I propose that the Rewards on Steemit.com move to 75/25 model ....
Curators / Investors receive 75%
Creators receive 25%
I am an Artist turned into an Investor / Curator.
I realize now that Artists will Starve to death unless they find a very wealthy Investor/Patron to back their work.
My goal is to become a Billionaire so that I can support starving artists like I once was.
Steem Curation Rewards makes this possible.
Originally I thought that the 50/50 split was good between Creators and Curators here on Steemit but the more I think about it and the more I read the many arguments for and against it I am now convinced that a 75/25 split is the best idea...
75% for Curators/ Investors.... and 25% for Creators.
We need to encourage Investment and good Curation here on Steemit.
If we get more Investors and Curators it will drive up the price of Steem .... as soon as the price of Steem goes way up you will get many more Investors, and when Curators realize they earn more from Curation you will get more Investors /Curators, .... as the price goes up and the Curation rewards grow you will also attract many more new Artists and Creators to the Platform...
I think this is a very good idea and the Best way forward here on Steemit !
As a Creator who has realized that Investment and Curation is more important. Without investors and Curators a Creator earns nothing... except maybe they have a basement full of paintings.
Special thanks to my Patrons... @steemcurator01 @steemcurator02 @steemcurator03 @steemcurator04 @the-gorilla
So the creator of the post get less than the voters ?
Nay sayeth I.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Artists earn nothing without patrons... 25% of something is better than 100% of nothing.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
I saw Dobartim suggest something similar once but he separated out investors and curators into something like 40/30/30. It's an interesting concept where there's a difference between curators who are more involved in the "artists" or posts that they support compared to investors who just want a return on their investment (more like upvoting services in the case of investors).
This would obviously appear bad from an artist point of view but 25% of $100 is much better than 50% of $1.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Exactly .... as an artist I would be much happier to earn 25% of $1,000 rather than 100% or 50% of zero. Most artists on Steemit earn nothing at all.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Investors should also be Curators. Curation is the key to success here on Steemit. It is a big job.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
If we didn’t have Autovotes and investors took a more active role in Curation or maybe at least delegation to manual curators The price of Steem would go to $100
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
I agree with all 3 points. The issue is that investors don't want the effort of curating. In fact, curators don't want the effort of curating. And it's a problem steemit has - another user that I speak to calls it a "sickness". Many users reach a certain point and delegate their power to an upvoting service. Which benefits themselves and the upvoting service. The ecosystem depends upon the wealth being distributed across the entire system to create more "whales" which then feed the smaller fish. I see very little of this happening and many smaller fish withdraw their money as soon as they earn it.
To make matters worse, when I joined, I found it incredibly difficult to find content that I wanted to read. I still find it hard to find content that I want to read. It's hard not to be critical but I love football and most of the football posts are utter dog shit. If somebody writes a decent post on a subject, there are 10 dog shit posts that follow with people wanting a piece of the pie. This exacerbates the problem with curation. If so much content's shit, then it takes even longer to find something worthy of an upvote. I'm just on a rant now.
Contests and Diary Games are not the making of a platform that will attract and retain users but appears to be the current strategy. I'd say that 90%+ of people on steem just want to make a quick buck. On the positive side, there is plenty of support for people who reinvest and retain their steem.
Rant over.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Well... with as little as 12,000 SteemPower I make almost $ 500 / month now posting and curating .... I try to curate manually but I have autovote set up to vote while I’m away from my computer ...
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
I try to do the same. I have a handful of people I like to support who are generally people who have read my content and given me their precious time and they get my "auto-upvotes". I still try to read their content though, even if it is their latest fight 😉
How's the maple syrup coming along?
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Maple Syrup is long gone. We only made a little. Got too warm too fast.
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