Vlog 407: Steemit inc? what do you want to be?

kus-knee (74) · 6 years ago

I'm surprised to see so few comments here on this important issue.

Businesses have spent several years building based on the current reward model. Investors have invested based on the current reward model. Will they be ticked off if the "rules of the game" are now changed? I'd be!

I got the sense that they want to "punish" self upvotes but not all self upvotes are created equal.

I've spent $23,000 buying Steem and I can't give my posts an upvote worth $1.50 or so?

Most of my posts are about the contests that I run and I have given away 1,000's of Steem in prizes. I do this and I'm not allowed to upvote my own post?

I donate Steem to the accounts of plankton fighting to become red fish in order to empower them, build up there confidence and encourage them to stay active and I'm not allowed to upvote my own post?

I hope that your vlog reaches many eyes and ears and that we can have good dialogue on the merits and dangers of changing the reward system.

$0.46

8 votes

jaki01 (74) · 6 years ago (edited)

Businesses have spent several years building based on the current reward model.

The question is if businesses were built because or in spite of the current reward model. :)

I got the sense that they want to "punish" self upvotes but not all self upvotes are created equal.

A convergent linear rewards curve would still allow everybody to upvote himself - it just would be a little bit less beneficial.
I also upvote myself and good friends, but at the same time I would see an incentive for everybody to spread his upvotes on as many different accounts as possible as step into the right direction. Too many new user earn nearly nothing, even if they deliver very good content, while many more established ones mutually upvote themselves and get the biggest part of the cake (apart from the bid bots which I consider as harmful, too). You may reply that the ones who have invested money also deserve the biggest rewards ... However, I would happily prefer to get a smaller part of the cake if then at the same time the cake was getting bigger (the STEEM value higher) again, instead of smaller and smaller ...
And that's the crux in my opinion: the more satisfied users are on STEEM the worthier it is for potential big investors to use STEEM (and not any other platform) for advertisement purposes, to offer their products or utilize it as communication channel, which longterm would make the STEEM price raise again.
Apart from that we should not forget that the high value of Facebook is due to the huge amount of its users. The value of a (social) network is measured among others by the number of its users. I would be more than happy about a somewhat weaker self-upvote if at the same time my STEEM would have a higher value again.

It's completely OK, if you disagree with the above, but I felt I had to contribute my opinion here. In case you like to read more about my ideas to improve STEEM, you may read my last article.

$0.15

ikar59 (54) · 6 years ago

Wow, they want to forbid that? I always thought that when I had enough steem power for my vote to be worth something, I could at least give myself some votes, after all I should be able to do what I want with the SP in which I have invested

$0.00

jaki01 (74) · 6 years ago

No, they don't want to forbid that.

$0.15

joshman (70) · 6 years ago

I keep going back and forth about changing the reward 'economics'. I'm coming to the realization, that as long as you change it from one fixed model to another, the gamers will adjust to exploit it. I'm not an economist, but I think if you made the ratio a variable chosen by either the author or curator, you make it more difficult to game the system. I lean more towards a slider for the author, since they technically 'own' the content. Curators could then decide whether or not they want to engage with that author depending on what reward balance is being offered. Stats could be gathered, and authors can be categorized based upon curator friendly or not. Tools can then be built to readily identify them. I think there should be a slider from 0-100. This would cover 2 edge cases. The case of an author wanting to give 100% of rewards back to curators to reward them, and an author capturing 100% of the rewards (think a charity or steem developer account).

$0.05

4 votes

exyle (79) · 6 years ago

I read somewhere that when a slider is introduced all/most votes will ultimately go to the authors that have a slider at 100%. I do think that can happen.

$0.00

joshman (70) · 6 years ago

You would have to make it very visible so authors must succumb to social pressure. If you for instance consistently set your rewards to 100(without justification), I would just stop following you(no offense ;-)). The same way I unfollow people who use promotion bots now.

$0.00

tubecollector (34) · 6 years ago

Can't the slider be limited to let's say 75-0%?

$0.00

j85063 (67) · 6 years ago

The slider idea sounds interesting.

Posted using Partiko Android

$0.00

masterthematrix (60) · 6 years ago

I totally agree with your view @exyle. We have the same vision in mind...this is my take on the situation.

I would like to see, that the Coin "Steem" and its "Reward Pool" will be designed more towards an infrastructure Coin instead of using it primary for POB content discovery. The reason for that is, that with the introduction of communities and SMT the Steem Ecosystem is not only more about "Content creation" and discovery.
No, we have a bunch of financial dapps, gaming dapps, services etc... which don't have anything to do with content discovery. All those Dapps should have more or less "equal" chances to receive Support from the underlying Steem Reward Pool mechanism to earn and empower their communities.
I think Steem is good with Steempower for Voting on Witnesses and Proposals (plus a new feature in the future Voting for Communities and Dapps) and as a source of Ressource Credits. For me that should be enough, on the level what Steem is doing to support its Ecosystem and for the use of the POB mechanism...only vote for Witnesses, Proposals and SMT or Communities.
No, more voting and abusing the reward pool by creating and discovering or gaming the content creation part.
All this POB content creation and discovery mechanism should be happening on the level of SMTs, and its communities, because these groups will have Admins who are able to set in rules how each community handles its users and the way they value content creation.
If Steem gets understood as a infrastructure Token and SMTs are understood as a empowering Community Token, than we have a clear Vision for all participants Investors, Users and Creators alike.
I don't like the idea that we are aiming for a SMT Ecosystem where all these project fight for attention but the real mining of Steem only happens on the content side of things...somehow that doesn't make sense.
Why should other Dapps or Communities suffer from miss management of the Steem Reward Pool which is only used for content creation and discovery?

chesatochi (72) · 6 years ago

I don't think this will be accepted and Steemit needs to focus on the right things and bring SMT alive instead to create FUD to change the economic model.

bozz (70) · 6 years ago

I agree, I think they need to take care of one thing at a time and just get SMT's out of the way first. Steemhunt vs. Musing is a perfect example of how and why SMT's are important and can make the difference between being successful and not. Then in the future if they want to look at the reward scheme with much more input than just a proposal from one Steemian, so be it.

ezzy (77) · 6 years ago (edited)

There is nothing wrong with the system of economics we have in place right now. It would be sheer madness to change it at this point when businesses are getting more interested in this blockchain. However, I do believe plain old common sense will prevail and we will stay as we are.

joetunex (67) · 6 years ago

Cool stuff @exyle thanks for your insight, every minute of the vlog does make sense the way you broke it down.

It all boils down to where Steemit inc's interest lies. Is it for their sole benefit or for the community at large?

We have a gift of a blockchain (STEEM) chain here let's not kill.
It will be of great benefit to leave those censorship agendas out of the STEEM Blockchain.

Posted using Partiko Android

marki99 (54) · 6 years ago

I think what they have is enployees who can work on different things. Not everyone is capable of making SMTs, they probably leave that to Vanderberg and one or two other devs to do once they are done with MIRA.

The rest will take care of steemit.com. It’s not only important because it generates revenue, but because it’s the flagship of the blockchain.

We have hundreds of Dapps on steem, but for outside investors (retail), they link steem and steemit.com together. They like the website, they buy the coin. They don’t like it they don’t. Same for swing traders, and maybe some big investors who look at steem as an altcoin to diversify into and potentially make crazy gains (without too much research).

Steemit.com needs to be the “hype” of steem. It’s our marketing. We don’t have a Justin Sun that can bring investors with litterally nothing, so we need a strong flagship. It has to push up the price of steem, and with a high coin price there is no limit to what steemit, inc can do.

They have 25% of the supply, this is huge. At 5$ their holdings were worth about 400 million usd

Posted using Partiko iOS

ketcom (72) · 6 years ago

I am trying really hard not to be confused. Lol. I really wish there was a forum where the management of steemit inc with the witnesses could seat back and really have a talk before making a post. I say this because I believe both parties should be working to make the blockchain a great one. I don't understand how things are mentioned but seem to never be done. I believe we should be working on agreed targets so that collectively we can make this place great.

newageinv (70) · 6 years ago

I agree that the change does not make sense nor will it be implemented but if changes were to be done, it may very well be a good time to them now given the engagement levels.

Posted using Partiko iOS

sannihorlas (51) · 6 years ago

Hi @exyle for this informative post! But my concerns is that hope it will affect steem price or value positively?

$0.00

mexbit (60) · 6 years ago

100% this!!!! First they should bring SMTs out and then use their own SMT with this hybrid model. They should not screw around with Steem.

Finish SMTs!!!!

$0.00

dreamryder007 (67) · 6 years ago

Steemit Inc. = Clown Show

$0.00

videoaddiction (57) · 6 years ago

I hope Steemit will remain as current.

Posted using Partiko Android

$0.00

blazing (70) · 6 years ago

they are out of surviving mode hopefully they don't do much adventurous stuff

$0.00

paras00 (26) · 6 years ago

Thanks for help

$0.00

ikar59 (54) · 6 years ago

Basically, what's the difference between linear and non-linear rewards??? And what are they proposing to do now with that?

$0.00

holybranches (60) · 6 years ago

Read @vandeberg's post. Don't listen to anybody.

$0.00

partiko (66) · 6 years ago

Thank you so much for participating in the Partiko Delegation Plan Round 1! We really appreciate your support! As part of the delegation benefits, we just gave you a 3.00% upvote! Together, let’s change the world!

$0.00

diogosantos (62) · 6 years ago

I agree with your "theory", until now, they had their focus on development, but now that we are out of Beta, it would make sense to focus on the community and changing the reward system to make quality being rewarded is something really good to consider.

$0.00

mihirbarot (57) · 6 years ago

To survive in market profit is must thing, business have to do and it will help them for the future project. 👍☺️

Posted using Partiko Android

$0.00

yahoosucks (25) · 6 years ago

Nice Video

$0.00

yahoosucks (25) · 6 years ago

Nice Video

$0.00

yaan (59) · 6 years ago

The light from the camera gives your eyelids a pink shade, looking fabulous. Just like a real queen lol.
Oh, you're talking about serious stuff, sorry, don't mind me.

$0.00

steeming-ali (54) · 6 years ago

if they do change this reward model will it have an affect on steem value cuz it sounds so

$0.00

direwolf (65) · 6 years ago

Agreed. I hope Steemit Inc. takes note of this.

$0.00