100% Re-Distribution GamessteemCreated with Sketch.

in steemsports •  11 months ago

We would like to to thank the SteemSports community for supporting us, and helping us grow to the team of passionate people on a mission to bring STEEM powered prediction games to the world.

The free plays, which had served us well for a long time have been discontinued due to attacks and a subsequent loss of whale support. One of the main criticisms of the games was a requirement to upvote the posts to enter the game. Some people saw this as a form of vote buying, which was never the intent. The whales that supported the project have received no financial or other compensation for their votes - their actions were/are solely based on their belief in our vision and our service.

The free plays were initially created as a Steem Power redistribution vehicle, and would, in its humble way help democratizing the platform.

We have since pivoted to the live games model, which is suitable for serious players, and serves as a scalable model for the future. Our goal is to attract and serve thousands of players coming from outside of Steem community. Furthermore, these games also increase the utility of the STEEM blockchain and create demand for STEEM and SBD.

We have realized that by dropping free plays we have turned our backs to the passionate community that has enjoyed these free to play games, and stopped the Steem Power re-distribution initiative.

We would like to continue serving our Steemit community with a new game type - a game that requires no upvoting for participation and is based on 100% rewards distribution.

How do the 100% redistribution games work?

With this game type, 100% of liquid rewards go to content creators (writers and editors). Editors are also responsible for running the game, announcing the results and paying the winners.

100% of Steem Power rewards go to the winners of the game. We do this by buying and powering up liquid Steem today, and powering down the illiquid Steem from post rewards in the future.

How much does @steemsports keep on these games? 0%.

Feedback required

Here is a recording of a meeting in which we brought up on some ideas for implementation.

We are looking for more ideas on how can we structure and improve these games. The goal is to create a game type that is fun and engaging. We will be running various experimental game types based on predicates outlined in this post and on the feedback received.

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:  trending

Some people saw this as a form of vote buying, which was never the intent.

It doesn't matter what you do - some people will complain regardless. I have no voting component at all on my games and I hear the same whining and get the same flags. It's not about "vote-buying." It's about some people just needing a scapegoat for all of their own problems. They need someone to blame when their preferred content isn't earning as much as they would like. And it doesn't help that they do not understand the mechanics of this platform (whether it's the code or the networking aspect of it).

As far as losing whale support - I think that had more to do with the PR issues coming from @steemsports. These issues could have been handled better, seeing as how the most vocal opponents to your free-play games were users who were essentially inconsequential. Also - the entire "SteemyGames" thing was a massive blunder. You probably should have consulted with more people before going forward with that idea. It was a really bad one.

In any case, I would try to rebuild your reputation with those whales who supported you and try bringing back the free-plays, perhaps with a different distribution model that gives more to presenters vs. editors and a portion of the illiquid rewards being powered down and distributed weekly (maybe somewhere between 25 - 50%)? Don't worry about the little ants that want to complain and flag. They're a very small minority. If you can draw people into Steemit with your free-plays on your website, that's good for all of us. The short-sighted will just be dragged along to higher value, kicking and screaming the entire way. The rest of us will accept it and be grateful.

·

I totally missed out on whatever the 'steemygames' was & I'd bet a majority of users also didn't notice. Move along people, no drama to see here. Lol

·

It doesn't matter what you do - some people will complain regardless. I have no voting component at all on my games and I hear the same whining and get the same flags. It's not about "vote-buying." It's about some people just needing a scapegoat for all of their own problems. They need someone to blame when their preferred content isn't earning as much as they would like. And it doesn't help that they do not understand the mechanics of this platform (whether it's the code or the networking aspect of it).

you don't get exactly the same flags. for example, you don't get mine. (though, that has nothing to do with an objection to SS vote buying component. I see other differences in the two formats).

That said, don't you see just a little pot-kettle in this argument you're making -- the argument that there are many who will rationalize their support or opposition as for the betterment of steem, though its really based on their immediate self-interest.

I feel like you get to either do a complete 180 when you start getting whale backers, or you get stick to your guns and describe everyone who disagrees with you as rationalizing their own selfishness... but i don't see how both makes for a compelling argument.

EDIT TO ADD: I do not completely disagree with some of the philosophical underpinnings of @noisy 's concerns,. but i do agree that there are many concepts that he does not grasp fully.

·
·

That said, don't you see just a little pot-kettle in this argument you're making -- the argument that there are many who will rationalize their support or opposition as for the betterment of steem, though its really based on their immediate self-interest.

No, I don't. I don't argue that non-abusive content is "harmful" for the platform or that it's somehow unfair to other users. The arguments that I see against my posts or @steemsports is that it is "abuse," "harmful," "unfair," and "draining the rewards pool." All of these claims are dubious, regardless of how much support I or @steemsports have/has.

I have made arguments in the past that certain non-abusive posts are completely overvalued - in my opinion - but I never made a crusade out of it and flagged users based on an absolute misunderstanding of the mechanics/networking involved.

For the record: I still have many of the same criticisms about the platform that I had when I did not have much support. The difference now is that I actually understand how things work around here and I realize that many of the current issues are due to the very small active user base vs. the distribution of stake. Until those things change, the results will essentially be the same as they have been - and users will continue to find "abuse" around every corner. As the active user base grows and the selling/dilution of stake continues, we will likely see many of the issues improve/resolved over time. I just don't see the sense in constantly complaining about things that can't be fixed under our current circumstances. And I certainly don't appreciate other users accusing me of nefarious behavior simply because they don't like my content or don't understand what exactly is happening with it, even after multiple explanations.

·

It's not about "vote-buying."

You are still not getting it? Seriously?

if value of potential rewards for people depends (even partially) on post payout, and
if your profit also depends on post payout,

People are not stupid, and they know, that they can maximize their potential profit (and they will do that) by voting for you, and you will take direct advantage of that.

It doesn't matter what you do - some people will complain regardless.

True, some always will complain, but others will be very thankful that some people adapteds to signals of the market, like SteemSports just did.

And... "surprisingly"... thanks to that adaptation, redistribution will be even better :)

In any case, I would try to rebuild your reputation with those whales who supported you and try bringing back the free-plays

There is no such things on steem like "free-play". Every user is a shareholder, and all shareholders are paying for that. You would know that... but:

it doesn't help that they you do not understand the mechanics of this platform

On steemit there are always two costs when you votes:

  • opportunity cost of non supporting another author (which could be greater asset to whole community)
  • cost from shareholder perspective (you looses daily because of inflation, which is needed to cover a cost of rewards, which means also rewards of those "free-plays")

·
·

if value of potential rewards for people depends (even partially) on post payout, and
if your profit also depends on post payout,

This has been explained to you several times without any acknowledgement that you comprehend it.

  1. I have no requirement for people to vote on my posts in order to enter the contest. This alone makes it explicitly not vote-buying. If you do not have to vote in order to participate, then no votes are being "sold." You seem to continually struggle with this concept.

  2. The overwhelming majority of the rewards for my contests come from highly influential stakeholders who do not participate in the contests. This means that the votes cast by these users are not at all related to any promise of receiving any rewards other than what can be earned through curation. In other words - there are no votes being "sold."

  3. My "profit" depends on post payouts just like any other user on the platform, so your argument about "if your profit also depends on post payout" is pointless. Every other user on the platform, if they want to earn money from posting, requires those earnings through upvotes on their posts. In addition, very few users are giving away 50% of their post rewards. So, what exactly is your point?

  4. When you write, "if value of potential rewards for people depends (even partially) on post payout," you're describing exactly how curation works. The higher the post rewards, the higher potential return through curation rewards. So, do you oppose the entire concept of curation rewards?

Every user is a shareholder, and all shareholders are paying for that.

You pay nothing. If the rewards were not going to a sports post, they would be going elsewhere. There is no additional STEEM being created simply because one post earns more than another. Furthermore, the dilution from rewards allocation affects everyone equally, so no individual is gaining or losing more stake than another simply because votes are allocated to certain posts.

which could be greater asset to whole community

This is a matter of subjective value/preference. Unless you have been able to quantify the value of each individual user, then this is just another meaningless argument.

you looses daily because of inflation

As stated, the inflation affects everyone equally as a percentage of stake.

So, as I was saying...you still do not understand how the platform works and you absolutely do not comprehend how my contests work. You may continue acting like a troll if you wish, but don't be surprised if users begin to treat you like one. And perhaps you can actually read my posts before flagging them? If you did, you'd learn that the things you're complaining about are not actually occurring.

·
·
·

This means that the votes cast by these users are not at all related to any promise of receiving any rewards other than what can be earned through curation.

Last time when I downvoted you it was because of this sentence:

So if your post would earn $1500, you are saying that according to your words you would not feel obligated to anything? Good to know.

I have no requirement for people to vote on my posts in order to enter the contest. This alone makes it explicitly not vote-buying. If you do not have to vote in order to participate, then no votes are being "sold."

those red underlined sentence above is a selling. Otherwise you would no have any reason to actually use it. Some people voted for you, and no one cannot be sure, whether they did that only because they bought what you tried to sell to them.

So, do you oppose the entire concept of curation rewards?

If you would read my article, rather than argue with my and trying to guess my points... then you would find out, that this is exactly what I think about them:

And perhaps you can actually read my posts before flagging them? If you did, you'd learn that the things you're complaining about are not actually occurring.

I am reading every single post which I vote or downvote. You were the person, which didn't want to even take a look on my post, which I also sent to you as a feedback.

Every user is a shareholder, and all shareholders are paying for that.

You pay nothing.

If you do not understand so simple concept, then I am afraid that I cannot explain this more clearly.

Those money already was allocated, what means that I already paid a fraction for every single cent which you earned on this platform. You can say exactly the same words about my earning here since day when you registered.

·
·
·
·

Last time when I downvoted you it was because of this sentence:

Yes, but you have again failed to realize that no user is required to vote on the post in order to participate. Once again - this means that it is explicitly NOT vote-buying. Do you see the connection there? You can actually participate in the game without voting at all. How is that possible, if what you're saying is accurate?

So if your post would earn $1500, you are saying that according to your words you would not feel obligated to anything?

I am only "obligated" to do what I have stated I would do. What makes you think that I ought to do whatever it is that you think I should do with my own posts and that other users ought to do what you think they should do with their votes? None of us are "obligated" to do anything that we do not want to do.

those red underlined sentence above is a selling. Otherwise you would no have any reason to actually use it.

Wrong again. That red underlined sentence is simply a statement that additional rewards will be determined after payout, because post rewards fluctuate over the period of the first payout. But as stated multiple times already, nobody is required to vote and large stakeholders are voting on the post anyway - so, I don't know what the final payout will be. That does not mean that votes are "being sold." Please learn what "vote-buying" actually is before you accuse people of it.

Also, you seem to still not be able to comprehend networking. Are you even familiar with social media?

Some people voted for you, and no one cannot be sure, whether they did that only because they bought what you tried to sell to them.

Exactly. You have no idea who voted on these posts for the content and who voted because they were hoping for more rewards. As you can see on these posts, there are far more votes than there are contestants. So, with all of your blogging expertise (and telepathic powers), can you tell me how many users voted on my posts because they liked the content vs. how many voted simply because they hoped to win more rewards? If you cannot, then your arguments are entirely without merit (still).

then you would find out, that this is exactly what I think about them

Yes, I am aware that you are against curation rewards. I just wanted you to state it here, for the record. This is further evidence of your lack of understanding about the platform and my posts.

Those money already was allocated, what mean I already paid a fraction for every single cent which you earned on this platform.

You may have paid for your stake, which determines how much of the reward pool you are able to allocate. However, the rewards come from inflation, not from your account. The inflation may result in the dilution of stake, but this is an equal percentage among all stakeholders. You pay nothing out of your own pocket when my posts earn rewards. You do know this, correct?

·
·
·
·
·

but you have again failed

yes. By writing all those arguments above one more time to you. I already said everything what I had to say, and because you still to not get it - that means that I failed - but this is life.

I will continue to downvote your posts (as I did) which IMO are inappropriate like this, and I will continue (as I did) to upvote you other really good posts, like this.

·
·
·
·

Nesting limit...

I already said everything what I had to say, and because you still to not get it - that means that I failed...

Yes, because your arguments are poor and based on complete ignorance of the terminology being used, the actual designs of the platform, and good old-fashioned networking on social media. That is your failure.

I will continue to downvote your posts (as I did) which IMO are inappropriate...

Then I suppose I should treat you like a common troll, since you continually refuse to acknowledge the ignorance of your positions - even after I've spent ample time explaining things to you (on multiple occasions), which I did not have to do.

So I guess I should ask: Do you think you're actually resolving anything? Because I have no plans to change my contests since I'm not doing anything wrong, and you have repeatedly demonstrated that you do not understand most of the things you're complaining about.

Maybe spend your time and votes on content that you actually like? That would do a lot more good and it might actually save/improve your reputation.

If you're not pissing people off you are probably doing something wrong... lol

·

Don't worry. They will start pissing off their old competitors - all current vote buyers ;) Vote buyers will have really hard times to compete with "100% redistribiution" by taking 50% of reward.

Community probably will understand, that in long run not supporting vote-buyers will have an effect, that vote-buyers will be forced to lower their 50% fee in most cases to 0.

steemsports should keep some portion of steem power; that would make the steemsports voice keep pace with the growth of steemit

its too bad that some voices decry the success of others instead of grinding out the beta course; I appreciated the redistrib games immensely and there were time when they were my sole steemit income!

looking forward to the new games!

Good to know you are back! Your knew concept sounds very interesting. To encourage content creation is both beneficial for the existing members and also good to acquire new ones - so always good for the platform´s development. I am sure the community will support you and your project accordingly, I´ll be one of them :-)

But hey.. how do I win!! :0)

Good riddence free plays, lets hope that this signals the end of the tacky redistribution posts!

If you guys win, its a win/win for everybody.

I personally never had a problem with steemsports. I participated in the free plays because it was fun and really didn't cost me anything. Never once did I think your intention was to harm the community and the engagement was awesome. That being said - best wishes moving forward!

I'm curious what will be the next problem about steemsports!

·

I dont know what people do without seeing my picture everyday.

I am not a whale, but I support your initiative. It is fun and it supports sports and community engagement. We are with you!!

I don't comprehend how the new game works from reading this post, I say just go ahead and do the game, and go from there, please no more than 1 game every 12 hours

I think it is good to try something and see what happens. It's better to try and fail, but learn from your efforts, then never to try at all.

I watched the trailer for the new Banking On Bitcoin movie, and one line in there, in regard to innovation, says, "The first person through the door gets shot, but you gotta go through that door." This site is in beta. In my opinion, we need people to try things. I am happy to see your team trying things here on steemit!

·

Thanks - we put up with some downvotes by the CTO of Steem Inc.. that catapulted this whole thing. Not much you can do when the corporation starts messing with your posts (specifically my posts). First through the door - first to the floor - but how do you dispose of the stinking corpse? The corporation stepped in - then came the trolls. Luckily a month on Steem is like a lifetime - I am hoping people see the giant diamond in this pile of wreckage. On a brighter note the CEO Ned voted on the recent OKC Thunder game.. Confused?

I enjoyed the redistribution aspect of steemsports. My recollection is that there was a lot of concern for a flatter redistribution curve, prior to steemsports. And in watching the daily curves shown by @ontofractal, the steemsports really did seem to flatten the curve - and the curve reverted to be more steep on the days steemsports wasn't there. I appreciate the effort the sports writers and editors put into the articles. Good luck on the live games and I look forward to what innovations you bring to Steemit in your upcoming experiments.

And that will be an honest redistribution :)

Few days ago I wrote a post about SteemSports: How I figured out, why SteemSports is better than I thought, but still, why it will continue to harm Steemit if few things won't be changed

and in my video I said exactly the same thing... this this is how true redistribiution should look like:)

Watch from 9m36s:

I am not sure, whether @furion watched my video, but I am really glad that you came to exactly the same conclusion.

Suggestions

If content-type will not be shortly introduced on steem (and all games moved to dedicated section on steemit), then I would really suggest to make one game a day only, to avoid taking one more time whole trending page. Probably you will always endup on first place anyway ;)

With "100% redistribution" rules IMO are really fair. But please remember about what new user will see on the trending page. It would be great if you could emphasize in title of such posts:

"100% redistribiution post: Oklahoma City Thunder vs Denver Nuggets"

And please not use words like "free-play". Those games are not and will never be free - the true cost is lost opportunity to support another probably great author with greater voting power. Besides that... when people see "it's free" they may think:

this is not possible, this for sure is some kind of scam

or

maybe this is a scam but I can take advantage of that

And I believe, that this is not our goal. You can make whole thing noble.

Glad to see this! 👍

What about free-plays without the content provided by the authors?

Idk about everyone else, but I always upvoted the main post, skipped the content then just picked the option from the two that looked the best, haha!

I really like the idea of e-sports betting, sponsoring live streamed e-sports events could recruit a significant quantity of users to both steemit and steemsports.

Either way, I look forwards to your future content :)

This sounds good, but won't some of you get left out from being paid?

Whohoo!!
Ya'll are back!!
AND giving all the sp, too??
Maybe you should keep 10% from each half to pay for the auto pay bot?

Thanks for your work!!

Interesting ..