RE: Steemit $500 per blog post reward limit, and the YouTube network effect campaign - August 24, 2016
I have to strongly disagree. I prefer blog posts over videos. I can read at my own pace. With a video, unless it's from a favorite blogger I don't tune in for more than 8 mins or so.
Vlogs are in no way superior to blogs to me simply a different media. I prefer podcastsbecause I can listen on the go when I can't be searching or browsing or watching.
Why bother promoting YouTube? Steemit should make their own file hosting service and not even worry about YouTube for the future. You are among the elite in the fact that you can make a decent amount on YouTube and have a following. I wouldn't advise people to start vlogging on YouTube now. It's not very lucrative for newbies.
I don't think capping post earnings is wise either. People won't try as hard if they know they can hit a certain level each time. Why would you bother?
I usually enjoy your posts and you may have more knowledge in crypto and what's best for steemit long term, but my feeling is that if what you say were implemented that you would not be happy. Why not cap YouTube videos at $5? Because there are so many of them. I don't think your argument holds up.
But people can choose what they wish to believe and maybe the system you have proposed will make steemit grow. That's what I really want. Steemit to succeed regardless of tweaks needed to make it happen.
What would be the point of curating content if it were capped? One whale vote bringing it up to $300 another $200 more and now what do you have? No opportunity to add value to that post so maybe it gets skipped.
I see potential problems in your proposals that make me a bit leery. Hopefully this is not taken as a slam on you at all. I just view thing from a different angle
A steemit blogger who only types is a like a leech, as it does not cost anything to type words on a keyboard, while youtube publishers invest money into making great productions for their viewers. Steemit being promoted by vloggers who are willing to invest money for their success is what steemit needs more than bloggers who get paid for reading, typing, and copy pasting pictures
By that same token you are esentially saying that deaf, mute, or those who are camera shy are not as valuable to steemit as those who vlog. Id argue that written blogs offer even more value.
A written blog can be edited and re-edited. A vlog is often stream of conciousness and not always well thought out.
Again i ask what value you have added by making the post you have just done as a video vs a blog.
I feel that I could do the same thing by turning my camera around and video blogging my comments.
There is value in all types of media one is not more valuable than another. A song, movie and book can not be argued as to which is best. They each have their own importance.
If I had to blindly pay for a song, movie, or book. I would prefer to pay for the movie before the song or book, because it costs more to make a movie and thus I get more bang for my buck.
It's somewhat ironic that you say you would "blindly" choose because a blind person would not choose a video.
Id argue that production costs do not mean the content is better or worth more. How many times have people said "don't bother with the movie, just read the book."
Books offer a look into the mind that a movie cannot.
Is that not the very readon you wrote a book instead of released a video?
I can't claim one type of content is "most valuable" but only what content is most valuable to me.
A great blog post should earn more than a mediocre video in my opinion.
I don't believe a cap should be made for any type of media content.
There is a reason A picture is said to be worth 1,000 words. A Video should be worth tens of thousands of words.
But content is all that matters. If a picture inspires someone it can be infinitely more valuable to someone over a b horror movie regardless of budget.