You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Why a Steem Power reward cap would be as controversial as the block size cap in Bitcoin [FAIRNESS vs FREEDOM?]
Although blake's point is valid, he also has $30 000 worth of STEEM, and does well on his posts regularly. craig, your thoughts and feelings on this matter are bang on! In the past I had argued for STEEMPower to dissipate over time, if the holder is not 'properly active' - posting & curating .. the lost power would be added to STEEM interest paid out to all members. If on top of that there was a cap on the amount earned on each post, and the number of effective votes raised up, then we could see a very healthly level of diffusion of STEEM Power.
If the little-people are supposed to just step aside for SUPERSTAR BLOGGERS, and forget any chance of gaining anything for their efforts here, then ... who should give a fuck about this place!?
More over reliance on "meaningless" dollar values. That dollar value is completely meaningless! How much Steem Power does he have? @craig-grant has almost 25,000 Steem Power and I have just over 28,000, and these are the only numbers that matter in Steem Universe.
Those dollar values are only estimates and are virtually worthless because we probably will never see those amounts realized. Whatever the true amount is will be based on how much demand we create for Steem Power by making the Steem Social Media Computation Game a fun game to play. If it's enough fun, people will power up.
So it's time to expand the privileges for powered up accounts!
I see your point about tweeking of the steem power up and down mechanics to make it more fun and interesting, more like a game to play rather than a rigid system of money.
Capping rewards may actually make it more fun to play for the majority which is actually more important to giving "meaning" to those "meaningless" dollar values.
It is worth experimenting with and iterating on. There is more at stake here than simple ideology.
If it doesn't work then the system can revert to the old reward system.
Why merely speculate on the outcome when we can test it and gather genuine experimental data?
Testing the hypothesis is the smarter way to do it.
@thecryptofiend Only temporarily, like austerity measures, or quantitative easing, its short term cheap money which comes at a long term cost. It's in my opinion not worth the long term cost.
For example, that precdent of having a $500 cap, could become a $50 cap when there is 700,000 people instead of 70,000 people, and could become a $5 cap at 7 million people, and do you now see the problem?
It will become impossible to earn Steem Power at a reasonable rate because there are too many caps on success. I know, a lot of people are into socialist ideas, but we also have to be honest that these ideas are not fun, particularly when you consider Steem could end up having competitors who don't decide to cap, and where do you think the top bloggers will go?
I don't support the cap because long term it's a bad idea. Short term it might allow me to get more Steem Dollars but less Steem Power? But what is the point if I don't know how to measure my own success? If the highest I can get is $500 then I would not have anything higher to strive for and would get bored.
And in terms of Steem Power, if I feel I can't ever become a whale or work my way up, even though I'm an early adopter? I would also get bored. The point is yes you can make a game easier, but you don't make it more fun by making the game boring for the people who are winning without breaking the rules.
You want to keep the current winners happy while expanding the ways to play and win the game. We can't all be skilled bloggers. Why not open new opportunities for people who want to earn Steem Dollars and let bloggers focus on being good bloggers?
And I know people say it's 'just a trial' but so was a lot of changes in governments or in other blockchains, where they make some controversial change just to try it out but then it gets harder and harder to remove the change as more people join. Something like this is easy to implement and remove at 70,000 people, but at 200,000+ people it's a different story. And let's not forget, there is the 24 hour curation cap, a post frequency limit, a 30 day limit, I mean there is only so much you can do to help people earn Steem Dollars from blogging before you say maybe it's time to let people earn Steem Dollars or and Steem Power doing something else.
Because @ned supports this idea I now expect them to try it out. I think it's a terrible idea but I now at least have notice that it's going to be a trial. If they try it they should at least collect and share statistics, because during this trial Steem Power flow is gong to change dramatically.