choose to help others.

·

I agree completely! That is always an option and I recognize that many people here do just that! Thanks for pointing it out :)

SERIOUSLY?????
F**K ME!
I mean I have been here for like forever. And I have even started my witness a year ago more for ideology than ROI (let's be the only witness that is decentralized). I am trying to work for community, because we so lack the sense of community.

Anyway, I am so bumped by this. It just doesn't make the slightest sense. I am just wondering why no one is removing their witness votes or deciding to leave steem. I am seriously thinking of selling all my steem and leave.

·

The supporters of it seem to think that it isn't a problem because most people don't make much more than 75% on their posts anyways. Since the 75% will still apply then they feel it will have minimal impact on the smaller accts. On the other hand, the larger accts get upwards of up to 90% because they can grab early curation.

I'm not convinced this is going to work, but they seem adamant that it will. I encourage you to think it through and form your own conclusion. I would hate to be the reason that someone left steemit and it turned out I was wrong (or looking at it from a narrow view).

Personally I don't like the idea of any money leaving my posts... I think the money should stay either with the author or the curators. I also don't like the idea of further "gamifying" the way in which things are done (it seems like a lot of rules already).

Please let me know your thoughts and its nice to meet you. I agree with your mission statement too, so I hope if you stick around to learn more and maybe find a way to help you out with your mindset!

·
·

I think the real reason I might leave is the frustration that :

  • there is little interaction (you need writers but also readers)
  • steemit,inc doesn't do much to promote creation(no writing/photography/drawing/music/podcast/... contests)
  • no sense of community, like reddit
  • no one reference steem content outside
  • and I won't even start on the blockchain side( low decentralization, full nodes, security,...).

I have been here for a while so I had time to see the directions steemit, inc pushes, when they do anything at all. I will be totally fine forbidding self vote for instance. I don't look much at the money part, even I am happy to make cash doing fun things. I remember how in the beginning I decided to not buy steem and to earn my way up. I value much more the interaction I have and that is what I will miss if I leave, not my payout and easy money.

I tried to work on helping communities around here. The basic idea was that you could automatically vote for some tags of communities you are part off because generally speaking there is no point saving your vote and you know the content is good. My goal was to make a website to let average users do that and in the mean time build a program using the Steem API then burn some steem to rent some SP and help some communities. But I run out of funds and had to stop my bot. I hope I can start again soon.

I guess I would like the focus to switch a bit here. Steem is not a good social network yet so let's work on that.

Lol

Although I believe it's true. And then it's not funny anymore.

·

I know... if I wasn't laughing I'd be crying... These guys sure do know how to mess up a good thing.

·
·

I personally don't believe a concept like Steemit can exist as decentralized concept. If you centralize it, it could work. Of course fully depending on the strength of the centralized owner.

·
·
·

@crypto-econom1st you might be right... I hope not, but it is looking that way as it regard this system right now... I hope things change.