The debate is... do you want a 50/50 curation/author split on reward or leave it as it is as a 25/75 rewards split.
I personally think it would be pretty interesting to see 50/50 split, but I don't think it changes anything meaningful it just changes the hoops that stakeholders have to jump through to give themselves back the highest value of their inflation.
I am for the change because maybe it will stop some stakeholder complaining but at the end of the day Steem is a very tiny community with less than 2500 accounts that hold more 5000 Steem. The debate is internal. Those who aren't here... Don't care about our Math and we don't have enough here to make enough difference to me anyway. People didn't NOT come here because of our Curation Rewards. They didn't come here, because they haven't heard about us and will likely never find us while we fight over things internally. Those that did come here left because they didn't like our tools or felt ignored by the community.
Let's make the change or not make the change, but then can we start focusing on actually attracting some people to Steem? Can we market and improve our user experience?
Tron, EOS, ETH they have apps, but they do not have a centralized place to talk to those users. We have a community, our games are more fun because we know each other. I don't want to play Steem Monsters because I've been dying for a digital card game. It's fun because we know each other and can compete. Same is true of Drugwars. There is no way I would go to Tron to play either of those games. I play because they are a part of my community.
So, go tell the guys which percentage you prefer so maybe we can move past looking at our internal struggles and look outside of Steem for new users and investors.
Use this link to read more and vote
https://busy.org/@theycallmedan/should-we-raise-curation-rewards-from-2575-to-5050
I only call it a circle jerk because this only matters to people who are already here... I'm not interested in Marketing to our 2500 stakeholders. I'm interested in Marketing to 2 billion people who use social media.
@whatsup,
I don't think it's a good time to go for a curation % debate! It's better everyone focus on Mira and SMT news and updates! Coz that's the place that we really boost up! And people will heard more about us as well!
Cheers~
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
The initial model of Steem was about people having to buy Steem and powering it up, in order to influence the visibility of posts. This is obviously redundant with the introduction of delegations and bid-bots/vote-selling.
The reason why Steem isn't working out for authors isn't that they're not earning enough. Heck, even 25% (instead of 75%) would be a lot more than most people gain when writing on WordPress. It's sadly somewhat of entitlement, that people believe authors should earn the majority of the rewards, while stakeholders are most important in this system. There will always be people interested in earning money by writing, but will there be more @theycallmedan's, buying millions of Steem? That's rare.
Instead, the reason why authors are not flourishing on Steem(it), is simply because the eyeballs are missing. But even if more eyeballs were on Steem(it), the content discovery is awful, the comment section is buggy and slow once the amount of comments gets higher. Essentially, the Steemit.com website had been abandoned for more than a year. (people are now working on it, but we still don't have communities)
So, do I want to see 50/50? Of course - why not. If it doesn't work out, we'll change it back. But we've had the status quo for way too long.
But besides the curation-debate, the biggest problem we have right now is that there is not a common view of what Steem is and what it isn't. Usually, in centralized structures, the people in charge are taking take of that, but Steem is very decentralised in that area.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Rational actors within a system will vote/do things in their best interests given the chance. That applies to witnesses and non-witnesses. I am going to argue that the 50/50 and 25/75 has nothing to do with why people aren't here.
I have been saying for awhile, Steem's problem is that everyone is relying on Steemit INC to come out with SMTs and somehow that will bring in a ton of people to the platform. Ethereum has all the smart contracts and have been fixing bugs in smart contracts for 3 to 4 years. SMTs are going to be extremely immature when they come out.
Steem also doesn't have anyone marketing anything from what I can tell its 0. The bitcointalk.org post about Steem is mostly people calling it a scam. Bitcointalk.org is a highly trusted go to for many in the crypto community, already you aren't going to get mass adoption from crypto community due to that. I'm not suggesting we go astroturf in there, but its pretty one sided with 95% of comments saying its a scam...
Steems great failure is that its poised to be a great solution to censorship and nobody knows about it, and those who do learn about it think its a scam.
Instead we see MILLIONS flocking to Minds.com and Gab and Voat, when Steem easily could have pulled in some of that crowd. I am only here because I deep dive into a lot of crypto stuff. Most of the people I talk to about Steem want nothing to do with it. I try to convert people from reddit(because reddit censors) and they look it up and see stuff about it being a scam.
Perception is reality for the (dumb)masses.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Geez I wonder why...couldn't be people being flagged for differing opinions now could it. Seems I remember you dropping by shortly after I got here to flag the crap out of me for expressing my opposing views, unless there's abuse of the system or false, misleading, dangerous information being spread people shouldn't be flagged for disagreeing with others. If I remember correctly not only did you flag my comments you ran over to my blog and flagged everything there...and I think you then proceeded to write your own article where my name was added in a bad light among others you disagreed with. It's these kinds of tactics that scare people off, it's bad enough people make pennies for their efforts when they get here it's just appalling that others with more power can take the pennies away. The way you deal with stuff you don't like is not to upvote it not gather your friends and flag the crap out of it.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
You were caught copying and pasting other people's content after receiving many upvotes from our group.
I contacted and got replies from the person you were taking content from, and got the whole story from them and informed them of what was going on. Its all on the blockchain on the posts we downvoted on. You were getting upvotes from us for awhile until we noticed it, wrongly getting Steem from our group upvote by plagiarizing. We removed our upvotes from your posts and downvoted you due to your plagiarism, and masking your posts as authentically written by yourself and trying to get upvotes from our group.
@freebornangel I see you upvoted this, its all on the blockchain everything that happened. I have nothing to hide and my reasoning and evidence is in the past comments we made and post we made on why Sunlit7 was banned.
EDIT: Here is the link to the proof. https://busy.org/@truthforce/content-thieves-banned-from-iw-curation#@truthforce/re-sunlit7-re-truthforce-re-practicalthought-re-truthforce-content-thieves-banned-from-iw-curation-20180610t001509842z
You said in your comment above " It's these kinds of tactics that scare people off" we don't need more plagiarists or people copying and pasting others content here.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Yes you contacted that person but they didn't know you where talking about me, that's why I sent you their emails to me granting me permission to publish her stuff. She suffers from a debilitating illness that keeps her from expanding onto Steemit that is why she grants me a right to promote her stuff for her. I sent that same verification plus some further conversations on the matter between her and I to steem cleaners and that's why it's noted as such on any of the post that I do publish of hers so people like you don't keep pushing a lie to justify what you did. Not that I want to speak ill in any way, shape or form of practical thought since him and I have moved beyond that and I get a good sense from him now that varying opinions are healthy for a platform and we have engaged in a positive manner in that respect since, you guys jumped on your friends bandwagon not by engaging in conversation but by attacking and striking out at me in a punitive manner. I can see from how you responded here you've only slightly improved since then pushing your false narrative to try and justify the attack, the only difference is you haven't flag me for my opinion and went over and flag anything open on my blog. Even your friend Canadian Coconut has come miles compared to you. I now engage on her platform all the time without my opinions being attacked as some sort of personal attacks on people but as merely a differing of opinion, I give many kudos to her and practical thought in their restraints now to tell the difference, we may not agree but it's okay to agree to disagree, just like it's okay to move forward and find something someday we may agree on. I see you are still miles off on that yet.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Plagiarism or making money from other's content is why you were flagged because you previously got a lot of upvotes from us before we found out. Upvotes were removed and some posts flagged(less than 5 I think and it was over with). Our operation, and Steemit as a whole doesn't exist to upvote people who copy and paste other's content(EVEN IF GIVEN PERMISSION). If we all we did was upvote content other people take from others, this site would be a dumpster fire of content thieves.
That isn't how the events of this transpired, as I had contact with them multiple times to ensure that is how things went down.
I really don't know why you want to keep trying to talk to me every now and then
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
You sir are a liar, I didn't even have five of her post pending at the time. It is explicitly explained that SBD was being forwarded to her, that money was coming out of my own pocket in payments to her because it wasn't worth or I didn't have any real worth worth powering down, that's why when you contacted her she was confused as to who you were talking about, I paid her under my legal name not under my screen name. I always paid her more than those pennies ever added up to. There is absolutely nothing wrong with someone granting permission to another person to publish their stuff, it is well within the framework of the law. You fail miserably at trying to justify what you did. It was punitive and went way outside the scope necessary to flag me on the post upon which we engaged on, that's the real issue here, if you or anyone at your site disagreed about whether or not you should upvote my post from her that was an entire different subject and shouldn't have been woven into the dispute from another site for retaliation.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
This was like a year ago and you still want to argue about the past.
Its simple, you copy and pasted other's content, our group is AGAINST that even if you had their permission, we upvoted it mistakenly and eventually noticed it was someone else's. Then we gave you some downvotes to neutralize the upvotes we gave/previously. You were then added to an extremely short list of people who were submitting copy and pasted content to the #informationwar tag, then you were banned from us upvoting you from the IW group.
You can still use #informationwar tag if you want, no one is stopping you. You just won't get upvotes from the group account.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Instead of working on that view like @llfarms and I are...
Or taking out an ad, paying for some marketing, or stopping other stakehodlers from draining the value out of our investment... our brightest minds are trying to figure out how to pay themselves for cleaning up their own investment. It's hysterical.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
From the perspective of someone who has never seen Steemit it would probably be: Steemit is an ugly blog with terrible trending page and nothing worth seeing there. It's complicated as hell and not even worth using for "average Joe" because the median post is worth 0.10 $ or even less.
Until that is fixed... There is nothing to fix :D
It would be better if Steemit separates to specialized platforms with the given topics.
But... It's impossible to disrupt those established...
So the only solution is to bring Steem to those who know how to use it / make some dollars (not too little, not too much)
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
I like our trending page, minus a few bad actors that the stakeholders will not flag, unless someone pays them to take care of their own investment. (LOL)
What we need to add is an "Interesting" or another tab that pulls from the most active and discussed posts and those that receive votes that aren't from the known bots.
All content site allow people to promote content and everyone knows it. It's not a problem. In fact professional level content creators know the model and are used to it.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
The problem is simple. When you use the internet, on a daily basis, you go to:
The key question is - why ever entering Steemit? Unless you are one of the authors.
It would be 100 times more successful if it would be something specialized, but good.
It would be also useful from the marketing POV.
The message from Steemit, Advertisement sections is:
We have 140.000 users, from 156 countries, with completely different interest!!!
From any reasonable perspective, this is a nightmare.
What / How to sell anything to those people?
Funnelling will be terrible (to nothing). This is why they can't sell banners.
For regular users:
For marketing whatever:
For investors:
Very, very tricky situation...
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
These are actually interesting points.
However, go take a new look at trending. Most of trending is filled with people who bought steem or spent steem and locked it up for 13 weeks to promote something.
A new project, either internal or external. A few of our stakeholder are so out of touch with our own site and users that they are actually mad about that. :)
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
What happened to the active tab?
We used to have that.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
yeah I wonder too
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
And if we change it content discovery will still be bad. I've said I am for it.
Which of our witnesses will code it? How about our stakeholders? You know the ones who are always screaming at Ned to do something?
I don't think our Authors are underpaid, in fact compared to pretty much any other market with this amount of eyes... everyone here is overpaid.
But my point is can we do it or not do it? Because it isn't going to help us at all with the rest of the world.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Authors are overpaid, and still think they deserve more (even if they have no readers) as they don’t understand the reward pool or economics and are only focused on their short term upvote. Stakeholders look to Steemit Inc. to do everything, and then bitch when they do.. while doing nothing themselves.
Steemit Inc. is trying to push the community to do more (as this is suppose to be decentralized and all), when their stake is being used to upvote shit posts 100x a day, rather than those actually trying to contribute to the ecosystem (which I believe will at least improve soon).
The problem is, everyone wants someone else to do something.. rather than do it themselves (minus a few projects). Then complains of power grabs and unfairness when the few actually try to do something.
We reward the behavior we want to see around here, and we get what we deserve based on that.
50/50 curation won’t fix the issues, but it won’t make them worse either... and hey maybe we could focus on something else after 🤷🏻♀️ Or the self votes and circle jerks will continue and the doers will either keep fighting the current and keep doing, or they will finally give in and move on.
When people start thinking of Steem as a whole, and how to improve it.. as then everyone benefits, rather than just fighting over themselves for their project or personal rewards.. then maybe we will get some actual shit done.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
This is a better way to say what I was saying...
Do it, don't do it... the people pushing it aren't even going to code it. They would like SteemIt Inc to code it.
:) Let's keep our 2500 inside investors happy, most of them are over paid as well.
Authors are unhappy? Maybe, but those of us who are working on this on a daily basis can find each other. Those who just want to pull money out are not needed at this stage.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Yep, totally agreeing with your points. The amount of time some of our top stake holders have spent on this (and nothing else) without actually trying to do anything to implement it pretty much is an example of what is wrong here.
Get it done, or don’t.. it won’t change anything drastically and like you said, it sure as heck isn’t going to attract people who know nothing about it anyways. Or fix some of the bigger issues here.
I think saying it will help encourage “organic votes” is comical but hey, I think people should get a return for something other than making content. So I’ve always been for the idea.
I guess I’m just over it all at the moment 🙂 Do it, or don’t.. then let’s move on.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Maybe it's time to forget tinkering and go full bhoona. It had been suggested before so it's not my idea but how about some kind of decaying vote strength if repeated. Eh, you vote for an author two posts running, your vote is ten percent less effective. If you leave a gap it resets by +10 % kind of thing. This would be to stop repeated circle jerking.
Something like that.
People say there would be ways round it but hey there are ways round everything.
Tinkering won't fix things. Change will fix things
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
I have friends that like to read and invest, not many of them but they all could easily buy 20 -50k of steem. None are interested in blogging. Guess i can tell them to sell votes and read stuff for free. Edit: 50/50 circle for me. P.S sent you SBD not interested in helping bot curators, They didn't help me find this post lol
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Your balance is below $0.3. Your account is running low and should be replenished. You have roughly 10 more @dustsweeper votes. Check out the Dustsweeper FAQ here: https://steemit.com/dustsweeper/@dustsweeper/dustsweeper-faq
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
ta dusty
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
This is true, but people didn't come here to post something and receive 0 votes... So, you can look at this from different angles... If I am a newbee, I even don't know how rewards functioning, but I first thing that I can see on the platform is upvotes and value that I see under my post (number of votes, value, etc)
Just my 2c...
Cheers...
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
I wish to be circle jerked at 25/75 please.
@demotruk has an interesting proposition regarding reward splits:
a custom reward split slider
Posted using Partiko Android
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
I couldn't care less about the fundamentals of rewards like you said it only matters to the people who are here. Its a case of thinking that steem/steemit will remain like this forever which if it does I think most of us would leave.
Focusing on rewards is spending time and energy focusing on the minutia. I'd rather focus on improving the user experience, acquisition and retention with less focus on the money to begin with and not make that the be all and end-all of why everyone is here.
The only focus is to get more users not just on steemit but any dapp that uses it. STEEM is ot steemit and this debate has gotten old and it was pointless from the begining. Just my 2 steem on the subject
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Hear hear
Posted using Partiko iOS
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Upvote for this :)
Steem(it) mindset = economy of redistribution = everyone become equal = equally poor
This cycle has repeated countless times.
Until those few realize that they need to attract real money and let the best authors thrive, there is nothing that can help.
(Note: the best authors are not even registered to Steemit...)
The greatest blunt, RT joined Steemit, and Steemit is not capable to make a buzz out of it?!
I mean, censor-free platform for independent media, recognized by one of the most influential .... with XXX... viewers in YYY countries.
Is it so difficult to make a clear message for media (for example) and a decent landing page?
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Well I only half agree. We don't need great authors. Social Media is about networking and friends.
There are NO successful models of Authors Sites.
It is about connecting people with people.
We agree on every other point.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Hmm, Patreon, Youtube, Twitch, these are all super successful "author sites". It's obviously not what they're called, but at the end of the day, that's what they are.
It's a bit different from social media ie Facebook or Twitter, but of these two types, Steem is more the former. Best example is, we make posts on Steem, but hang out on discord. A Status update or tweet style post is generally referred to as a shit post here. It's all about the UI/UX. I think Steem COULD do this, but we haven't really yet :/ I think it would work best with an SMT to be honest though, so that the faucet sites aren't full of "tweets" They aren't really designed for that.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
We don't need Authors. We need networkers and creators. :)
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Is Angela Lansbury still kicking? Murder Shteem Wrote anyone ?
Posted using Partiko Android
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Lol even if JK Rowling exclusively published her next Harry Potter book or EL James published 50 shades on steemit it wouldn’t do tits to move the needle! We’re a well kept secret for a reason! Poor marketing and poor user experience! I am hoping the steem alliance will make this the first point of order
Posted using Partiko iOS
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
I’ve expressed similar sentiments since i arrived. Well kept secret is a very very kind way to put it. All this talk of tens of thousands of daily users yet I feel like an elite steemian if I earn a dollar, and for good reason. That’s quite a minority, even rarer a wild homesteader
that organically became a minnow in just a few months. That’s seriously one in a million, and his model cannot be followed as it’s a niche market. However this does show potential to develop communities. We shall see where the alliance takes the torch...
Posted using Partiko iOS
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
what's with that inage anyway, I don't get it. They're not 50 I think. haha
Posted using Partiko Android
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
It is becoming boring this subject of 50%/50%...
Posted using Partiko Android
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
That last paragraph says it all, really. I'm not bothered which decision they make. Like you say, make it and get on with things that will make Steem more attractive and useable. If we're going to start using crypto as a currency, then everyone needs to be able to access and use it. The huge pass keys are daunting for most people. Even banks don't make things that difficult, or how would they get everybody using them? Loose your key here and you can't access your money. How many are going to take that risk? Is it any wonder only 2500 people in the entire world hold over 5000 steem so far?
And I agree with Galen; that picture with the title is so disturbing!
Posted using Partiko Android
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
I think the author should be rewarded higher than a curator. This is just common sense for me. I don't think 50/50 is a good idea. I agree with the part that we have to attract way more users. In the end it doesn't matter that much if we don't have curators and authors.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
That image is somewhat disturbing.
Posted using Partiko Android
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
lol, it was meant to be! :)
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Freaked me out...Please don't repeat. That image and the words, circle jerk... Unpleasant mental image. 😳🤢🤮
Posted using Partiko Android
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
haha.... Perfect, that means it worked!
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
You're evil...🤣
Posted using Partiko Android
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
All it takes is that one good dapp on Steem, I’m patiently waiting 😬
Posted using Partiko iOS
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
I think we need a circle jerk meter. The more circle jerking you do the higher your score.
Posted using Partiko Android
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Here's how I voted on that poll:
Voted for
While I do think that curation rewards should be increased somewhat, I still hold the conviction that an author holds the right to reap the greatest reward from a post as it is their content they created and own. 75/25 is, however, maybe a bit much for the author. I might suggest 60/40 or 55/45. Or like @demotruk just asked about, maybe introduce a slider to allow authors to decide how large the curation reward should be. Because I firmly believe in the right to choose, I support this option the most!
I'm curious to know what you think of this slider for choosing curation rewards on individual posts? How does the idea sound to you? To me, it would be the best of both worlds as authors could choose their curation rewards and curators could check what their reward will be before voting a post (if that's seriously what they value most...). Although I'm sure there's a few salty individuals out there who would ensure this idea is viewed as making "no one happy" cause they didn't get their way...
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Great Article,
I upvote all your quality Articles, but I don't understand.
50/50 means what for me?
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
I'm for a sliding scale based on SP. So when you have less than 100 SP, you receive almost all your author rewards, but once you're an Orca you're at 50/50, but yes you're right. This is not what we should be focused on right now. How about we make something people want to use first.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
It seems like we have had the 50/50 debate many times. I have been in favour of it each time. Overall, opinion is quite divided. This can be expected because it is difficult to know what will happen. Just changing curation rewards probably won't make much difference. I think a package of changes are required for higher curation rewards to be more effective.
Posted using Partiko Android
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
I don't think it should be 50/50 as it is a lot harder to create content than it is to click a button...
Cg
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
I read every post, that I vote on. So do some others.
the ones who don't have autovoting turned on anyway.
None of it is going to matter. We need new people not to make these guys happy with how they hand themselves back the rewards.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Tell me, what is riskier?
OR
Nobody is arguing that the simple action of pushing a button requires less work than writing an article. Obviously, people usually read an article as well, before upvoting it, but the curation rewards aren't really about the voting action; they're a representation of the staked Steem (STEEMPOWER) of the voter.
I'm pretty sure, you'd think differently if you'd have more stake in this system, and would power up your rewards, instead of sending them to exchanges.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
I don't really see it as a question of risk, however that is an interesting point of view and one I'll contemplate...
Nope I didn't think any differently when that was the case, in fact I was one of, if not the first people to champion rewarding comments.
Cg
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
OK, I've thought about it @therealwolf, I don't think you can look at it from a risk perspective because risk is relative.
So for instance you might have a net worth of a couple of hundred thousand dollars, so for you to lock up say $30,000 into Steemit for 13 weeks is not as risky as somebody whose networth is $10,000 and is locking up $2,000.
However effort is not relative here, if I take a couple of days to prepare and publish an article, or even if I take one hour to do so, that effort stays the same no matter how much or little time I have. Whereas a button click, or a couple of hours setting up an autovoter, will always take less effort than the articles it's voting for.
So yes, I still think that way, I thought that way when I had over $200,000 of Steem, and I think that way now when I have less than $1000 worth.
Cg
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Well I agree we need marketing to get more eyeballs. More people would probably attract more investment because of eyeball count.
Posted using Partiko Android
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Exactly
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
I want %0 curation reward and %100 author reward.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Good luck with that.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
🙂🙃😊 did you mean something ironic?
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Clickbait, I thought this post was going to be about soggy saos
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
I don't think this will solve all of the problems this platform has but giving a larger stake to curators is a small step in the right direction. Let's face it those making the most off this platform are in the buddy system of the upper echelon, those who have managed to create enough sock puppets to upvote their content....therefore they don't need curators or a audience to converse with..along with the fact most also don't want your opinion if it don't align with theirs. Then there are the authors who publish their own articles for gain and don't engage what so ever with anyone who does take notice and comments on their stuff. Don't get me wrong I agree more than disagree with this authors stuff but Dan Dicks would be a prime example of a author who I have never ever seen respond to anyone, he is purely a selfish taker, if he wants to play that way then it would be a good idea to up the rewards for those who spend time listening to his stuff. Caitlin Johnstone is another one though it's rare she will on occasion reply back.
In all reality though what the biggest issue facing this as a platform is that it takes curators to get four upvotes to make a penny...a penny, think about that...most people think...a lousy penny, now if they have a view that a penny is lousy just think of what they think about getting rewarded one quarter of a penny. So let's say that when people who think about joining can move past all the flagging censorship issues and talk of being a pyramid they literally (as I did, laughed and joked about for weeks) fall out of their chairs laughing at the prospects of earning one quarter of a penny for the time they spent reading then engaging, maybe even researching a post and commenting. Then...wait for it, wait, wait...if that quarter of a penny doesn't meet up with 7 more additional votes it turns to dust. So if you are not graced by the good graces of someone with a high enough power to grant you your two cents worth you have to take and invest in something like dustsweepers to come along and save the worthless upvote(s).
I could many good articles but my take is that I am not putting forth that kind of effort for a minuscule to no reward. I'd rather wait until I can earn something of meaning for my effort, it don't have to be a lot but it has to be a whole lot more than dust, penny, nickle or a dime. Why give away my best stuff for nothing, sure you can claim that stuff will eventually get me to my goal but if you abide by the rules of the platform that will takes years upon years given that I have no power to attract or compete with those capable of giving better rewards for participation so it's no wonder people choose a path to cheat their way up, which incidentally I will probably have to choose to do after I somehow manage to get a slide bar whereas I can upvote my stuff then bid it out like everyone else.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
🌹 🌹
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Um...a 50/50 circle jerk? Cuz it sucks being the person with only 25% of a jerk. How are you supposed to get off on that?
In truth, it's only part of the problem. The value of a post doesn't do much to help people find it, because trending sucks. Steem's current implementation just doesn't work. We have to come up with more ways to find "good" posts that people find value in, to ensure they get rewarded.
Sure, we shouldn't have a bunch of shit here that really only has value according to some unnamed metric...but it still would be pretty cool if we rewarded people for making awesome art and posting about cool experiences. Right now it's just broken, and has been for pretty much as long as I've been here. Curie did give some nice rewards for a time though.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Hi, @whatsup!
You just got a 0.32% upvote from SteemPlus!
To get higher upvotes, earn more SteemPlus Points (SPP). On your Steemit wallet, check your SPP balance and click on "How to earn SPP?" to find out all the ways to earn.
If you're not using SteemPlus yet, please check our last posts in here to see the many ways in which SteemPlus can improve your Steem experience on Steemit and Busy.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
This post has been included in the latest edition of The Steem News in 10 posts - a compilation of the key news stories on the Steem blockchain.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Congratulations @whatsup!
Your post was mentioned in the Steem Hit Parade in the following category:
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit