50-50 is not enough. absolutely no go.

juanmolina (68) · 6 years ago

Regards, appreciated @gandhibaba, @crypto.piotr.

Initially we should reflect and ask ourselves: why am I in Steemit?
We will find ambiguous points of view.

If we are content creators, our goal is to promote our work and at the same time obtain economic benefits. But we also have investors who only seek to increase their profits.
The issue is, that in both cases we would be part of the balance.

We need the investors. Investors need content creators.

A 50/50 reward distribution assumes a balance in profits.
We can not ignore that the creators also vote, then somehow they would also receive benefit for this action.

Unquestionably the platform must evolve. If we are here, we must trust the administrators. The only way to introduce significant changes is through HF. Hopefully all the changes (resulting from deep analysis) bring benefits for all.

Greetings. Juan.

$0.56

11 votes

redpossum (48) · 6 years ago

You said, "Initially we should reflect and ask ourselves: why am I in Steemit?
We will find ambiguous points of view.
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/ambiguous
Most of us are quite unequivocal about what we want from Steemit; many of us are downright opinionated. Personally, I want an audience which will pay some attention to my writing, and I want to get paid for my efforts. See? There's nothing ambiguous about that at all.

You said, "A 50/50 reward distribution assumes a balance in profits."
Balance? You know what I get for an average blog entry?
$0.02
That's not what I call very damn balanced.

You said, "If we are here, we must trust the administrators."
Let me just ask you to please share with us the chain of logical reasoning which led you to this conclusion, because it is by no means apparent to me. Why in the name of all that's holy would you think that we "must" trust them?

But worst of all is the way you keep talking about "investors" when what you mean are whales. This ignores the fact that I too have invested in Steemit, not just money but over a year of my time and much unrewarded effort, as have hundreds of other minnows and redfish!

$0.27

8 votes

kharma.scribbles (57) · 5 years ago

Well, I see that you've left sadly.

You were here longer than me even when you were active though..

I just want to say it is NOT the fault of any hardfork or anything to do with Steemit about your author rewards being so low.

I've made 35 posts in about 4 months of being active.
Without bots, I average about $1.00 per post. Some of my posts have made a heck of a lot more, some made less..

But everyday I grow! and hey, I'm newb to blogging, and I'm pretty fucking boring if you ask me, there is nothing special about me and I'm not any better than you...

But there must be something I am better at which explains why I get some more rewards, and if I'd have to guess I'd say it's networking.

Networking is a lot of work, sometimes it takes more work than creating a new post, but the payoff is pretty even - the work you put in to networking is manifested almost 1:1 with account growth and rewards..

$0.00

gandhibaba (72) · 6 years ago

Thanks @juanmolina. Your excellent contributions to this discourse summarizes the controversies here and strikes a balance. I agree with your witty, vital points. Thanks.

$0.14

lanzjoseg (74) · 6 years ago (edited)

Friends @gandhibaba, @crypto.piotr, @juanmolina

For many of us who are doing interaction inside and probably outside the platform, we are here because we like to do what we do, it is a way to release our own experiences and additionally we do what we like and that is why we receive something monetary.

Many times the changes are not favorable in the short term, everything will depend on the behavior and how they accept the changes

But I'm sure of something, I like to do interaction in steemit and I know I'm going to be inside because I feel that if it's worth it to be inside steemit, and I always know everyone about our platform about all my students.

Steemit is here to stay and it will be up to everyone to accept the changes.

I send you a big hug from Venezuela.

$0.09

crypto.piotr (70) · 6 years ago

Dear @lanzjoseg

Many times the changes are not favorable in the short term, everything will depend on the behavior and how they accept the changes

very true. However I believe that this change is great in short term, but looking long term it's a complete disaster.

Just watch all new STEEM being redistributed in a way, that would benefit wealthy ones and pretty much ignore everyone else. Slowly and steadily most available STEEM will end up completely in hands of very few. Is that healthy? I hardly doubt so.

This system can only work if so called Whales would actually start delegating their Steem Power to quality curators. That would indeed allow those curators to be rewarded for their work and benefit entire platoform.

I'm simply afraid, that this will not happen. That at the end most whales will continue auto-upvoting publications of very few people, with their powerful votes and without putting any effort they will start earning x2 more than they did so far.

It surely would encourage them to slow down with powering down, which in effect would most likely bring up the price of STEEM. But that is the only positive outcome. And what would happen year from now, when those "whales" would start dumping this easily earned STEEM?

Yours
Piotr

$0.00

majes.tytyty (78) · 6 years ago

I fully agree with your conclusion, that we have to allow the platform to evolve. And let's hope that the developers work to improve the platform. I believe they realize that their future success relies on the platform's future success, and that they are not about to shoot themselves in the foot. Cheers!

gandhibaba (72) · 6 years ago

I also agree with @juanmolina's contributions. They are well received.

And let's hope that the developers work to improve the platform. I believe they realize that their future success relies on the platform's future success, and that they are not about to shoot themselves in the foot. Cheers!

That is my hope also. Cheers!

$0.14

crypto.piotr (70) · 6 years ago

I fully agree with your conclusion, that we have to allow the platform to evolve

Thanks for sharing your view @majes.tytyty

that they are not about to shoot themselves in the foot.

Let's pray for that.

Yours,
Piotr

$0.00

qwerrie (72) · 6 years ago

@majes.tytyty -> take a hammer, a nail, and break a small hole in the wall of the steemit. water pressure will do the rest of the 'evolving' work.

bwa haha

$0.00

crypto.piotr (70) · 6 years ago

Dear @juanmolina

Thank you for this amazing comment and your time. I'm guessing that you support HF21 changes and we're seeing them differently.

A 50/50 reward distribution assumes a balance in profits.

Personally I'm not sure if I agree that 50/50 is balanced split of reward. It does surely sound fair.

However I cannot think of many businesses out there, where 50% of company profit ends up as a divident distributed to investors.

Unquestionably the platform must evolve. If we are here, we must trust the administrators.

Question is: will this platform evolve only because it will reward current investors/stakeholders with double paychecks? Just wait until all those stakeholders will grow (and they will grow much faster now). We will witness centralization of power and New STEEM will be handed over mostly to those very few.

A 50/50 reward distribution assumes a balance in profits.

So again: 50% rewards for bringing value to blocklchain (creating content, commenting etc.) and 50% for just holding coin? It actually sounds like a recipe for upcoming disaster.

Yours
Piotr

$0.00

qwerrie (72) · 6 years ago (edited)

@juanmolina,

50-50 is not enough. absolutely no go.

"The poor stay poor, the rich get rich. That's how it goes. Everybody knows...' (c) Cohen

$0.00

crypto.piotr (70) · 6 years ago

Hard not to agree with your comment @qwerrie

$0.00

qwerrie (72) · 6 years ago

but the decision-makers do not agree, @crypto.piotr.

all discussions show that people dont vote for it,
all predict harsh consequences and further ship-sinking
everybody knows - that s the way it goes.

enforcer48 (68) · 6 years ago

Here are some facts:

No one knows how it will affect behavior. Whether there would be more or less shitposts from large stakeholders and their friends is unknown.
Bots can easily adjust costs to stay profitable. There is zero reason to believe they can't adjust how much they charge and the vote they dish out.
Several whales have made it clear (or insinuated) that they will utilize the subsidized downvotes. Even some bid bot owners will also drop flags when that becomes a reality.
How beneficiary rewards, siphoned from the dapps, will affect its users' sentiments to continue to stay using them is also unknown.
Auto-voting is nothing new. Plenty of people are on curation trails and already milk them excessively by posting multiple nonsense a day.
Whoever saying you are wrong is also making conjectures. There are so many factors at play.

Here are my opinions:

All the extra stuff about how people behave is moot. Many people, across different communities, have different beliefs of what is the best for Steem.

You have folks who believe bid bots are the true incentives for people buying Steem while many feel they are destroying it. I won't get into the details of those fallacies. Economics is definitely not most people's strong suite around here. I would read everything with a grain of salt.

Curation rewards take time to liquidate. Expect services that will provide liquidity. In fact, they already exist. One that already exists is @likwid.

The fundamental issue with Steem is that one can easily do well by playing solitaire. It can be with your own stake or through bots. There are plenty of people whose posts have only bot comments on them, but what do they care? They continue to create for nobody and vote for nobody but themselves.

I would bet anything that most people have no idea some of the tactics used by people to reach ROI around here. One great example is someone continually babbling about the 15-min wait. Nobody waits for that. More and more people vote around 8-10 minute mark to accrue some potential losses in exchange of actually earning curation.

$0.45

12 votes

majes.tytyty (78) · 6 years ago

Thanks for the input and your clarification re the various points above. While I find much of this entire HF discussion far above my head, it's good to read well-reasoned comments such as yours.

$0.12

enforcer48 (68) · 6 years ago

Thanks for the compliment.

We won't know until we get there. I think we can all agree on that the status quo isn't working.

5 votes

devann (61) · 6 years ago

Whilst I was cracking my head wondering how to comment given the so many unknowns, I came across your well reasoned comment. This is probably the most sensible comment.

The investors and the authors+curators group are in a symbiotic relationship feeding each other here. If one of them benefit excessively at the expense of the other, that will be the beginning of the end of the steem blockchain.

However, I think the investors have more to lose than the other group should steem flounder.

happyme (68) · 6 years ago

Let's get one thing straight: Everyone (I repeat) EVERYONE who contributes here is an investor of some sort.

Do you see up-votes on your posts by any whales on a regular basis? I can't say that I do any more. So what does that mean?

It means that I don't rely on whale votes. I'm here and earning my little bit from the little fish like myself. Does it make any difference at all if all the whales leave? I really don't know! I expect the price of Steem to drop as they pull out, but eventually it will return to something stable from the value of all the OTHER investors besides the whales. Those doing statistics have already shown that the middle class is growing and whales are becoming less relevant as far as SP goes.

Will a 50/50 split hurt me? I don't know that either. I cast votes and I receive votes, so one may balance out the other.

Do I think changing to a 50/50 split will solve Steem's problems? Not at all. The goal-posts will have been moved, but the rules of the game are still pretty much the same and those who game the system will continue to do so; they will just find new ways to do it. What it will do is to disrupt all the calculations of programs like SBI and other less-known programs. MANY people have invested into these programs (note the word, 'invested') and could end up being badly hurt by the change. HOW MANY PEOPLE need to be badly hurt before they stop messing with the rewards system? What will the whales do if everyone else pulls out because they keep getting hurt here? Do you think Steem will survive with just whales attempting to outwit each other to grab the biggest piece of the pie?

$0.07

qwerrie (72) · 6 years ago

+100. man. your deduction is so clear. @happyme

$0.00

happyme (68) · 6 years ago

Thanks.
As far as I can tell, Steem NEEDS the small investors as much as it needs the big ones; perhaps even more. Can you imagine what Steem would be like with just a dozen people making content?

crypto.piotr (70) · 6 years ago

Let's get one thing straight: Everyone (I repeat) EVERYONE who contributes here is an investor of some sort.

Love that comment. Very well said @happyme

$0.00

edmundocentenor (64) · 6 years ago

I completely agree with @happyme, in any community it is necessary the participation of all, large, medium and small, but we must think about helping the youngest ones grow, if they grow, we all grow and we have the satisfaction of contributing and build a better future for everyone.

$0.00

enforcer48 (68) · 6 years ago

Problem is, many people don’t have an investor’s mindset. They have the speculator’s. Hence why everyone feels “stacking coins” is the most important and profitable thing to do at all times.

$0.00

crypto.piotr (70) · 6 years ago

Dear @enforcer48

What an amazing comment. One of the best I've read so far.

Thanks for sharing your opinion on that particular issue.

ps. thx for introducing me to @likwid

Yours,
Piotr

gandhibaba (72) · 6 years ago

You've made some fine contributions here, friend. Your points are well received. Thanks for stopping by.

$0.00

majes.tytyty (78) · 6 years ago (edited)

As a rather hard-working content creator, I see your point. Or course, I'd love to maintain my current level of rewards.

However, I believe the long-term growth and stability of the platform is of utmost importance. I don't really care about short-term profits. I'd rather have a situation in which my income drops 50%, but the price of Steem rises 100%, or 500% – or 2000%, to its previous high.

As for the abuse of the system, I agree it's a concern, but I believe it might be a minor concern. In any system / organization, there is plenty abuse and inefficiency and incompetence and worse.

In many cases, the system survives. It may not be working at 100% efficiency, but it plods onwards, and sometimes keeps doing quite well.

As @enforcer48 said, there are many factors in play. I'll just continue doing what I do, and hoping that it continues to add value to the platform. And I hope that the developers and witnesses do what they have to do on their end to also add value.

$0.35

6 votes

crypto.piotr (70) · 6 years ago

Dear @majes.tytyty

Thank you for accepting my invitation.

I realized just now that I never actually thanked you for your amazing comment. I appreciate your time :)

Have a great monday.
Piotr

gandhibaba (72) · 6 years ago

First and foremost, thanks for your comments and for promoting this work to your audience and even placing a bounty on it. You're marvellous!

Now to your comments:

My impression is that Steemit is turning into ponzi scheme. Investors will be rewarded for doing really nothing, but pretty much for holding their STEEM (and auto-upvoting any kind of content).

I fear that this may not necessarily be the case. A ponzi scheme is a scheme where earlier investors are paid with the money of the later investors. As long as people still earn money on Steemit without having to invest in Steem, Steemit isn't a ponzi.

One more point, I don't think investors are rewarded wrongly because they chose to hold their SP. Have you noticed the crashing price of Steem lately? The main reason behind the price action is that many people here are dumping their Steem on the exchanges. If investors are incentivized to hold SP, I think it is worthwhile because the price of Steem depends on their actions.

Now one more question that is on my head: would HF21 help or destroy bidbots? Most likely demand for their services will still be there and at the same time bidbots will be growing twice as fast as they do right now (after all curation rewards will be doubled).

You're right that bid bot owners will earn more with a 50/50 curation reward. However, you seem to ignore the fact that a 50/50 model will leave the bid bot user in great negative ROI. Therefore, only a cretin will use bid bots after hf21 because such actions will only fetch nothing but losses.

Thanks for your contributions. You made some key points.

$0.31

crypto.piotr (70) · 6 years ago

Dear @gandhibaba

Of course I'm marvellous :) Somehow everyone sees it except of my own wife hehehe :)

for promoting this work to your audience

I hope you will manage to reply to some of those valuable comments.

A ponzi scheme is a scheme where earlier investors are paid with the money of the later investors.

Ehm, I think this definition is a bit outdated. Masternodes are mostly ponzi and they "in theory" do not fit your description.

If investors are incentivized to hold SP, I think it is worthwhile because the price of Steem depends on their actions.

That's correct and I do agree with you fully. Investors will have reasons to hold SP and probably powering down will slow down a lot right now.

But those who actually bring value and create content + engage with comments will suffer. Eventually we will end up with huge speculative bubble, with very few authors, bidbots bigger than ever before and with hardly any traffic. Not to mention that if price of STEEM will grow then this place will turn into ghost town (new users will not be willing to spend 100-200usd just to power up to 50SP -> min necessary amount to be able to "test" Steemit without hiting Resource Credit limitations right away).

However, you seem to ignore the fact that a 50/50 model will leave the bid bot user in great negative ROI

I ignore this fact because it will be VERY EASY for bidbot owners to adjust. Little math, few small changes and bidbots will be running again. This change will only force those programmers behind bidbots to implement some updates.

I really wish to have your optimism. I believe that short term this change will indeed bring up the price of STEEM, but in long run I see it as a huge opportunity for abuse. Those who are rich will easily get richer (bringing no value to STEEM blockchain) and content creators will struggle more than ever before.

Yours
Piotr

$0.14

jacobtothe (70) · 6 years ago

Any new changes MUST give us content creators and manual curators something worthwhile. I'm just not seeing taht in the HF21 proposals. Finding a way to curb bid bot abuse is far more important in the long-term than is tweaking the reward calculations. As for the numbers game, switching to 50/50 is a HUGE change, and if any changes are to be made, it should be a gentler adjustment to see how it all pans out there first. I have seen others propose something like 67% author, 33% curator to test the waters.

The last HUGE changes from a creator viewpoint were the change from 1day/30day payouts to a single 7d payout, and tweaks to the reward curve. The former gave content creators a better single window for getting eyes on their content. The latter seems to have cut down on votebots. These were overall for the best, I think. How will HF21 help us fight the deluge of spam and bid-bots? That is what I need to know. The platform needs to be sound before STEEM can gain in value for the overall market. Until the platform is better policed, I don't foresee any hope beyond altcoin speculation as Bitcoin gets volatile again. Perhaps a separate downvote pool would help. Maybe spending extra RC instead of vote power for flagging bad content could do something, since I now rarely make any measurable dent in my RC reserves.

[/rant]

Oh, and thanks for sending a memo that wasn't another BS bid bot or resteem offer.

crypto.piotr (70) · 6 years ago

Thank you for this your comment @jacobtothe

I only just realized that I never thanked you. Have a great monday ahead :)

Oh, and thanks for sending a memo that wasn't another BS bid bot or resteem offer.

Absolutely :) My pleasure.

Yours
Piotr

$0.00

rufans (68) · 6 years ago

Not to mention that if price of STEEM will grow then this place will turn into ghost town (new users will not be willing to spend 100-200usd just to power up to 50SP -> min necessary amount to be able to "test" Steemit without hiting Resource Credit limitations right away).

Hard Fork 21 contradicting Hard Fork 20.

$0.00

honusurf (62) · 6 years ago (edited)

$0.00

Reveal Comment

iflagtrash (63) · 6 years ago

You're a waste of space. You've been flagged like the trash you are.

$0.07

8 votes

majes.tytyty (78) · 6 years ago

You wrote about "the crashing price of steem." But I'd hardly say that it's crashing.

For the most part, the price has moved along with all other cryptos this past year and a half. That implies that the issue is not with Steem, but with the overall crypto market.

As of last February, the Steem price was still in the $0.20s. Now it's up over 50%. While we would all love it to regain its momentum of late 2017, that probably wont happen, at least not for a while.

I agree that some of the price action might be due to people moving there Steem out of their wallets and to exchanges, but I don't agree that it's a major cause for concern.

Cheers!

jaki01 (74) · 6 years ago

For the most part, the price has moved along with all other cryptos this past year and a half. That implies that the issue is not with Steem, but with the overall crypto market.

A year ago, STEEM wasn't ranked 65th at CoinMarketCap ... Many other cryptos have performed way better, and you get much more STEEM for one BTC than some months ago.

$0.18

drakernoise (60) · 6 years ago

Hi @majes.tytyty,
I totally agrees with you and It’s my major concern about Steem, it’s so dependent of BTC price (and this would extend to the whole crypto coin world).
I think we need to find the way to detach Steem from that main stream, how?, I think the key lays on Content and how it’s accessible and used... dapps, SMT and communities may be the way.
It’s only my humble user side opinion as major technical aspects scape to my knowledge.

Cheers

$0.15

majes.tytyty (78) · 6 years ago

As Bitcoin and the other major cryptos rise (along with gold and silver), even the smaller cryptos such as Steem will tag along for the upward swing.

And to be clear, it's not just that cryptos will simply become more valuable. The price of all fiat currencies are far above their true values, so those rates will drop. Consequently, cryptos will gain in relative value.

It's just a matter of when.

drakernoise (60) · 6 years ago

...And that’s the “trap” for Steem. Whe need to gain “independence” and keep our “content” aside of it’s influence. Whe have this as our main weapon and our great advantage. We are full of real humans willing to share human things and feelings, something that greedy coins and assets can’t provide.
We should find a way to empower our values over this crazy economic model.

majes.tytyty (78) · 6 years ago

Yep. For my part, I'll just keep producing quality content, and supporting the community whenever I can and in whatever way I can.

Onwards!

gandhibaba (72) · 6 years ago

Another brilliant analysis. When the boss speaks, I listen.

$0.00

gandhibaba (72) · 6 years ago

Yes, Steem is not really crashing just as you have asserted. The overall bear market affected all cryptos but some suffered more than the rest. And Steem seems to have suffered far more than many promising cryptos out there. There was a time Steem ranked 3 now it's 65 or so. We need a radical approach because price is key for our survival in the long run. Thanks for sharing your views.

rufans (68) · 6 years ago

That implies that the issue is not with Steem, but with the overall crypto market.

I tell people that all the time!

jaki01 (74) · 6 years ago

A year ago, STEEM wasn't ranked 65th at CoinMarketCap ... Many other cryptos have performed way better, and you get much more STEEM for one BTC than some months ago.

majes.tytyty (78) · 6 years ago

Keep telling them!

$0.00

krischik (61) · 6 years ago

only a cretin will use bid bots

You would be surprised how many cretins are on the server.

jacobtothe (70) · 6 years ago

These cretins like their spam and plagiarism, too. No wonder they rely on bidbots for support.

apshamilton (64) · 6 years ago

I agree. I don't think the change is a good idea. It certainly won't fix the "problem" of authors voting for their own content. In my view this is not a problems at all. At least these people are creating content.
This is a lot more work than just voting. (curating)

$0.26

7 votes

crypto.piotr (70) · 6 years ago

Dear @apshamilton

I'm glad to see that you accepted my invitation and you enjoyed this publication.

I only just realized that I never thanked you for your comment. Appreciate it.

Piotr

stever82 (69) · 6 years ago

I was not a fan of this change until I really spent some time to think about what it will do here. So let me go over what I think it will do an why I am now okay with the idea.

I myself use the TIPU service. I don't buy big votes I use it as a way to power up my account. It might seem silly but I saw no reason to turn sbd into steem and power up when I could send the SBD to TIPU get a vote get a token to earn back payments and be able to repeat pretty much forever. As each post always gets back some funds in SBD. I am not sure if people approve of growing my account that way but it pushed me past 2k SP in a little over a year and I only bought maybe 300. What this change will do to TIPU is make it much harder to use. Same with all bots. To stay open they will need to give you 201% your payment or you lose ROI. Sometimes people are okay to lose ROI but they are promoting a post with real content or ideas. I feel those people will still use a bid bot at as low as 190%. Still, this means the bots will get way smaller payments and be able to give out way fewer votes. The adjust they can man is to offer to pay you out part of the curation but that is harder. As half of it will become SP they will be forced to wait for power-downs to send payouts. All of it will be much harder to manage so I feel more of the bots will just quit.

Now for the 50/50 for normal users. Here is what it is going to do to me. I have over 2000 SP but I only vote with a 1000 SP vote. Why because it is way more profitable to delegated my steem power away to services. Some of mine I give away to support friends but a good 800 is out there earning. But after 50/50 I would stop doing that. If I get half my vote back I want my vote to be as big as possible. This to me is a good thing.

I will also point out that the people who are here just for themselves buy votes for-profit and voting each other will still try to do that stuff. But if they join a curation trail and just collect at least they won't be powering up silly posts. We shouldn't see as many two line post earning 200 dollars. Instead, we will see curation bots running around powering up what I hope is good content. I hope this helps a bit for you to see what I see happening. Let junk post bid up means more quality stuff makes it to trending. If we start to payout good post with big numbers higher quality content creators will come. Users like myself will stop lending out our SP for self votes and start voting for more content that is good.

$0.24

gandhibaba (72) · 6 years ago

Hello friend, thanks for stopping by and dropping this fine comments that support (not only support but give detailed arguments) how HF21 will mark the end of Bid bots or at least leave the bot owners in serious trouble. This is one of the best comments I have read in this regard. I sincerely appreciate your point of view.

crypto.piotr (70) · 6 years ago

Dear @stever82

Thx for taking the time to share your opinion with us. Amazing comment buddy.

What this change will do to TIPU is make it much harder to use.

Perhaps you're right. I think bot owners will take into consideration the fact that their bots will be growing twice faster now and they only need to adopt their current algorythm to new situation.

Seriously it's not going to be that difficult. It's just playing around with numbers a little bit.

But after 50/50 I would stop doing that. If I get half my vote back I want my vote to be as big as possible. This to me is a good thing.

Interesting point. Something to think about.

But if they join a curation trail and just collect at least they won't be powering up silly posts.

Proposed system can only work if so called Whales would actually start delegating their Steem Power to quality curators. That would indeed allow those curators to be rewarded for their work and benefit entire platoform.

I wonder if you would agree with me on this one.

Yours
Piotr

$0.00

stever82 (69) · 6 years ago

I am not so sure the whales will get as much as you think. I know most of them to have more than one account. So they can self vote without it looking like it. Now they have to share those votes with anyone else voting for them. Also, the downvote pool will help to avoid stuff like that if used correctly. It will make much more sense to have all you SP in once place and go and hunt for a good post to vote for. In that case, if you vote early you get a big piece of that 50% I am not a whale at all so I can't know for sure what they will do but I fell like it is harder to abuse a 50/50 set up than a 75/25 set up.

andyjem (55) · 6 years ago

This just reflects life really. When you play in the big boys sand pit you must expect to play by their rules,
Why would the people at the top want to help the people at the bottom.
We vote for witnesses like we do for politicians, then they all do as they please to fill their own pockets.
HF 21 is going to happen so get used to it.
As with everything in life we will find other ways to help ourselves to the crumbs that are left.
When you leave the sand pit check your pockets, a few grains every day soon add up.😁😎

Posted using Partiko Android

$0.20

gandhibaba (72) · 6 years ago

Hahaha I find your comments funny, pragmatic and interesting too. This is just the reality of life.

$0.00

crypto.piotr (70) · 6 years ago

Dear @andyjem

HF 21 is going to happen so get used to it.

Any idea when will HF21 take place?

Cheers, Piotr

$0.00

felipejoys (71) · 6 years ago

This change is shit. It actually encourages self-voting in all scenarios. I can already get more from curation than from self-voting, but now I might as well not curate anymore, seeking other ways to reward content creators instead.

Circlejerking whales will never have it any easier than HF21. Fuck that.

$0.20

5 votes

gandhibaba (72) · 6 years ago

Please read the comments of @stever82. It is not as bad as you think. Thanks for your comments, anyway.

$0.00

felipejoys (71) · 6 years ago

Nothing new there. This change is shit.

brianoflondon (71) · 6 years ago

Here's my tuppence -ha'penny worth...

Whilst I could technically understand what goes on with Steem under the hood, I just don't have them time and this applies to most REAL people who just aren't interested in mechanics.

I want to post stuff and it is fantastic to see it accrue value. However the values are wildly disperate unless you catch the eye of a whale.

The biggest problem I have on Steem is that there isn't very much interesting content (that I'm finding) about anything other than Steem or crypto.

I just don't have the spare mental capacity to figure out what this or that algorithmic change will make but I do know that Steem should do everything it can to encourage actual real content over nonsense spamming.

$0.19

5 votes

crypto.piotr (70) · 6 years ago

Thank you for this your comment @brianoflondon

I only just realized that I never thanked you. Have a great monday ahead :)

Yours
Piotr

$0.02

holydog (45) · 6 years ago

Thanks for inviting me reading this comment, @crypto.piotr!

It may be that the 50-50 rewarding regime will not solve the self-voting circles and the bid-bots, but we'll see!

Meanwhile, several tokens that reward interactivity among users, such as MSTK by @fedesox, are growing well: have you already created your own on @steem-engine?

🐶 HARF HARF! 🐾

crypto.piotr (70) · 6 years ago

Dear @holydog

I'm glad to see that you accepted my invitation and you enjoyed this publication.

I only just realized that I never thanked you for your comment. Appreciate it.

ps. what is harf harf?

Yours
Piotr

$0.00

wakeupkitty (76) · 6 years ago

You took the words right out of my mouth.
Most whales did not became that far by writing good content at all.
The good-content-story is as fake as HF20 fighting scam and HF21 fighting bots.

The blinds will buy it but soon authors will end with nothing.
Is it worth investing so much time here?

Posted using Partiko Android

7 votes

majes.tytyty (78) · 6 years ago

Good points. As for me, I'm not sure of whether or not it's worth it. But one of the reasons I'm here is that I truly enjoy creating the content that I create. Secondarily, I hope I can continue to earn Steem from it, and eventually earning more and more.

And I must admit, many of the details leave me either confused or brain-dead. So, I just continue to create my content, and hope all works out well.

I hope you don't give up on this platform yet. Cheers!

wakeupkitty (76) · 6 years ago

I like it here too although I am slow. Palnet will hopefully be an extra.

Since I am an only mobile user I also have not much options. There are platforms I can hardly read on my smartphone and a part makes it hard for me to write/reply.

So I stay. If it comes to it they will do as they like and it all will just end like any other platform... making a huge income over the back of others.

☘💕

Posted using Partiko Android

$0.22

majes.tytyty (78) · 6 years ago

I'm hoping (and believing) that the witnesses and the developers understand that the old dictum is true ... True success will come only if success comes to all.

Best of luck!

$0.00

wakeupkitty (76) · 6 years ago

That is true. I hope you are right.
Wish you luck and 💖

Posted using Partiko Android

$0.00

ajongcrypto (63) · 6 years ago

Personally, I curious to see how things go on for the common users but I think this will have little or no effects on bid bots operations.

Bid bots currently consider the 75/25 nature in their operations and offers. So, they will simply have adjust this and provide a ROI based on 50/50 since they will be earning more from curation.

fitinfun (71) · 6 years ago

This is a non-issue to me until the day it happens, and then I will adjust as needed. Giving my opinion of what witnesses and whales will do here is a waste of my time and I do not pay attention to them until they make changes I have to deal with.

smallearth (63) · 6 years ago

Well said. And likely this will not be the last change.

Posted using Partiko Android

$0.00

majes (71) · 6 years ago

If nothing changes we would see no change :) This change has been discussed enough it's time to try it, then we'll change again...

Relax, it will be fine... Prolly.

$0.02

kansuze (63) · 6 years ago

Thank you @crypto.piotr for making me aware of this discussion. I have been on Steemit for 16 months and in that time I have watched the majority of my new content creator friends give up and leave. Yes, I occasionally ask myself if it's worth it. It has only been since I received a large delegation in April that I have felt like I'm making progress. If it's believed that moving to a 50:50 split is desirable, why take the risk in one shot? Why not first move to 70:30 as a test for unforeseen consequences?

$0.15

crypto.piotr (70) · 6 years ago

Dear @kansuze

I'm glad to see that you accepted my invitation and you enjoyed this publication.

I only just realized that I never thanked you for your comment. Appreciate it.

Piotr

$0.00

ura-soul (75) · 6 years ago (edited)

Hi @crypto.piotr, I will give my 2 steems on this, sure. ;)
The proposed change to the rewards split does mean that self upvoting is less profitable, since more of the rewards are split among a higher number of people and thus also stake. It does not really provide a guarantee that people won't continue to just sit and upvote themselves, however.

Since curation rewards increase as the community gets behind a post, in theory it is possible to earn more from good curation under this system and that is a good thing for the network and post quality. If there is a strong culture of curation then that is a good thing for stopping bots too.

The downsides are present too, though, of course - in that bot operators will just adjust what they do to fit in with the new rules. They may start paying out curation rewards - whereas currently they keep them.

I made a suggestion months ago to implement changes to User Interfaces so that posts that are boosted with bid bots are either (optionally) hidden completely from people's feeds or are adjusted to have the bidbot reward component removed from the calculation that is used to determine their position in the feeds. Each user could opt in/out of this and even choose which bots and accounts they personally want to have effected.
I also provided a method for Steemit inc. to use their ninja mined tokens to force bid bots out of the market.

I think that these two options are sufficient to prevent the problems of the bid bots without needing to change the curation/author split.

It is not possible to know exactly what is going to happen if this feature goes live - but I would take the middle ground of being open to experimentation without going the whole way, by opting for a 33.33% and 66.66% split - then seeing where that goes.

I am also concerned about the downvote pool changes, I consider those to be a potential nightmare due to the total lack of social skills held by some of the whales.

crypto.piotr (70) · 6 years ago

Dear @ura-soul

I'm glad to see that you accepted my invitation and you enjoyed this publication.

I only just realized that I never thanked you for your comment. Appreciate it.

Piotr

$0.00

ura-soul (75) · 6 years ago

Ahoy! Ok, no problem. :)

$0.00

mmunited (67) · 6 years ago (edited)

I read your posts and comment (honestly I did not read all comments). What you point out seem to be right but I also like comment of @juanmolina, @gandhibaba and @bluerobo. I don't worry about HF21 because it will happen. Is there any chance to change it.

You concerned about the bidbots. I think they will change their ROI so less users can use bidbots but in sometime they will grow again to fulfil the need of users. I basically depend on the dapps so they will grow quickly and I can get the the same
payout as before HF21.

Some whales are not using their power. Will HF21 can bring them into business. I think that would be the key factor.

$0.11

gandhibaba (72) · 6 years ago

Some whales are not using their power. Will HF21 can bring them into business. I think that would be the key factor.

I agree with the above. HF21 may do that overdue magic. Cheers!

$0.00

mariska.lubis (67) · 6 years ago

I think the main issue that we all have to face is that only a few who really want to know and understand about the benefit of blockchain. Most are see it, including Steem as one of the fastest solution to get money and profit, they don't care about ethics, morals, even the purpose of the existence of blockchain. We have to accept the fact about it, most people don't care and that is why we have continuous problems and every changes that we all are trying o create will have only small impact.

I see it as a challenge. I wish more people educate about blockchain, not only about how to get money. It will not help us all to have a better world. Though it sounds naif and impossible to do, but to change people's mind and the way of thinking is not that easy. A lot of people are too stupid to be smart, and they are reluctant and got angry to be called stupid, because they are stupid.

Anyway, I do appreciate all kind of effort to make Steem much better. Pro and contra is only a way to create a better one and more. We need to always find a better way to stop people only thinking about money but thinking what can we get and do more with steem blockchain. It is a process, a long process. Be patient.

Regards from Indonesia.

$0.11

crypto.piotr (70) · 6 years ago

Thank you for this amazing comment @mariska.lubis and for your time.

Yours
Piotr

$0.00

leeart (67) · 6 years ago

I don't know what these ever going changes mean but I hope it is all for the best. I hope there is a better way to approach abusers but people adapt and sooner or later they will find new ways to cheat the system. If we are to move forward to the 50/50 rewarding, there should be a ceiling up to how much there should be that kind of sharing. How about those who are earning not even 1 on their posts? The author should get 100% of the earnings instead but then again that depends on what the content is. We try to be as straight but there will always be cheaters.

$0.11

crypto.piotr (70) · 6 years ago

Dear @leeart

I'm glad to see that you accepted my invitation and you enjoyed this publication.

I only just realized that I never thanked you for your comment. Appreciate it.

Piotr

$0.00

leeart (67) · 6 years ago

It's all good 👍👍

$0.00

alpayasteem (67) · 6 years ago

Hi @crypto.piotr, I agree with your opinion, it looks like this change will only benefit curators than content writers, but if this change is indeed needed with a reason for long-term growth and for the stability of the more important platforms, I think it doesn't matter.

crypto.piotr (70) · 6 years ago

Dear @alpayasteem

I'm glad to see that you accepted my invitation and you enjoyed this publication.

I only just realized that I never thanked you for your comment. Appreciate it.

Piotr

$0.00

clareartista (61) · 6 years ago

Ciao dear @crypto.piotr! Thank you so much for your memos, links and Steems - I just found your messages now, and am navigating slowly through your discussions - a lot of this is still over my head, and I'm not finding Steemit effortless to use, but am persevering! Beautiful day to you, Clare

cyemela (63) · 6 years ago

Great point.

From my point of view, Steemit seemed attractive as an author who found it difficult to earn royalty checks.

However, as time goes on, and Steemit becomes more "mainstream", the same thing happens on Steemit.

For the most part I've already stopped blogging.

As an investor in the platform my engagement has already changed to adopt this type of policy. I just auto Upvote and comment from time to time.

Only I hope bid-bots remain in play as they remain the highest source of ROI.

crypto.piotr (70) · 6 years ago

Dear @cyemela

I'm glad to see that you accepted my invitation and you enjoyed this publication.

I only just realized that I never thanked you for your comment. Appreciate it.

Piotr

$0.00

autovoters (63) · 6 years ago

A very controversial measure, by the looks of it. I think the big problem with this is that the little user is going to get a good bang. The one that creates content worked with the hope of being voted by curation projects... Will they leave or will they demotivate? Really new investors and curators will appear, or only the existing ones will be enriched more. It is clear that 50/50 will benefit the investor, but what about the creator?
I would prefer to leave the subject as it is, because there are many content authors who make an effort and will earn less.
Because... how many times do we see whales SEARCHING good content from authors with little SP and CURING it?

NO to 50/50 and YES to the people who work on the content they publish.

gunnarheilmann (69) · 6 years ago

I was invited to give my view on things. Well in my humble opinion its a 50/50 chance to be a good thing. For me as creator i may earn less right the next day it happends. I post every day, at least when i can, so it will have an emidiate impact on what happends at my wallet. For sure. If the people who love my content then upvote more it may everage out over time. My guess would be thats not the case. So only if the big curators share more of my content it will compensate by getting more traction and reach. That would be perfect. Again i dont see that happening so easy nor fast. My reach here is very limited and its very hard to reach new users throughout Steem. At least thats what it feels like. So even though i just hope it works out for the good i dont see how it can, from the start. There will be a very quick shift to something i cant predict. Iam not long enough here to understand it all in full.

Creating is part of me, there will be more content to share and i hope the 'dip' will not mean the end of Steem. So i am here to stay and if more people find my content in the future and i find some loyal friends here that are not just about the upvote farming here, it will be come a more or less social network. The content i create takes a lot of work, i know i can not expect to be compensated equally for the work i put in. Same accounts for people who write or draw. Either there is a self motivation to do it anyhow or not. Steem is not here to just pay for your work. Do not make a mistake here.
Lets see what happends and cry later ;-) or celebrate. I think if it does not work i guess we can correct the mistakes again.

Yet I do see light at the end of the tunnel 8)

Belgium-LPU_2-(26)-LR-2000.jpg

crypto.piotr (70) · 6 years ago

Dear @gunnarheilmann

I'm glad to see that you accepted my invitation and you enjoyed this publication.

I only just realized that I never thanked you for your comment. Appreciate it.

Yours
Piotr

$0.00

hobo.media (64) · 6 years ago

Honestly, I don't believe it will change anything related to bidbots. Currently, bidbots charge a fee and offer a certain percentage of upvote value over that, many times its only 5% or even less. All bidbots have to do is adjust their fee rate in order to keep running their service. Really, there are a lot of people that use bidbots unprofitably, and they don't care because its just another way of purchasing promotion.

My largest concern is not about the 50/50 split but the downvote change. Downvotes are very problematic, because they create a negative atmosphere and ganging up. Imagine the cruel power it gives well funded political groups, religious groups and all the many diverse communities that dislike some other community. They can literally rush over to the other community to hurt them with downvotes. Its a terrible concept...

I am genuinely thinking about finding out how many people on Steem would be willing to move over to a Steem fork that doesn't have downvotes. I just don't believe downvotes belong on Steem and the future that can be created by Steem.

As for the 50/50 change, well, its never even truly been 75/25. When you go to steemdb.com you find the rates are quite different:

steem distribution averages.PNG

Who get the "interest"? Its the people that have their STEEM powered up as SP. Those are the same people as the curators... This means that curators are already getting 32.90% of the reward pool, just for clicking a little upvote button a few times a day.

The problem with Steem is not bidbots, these are actually effective services creating a valuable aspect of the economy. Bidbots get blamed for the state of Steem, but its never been the bots. The bots serve a purpose of promoting those that are willing to pay for the service. This means that rather than being so-called "leechers" they actually provide a utility for STEEM/SBD as a currency. Thanks to bidbots, we can actually buy something of value with our crypto! We can buy promotional services.

Then what is the problem? The problem is that no one is truly creating a sophisticated outreach program. Steem whales want paid to give out accounts, while blockchains like Energi are giving out $400 in their cryptocurrency for free!

Check it out here for $400: Give me 100 Energi!!!

Steem is a social media blockchain and yet Steemit Inc. is pretty much the worst social media presence in Crypto. Even JSEcoin has done a better job... That's embarrassing! Is anyone embarrassed about that? They should be...

But hey, that's okay, because...

The Hobo Media team is gifting everybody in this discussion a free 50 HBO! :)

crypto.piotr (70) · 6 years ago

Dear @hobo.media

Thank you for accepting my invitation.

I realized just now that I never actually thanked you for your amazing comment. I appreciate your time :)

Honestly, I don't believe it will change anything related to bidbots.

Personally I think that bidbots will be growing way faster now.

Downvotes are very problematic, because they create a negative atmosphere and ganging up.

Very good point. I didn't really think about it that much. Thx for sharing your thoughts.

Thanks to bidbots, we can actually buy something of value with our crypto! We can buy promotional services.

You nailed it. This is exactly the way I see bidbots. Not as a way of cheating the system, but as a promotional tool.

Have a great monday.
Piotr

justyy (82) · 6 years ago

The bid bots will still be there, I doubt the HF21 will fix all the problems.
@justyy - the author of https://SteemYY.com

11 votes

binkyprod (67) · 6 years ago

They're going to push content creators away and then they'll wonder why we've all left the platform.

earthcustodians (67) · 6 years ago (edited)

Just read you message, thanks for letting me know. After reading this blog, the upcoming new rules do not seem to be in favor of content producers. Isnt there any way to stop this? I am not sure if I understand all what is implied, as my crypto jargon isnt that great.

crypto.piotr (70) · 6 years ago

Dear @earthcustodians

I only just realized that I never thanked you for your comment. Appreciate it.

Yours
Piotr

$0.00

justinchicken (62) · 6 years ago

This sounds really worrying. I hope this doesn't mean the end of steemit. I stopped using Facebook after it became a big data monitoring cess pit. I thought Steemit was more fair, but it seems like this will make it less fair for creators. That's a big shame!

Posted using Partiko Android

gabbynhice (66) · 6 years ago

I think in some points you are wrong.

One main stuff both of you forgot. That even the smaller accounts will grow faster. With this the currators have a positive experience and hope more and more currators will come so basicly more people will hold steem power. Which is good for all of us.

Content creators: Many of the creators they use bots that is not a secret. Hopefully with these changes there will be less bid bot abusers.
I dont think so that it will worth to buy votes if we have 50/50.
Also it will not worth that much to sell votes i think with these changes.

So actually what i am waiting it is more human interaction in the future do to these changes.

But we will see in action how it will goes.

Personaly i am happy at the moment for these changes.

Posted using Partiko Android

cranium (76) · 6 years ago

You are absolutely right, these are very important questions.
My humble opinion - 50/50 will help attract investors, those who are so lacking in STEEM. I understand perfectly why there are so many perturbations, because 90 +% are people who see STEEM as an opportunity to earn money.
But, for me, as a person who loves STEEM and for whom STEEM has long been a place for investment - this is great news. I am sure that everyone will be happy if this change will help to raise the price of STEEM in 2 or more times. Such a raise the price, in my opinion, is absolutely real.

Вы абсолютно правы, это очень важные вопросы.
Мое скромное мнение - 50/50 поможет привлечь ИНВЕСТОРОВ, тех, которых так не хватает на СТЕЕМ. Я прекрасно понимаю, почему так много возмущений, ведь 90+% это люди, которые видят СТЕЕМ - как возможность заработать.
Но, для меня, как человека, который любит СТЕЕМ, и для которого СТЕЕМ давно стал местом для инвестиций - это замечательная новость. Я уверен, что все будут довольны, если это изменения поможет поднять цену на СТЕЕМ в 2 или больше раза. Такой поем, по моему мнению - абсолютно реален.

#spt #palnet #sct #actnearn #weedcash

crypto.piotr (70) · 6 years ago

Dear @cranium

Thank you for sharing your humble opinion with us.

My humble opinion - 50/50 will help attract investors

In my humble opinion it will mostly benefit current so called "whales".

I wonder if you would agree with me on this one.

Yours
Piotr

cranium (76) · 6 years ago

Your concerns are absolutely justified. It can be a very long time to guess, but none of us can predict the future. In this news there are both positive and negative sides. Time will put everything in its place.
But, the very fact of hardfork, against the background of the cosmic development speed of Steem –engine, should have a positive impact.

#spt #palnet #sct #jjj #aaa #actnearn #weedcash

gandhibaba (72) · 6 years ago

Thanks for your fine thoughts on this post. This is exactly the point I was trying to make throughout this essay. I am glad that we share similar thoughts on this subject. Cheers!

$0.00

qwerrie (72) · 6 years ago

ну да! мир дерьмо, но все мы любим деньги, так что давайте делать его ещё дерьмовее! @cranium

$0.00

cranium (76) · 6 years ago

Можете перефразировать? Ваше сообщение можно рассматривать двусмысленно. #spt #palnet #sct #jjj #aaa #actnearn #weedcash

$0.00

qwerrie (72) · 6 years ago

да, это поток сознания, в котором переход не с одной ступеньки на другую, а сразу на весь пролёт. не обращайте внимания. -> я думаю что в результате очередного форка удастся если не спасти, то укрепить-повысить ден.единицу, но общий уровень системы станет еще более говнистей. @cranium

"everybody knows, thats the way it goes" (c)

$0.00

intellihandling (63) · 6 years ago

Dear Piotr, i agree 100% with you, this implementation is WTFBS!!

d-zero (68) · 6 years ago

Agreed. All these people should be spending their time on DAPPs or SMTs or at the very least on marketing. These changes are starting to look like market regulations and thing with regulation is people always find a way around it.

These changes will work as well as how DRM worked for video games. I'll give it 2 weeks before everyone adjust and everything is back to the usual way. Make some Goddamn software for me!

crypto.piotr (70) · 6 years ago

Dear @d-zero

It's clear to me that we're having very similar view on that particular issue.

Yours
Piotr

$0.00

qwerrie (72) · 6 years ago

dear Piotr,
golos.io already tried to implement 50-50 schema. to be brief: it didnt bring in any desired improvements, but instead (together with some other reasons) just spoiled and ruined down the value for Golos tokens. shit remains shit, whenever you name it.

Investors will be rewarded for doing really nothing, but pretty much for holding their STEEM (and auto-upvoting any kind of content).

I never upvote automatically, always manually and check the post (that doesnt mean I automatically read all the longreads, tho). (well, except the qurator posts). I am quite new to steemit, and to whole blockhain deal, but already figured out how important a good curation is, and how much steemit turned into a platform where only bots talk to you, and how much you need to play engagement games to grow, and

this new algorythm means more shit!

who need it, I wonder? probably the ones who are in it for the money, who want just to implemet a New Order to simplify moneymaking with their Giant Stacks. maybe steemit dont need 'authors' and 'content' after all? well, a few more iterations like this, and authors will off. thats for sure. no creator (unless he's a creator, not a soulless ~~content~~ shit-generator) wanna deal this shit. its just a humiliation.

crypto.piotr (70) · 6 years ago

Dear @qwerrie

Thank you for accepting my invitation.

I realized just now that I never actually thanked you for your amazing comment. I appreciate your time :)

golos.io already tried to implement 50-50 schema.

That's something I never knew. Thanks for sharing. When did they introduce this 50/50 schema?

Have a great monday.
Piotr

$0.00

qwerrie (72) · 6 years ago

@crypto.piotr,
golos.io had a lot of other problems (users gaming the system, hacking its weaknesses etc). you may find intresting this text (its in russian, hope that will not be a big problem).

as for the 50-50 reward.schema, if i understand it correctly, it was rolled out in HF19 in december 2018 (more details, in russian)

i dont think my comments are that great / informative.. but at least they are emotional ;)

ps. have you seen this article? sounds optimistic!

$0.00

huseyinunozkan16 (60) · 6 years ago

I totally agree with you that "content creators doing actual work will have it even harder to be rewarded. In order to get any rewards they need to create content." So current rate is better in my opinion. Thank you for your valuable assessment

crypto.piotr (70) · 6 years ago

Thank you for sharing your opinion @huseyinunozkan16

It's clear to me that we're having very similar view on that particular issue.

Yours
Piotr

$0.00

videoaddiction (57) · 6 years ago

First off all, we need newcomers for Steemit to grow up and up; and for the newcomers, they need to get Steem of their works on Steemit to stay here. I think the new 50/50 reward model will only be useful for old members and Steemit will be more circulated among them than now.

Posted using Partiko Android

crypto.piotr (70) · 6 years ago

Dear @videoaddiction

First off all, we need newcomers for Steemit to grow up and up;

Indeed. And new users will have even less reasons to create quality content :(

It seem that we're having very similar view on that particular issue. Thx for sharing.

Yours
Piotr

$0.00

videoaddiction (57) · 6 years ago

You r welcome

Posted using Partiko Android

$0.00

edouard (65) · 6 years ago

Honestly, as a content creator and at around 3 posts a week, I can hope to make much more with author reward than curating with the present system, more even than if my curation rewards doubled so yeah, I am mad at HF21.

If self upvoting is such a problem why not take it away?

The kind of price action generated from wealth gained in this 50/50 system is looking ugly to me. Those whale have temporary skin in the game and when they are done siphoning value off the social fabric of this place, they will leave but an empty carcass behind.

Authors are the ones who have real skin in the game because our blogs have sentimental value. People sticking to Steemit out of principle as opposed to greed is why we are still around after the bear market.

crypto.piotr (70) · 6 years ago

Dear @edouard

I'm glad to see that you accepted my invitation and you enjoyed this publication.

I only just realized that I never thanked you for your comment. Appreciate it.

If self upvoting is such a problem why not take it away?

Such a simple solution, isn't it? :)

Those whale have temporary skin in the game and when they are done siphoning value off the social fabric of this place, they will leave but an empty carcass behind.

Very true. I see this system as "milking the cow" as long as it's alive.

Yours
Piotr

$0.00

edouard (65) · 6 years ago

Cheers!

$0.00

bluerobo (61) · 6 years ago

Hey Piotr,
I have stopped caring about the upcoming HF because it will happen. T20 consensus is established. It is only a question of when.

The only change I fully support is the modified reward curve.

A separate downvote pool is a wasted opportunity because I can't delegate it or have my ratio of downvotes follow a responsible entity. My downvote its useless - especially against bidbotted content. I mostly use my feed to get content. That way I hardly see downvotable posts.

The new changes will probably not obliterate bidbots.
And I highly doubt there will be more rewards because the 50/50 split causes more genuine curation.

crypto.piotr (70) · 6 years ago

Dear @bluerobo

I have stopped caring about the upcoming HF because it will happen.
It is only a question of when.

That's a solid question. I care about this HF simply because I want to understand what's happening and to compare my own view with others.

The only change I fully support is the modified reward curve.

Would you mind sharing with me why do you think it's a good change?

ps.
Thank you for accepting my invitation.

I realized just now that I never actually thanked you for your amazing comment. I appreciate your time :)

Have a great monday.
Piotr

$0.00

deemarshall (66) · 6 years ago

I was asked to post my view on HF21 50/50 which is going to be introduced.

As a contest host, I am not here to make a profit for myself. What I earn goes as contest prizes. If my earnings suffer because of changes then the contest prizes will suffer. In my view, entries will drop off and if this is significant, it won't be worth holding contests that are a valued way of winning steem for some.

You speak about investors being paid more. I was considering investing in Steemit like my friend @organduo. Now, I am putting that on hold to see what happens with HF21.

I agree with you about bidbots. They will still be frequently used and will rake it in.

BTW, there are other social media that pay authors. One example is Tuetego that pays in normal currency.

organduo (72) · 6 years ago

Even if rewards in Steem will be reduced, we will still get rewards in PAL. And many other tokens by the way which are yet to come. Hope you have claimed your PAL airdrop yet. The price of PAL is rising fast and it has a good chance of catching up to Steem. People are powering up more PAL every day. Do not fear for the future of your contests...

If you think HF21 will benefit investors, remember that I am one. In which case our contest prizes shouldn't suffer.

Posted using Partiko Android

$0.00

deemarshall (66) · 6 years ago

Thank you for your reassurance :) You are very kind.

$0.00

crypto.piotr (70) · 6 years ago

Dear @deemarshall

I'm glad to see that you accepted my invitation and you enjoyed this publication.

I only just realized that I never thanked you for your comment. Appreciate it.

Piotr

$0.00

deemarshall (66) · 6 years ago

You're welcome.

$0.00

d-zero (68) · 6 years ago

I'm with you on this @crypto.piotr I've seen you do great work in this community and people like you will be the least favoured ones here. 50/50 is a stupid idea made of nostalgia of an old time (where I wasn't present in STEEM) Under 50/50 a person could make an alt account and upvote that.

Bidbots won't be affected at all and I think it will be a huge disaster for the long term. Most of these HF21 changes are only from an old vocal minority with a lot of stake. This is going to drive out bloggers even more and it's not going to be helping any DAPPs.

crypto.piotr (70) · 6 years ago

Dear @d-zero

I've seen you do great work in this community and people like you will be the least favoured ones here.

Unfortunatelly you're right :(

I'm glad to see that you accepted my invitation and you enjoyed this publication.

I only just realized that I never thanked you for your comment. Appreciate it.

Piotr

$0.00

binkyprod (67) · 6 years ago (edited)

50/50 = PENALISATION FOR CONTENT CREATORS

How is this going to help quality content? We have to write so much, so often, such quality stuff, and we get so little from it all. I am always grateful to everyone who upvotes me, no matter the value of their upvote, but one thing that always motivated me to STAY on Steemit and to PROMOTE Steemit, was that I FELT like I was VALUED.

Now it feels like "sorry your hard work isn't good enough for us anymore.' CREATORS ARE BEING PUNISHED. That's what this is. Plain and simple. This is NOT about creators of valued content. You are pushing us to the sideline.

We are NOT going to be getting more upvotes just because it's 50/50 now. We are going to be getting less for our hard work. /slowclap Great work, Steemit, way to go to make a girl feel valued and important on your platform.

How much more sweat are we going to have to put into the community and platoform. How often are we going to have to post to compensate. I can't compensate, I have bunrout, other people have jobs, children. How many upvotes will we need more in order to be able to compensate for the LOSS. Because it's a loss, that's for sure.

I've been very vocal about this in the past and I'm with @crypto.piotr on this that this is a BAD idea. It feels like Steemit is poopooing on content creators. WE have to suffer because some people take advantage. How is that fair? How is that going to stop those who take advantage and cheat the system. There will always be those who cheat the system.

Is there a guarantee that we are going to get the necessary amount of upvotes MOREin compensation. Because if not I am very opposed to this.

WHO DECIDED THIS? WHY WAS THE COMMUNITY NOT CONSULTED?

I thought Steemit was decentralised and not governed by Elite parties.

If Steemit goes ahead on this it makes Steemit a DICTATORSHIP! Is it then a platform I want to continue to support? How many GOOD content creators are going to LEAVE Steemit because it DOES NOT CARE about its creators.

This idea has earned one of my infamous Steem-poos. He's happy here, but he should be crying lol
Gosh, I feel so unappreciated right now. I know there are many here who DO appreciate me and who upvote my content often. I love and appreciate every one of you. I just feel unappreciate by the platform itself. We don't run it, it's not a platform of the people at all. It's a dictatorship, dictated by the Elites, just like the centralised government, and we have no say whatsoever, it's just an illusion. Thanks for breaking my spirit Steemit. I'm losing faith in you.

Oh, and edit: I keep asking to see that hard proof of how this will benefit, NUMBERS' GRAPHS, STATS. NO ONE has provided that for me. Until I see stats that prove me wrong, I will be opposed to this.
Steem Poo Emoji (small).png

crypto.piotr (70) · 6 years ago

Dear @binkyprod

I'm glad to see that you accepted my invitation and you enjoyed this publication.

I only just realized that I never thanked you for your comment. Appreciate it.

Piotr

$0.00

binkyprod (67) · 6 years ago

Sure thing. It's a very engaging topic, this new change, and we're all quite passionate about it, everyone with their stance and opinions. Being able to share freely is one of the things I love about this platform, even if what I'm sharing is distaste in a change for this platform. It's a sign I care 😁

Posted using Partiko Android

$0.00

shadowspub (70) · 6 years ago

I already wrote a very lengthy post on the topic of HF21. You can read it here

Most of the top 20 witnesses are not regular content creators. They do have various ways of generating income from the content creators efforts like curation bots and bid bots.

Some of them are engaged in trying to convince the community that content creators are overpaid. It's a narrative designed to gain them additional income. IMO the changes have nothing to do with the longterm benefit of the platform and everything to do with their income.

When decent content creators get tired of decreasing return on their time and leave, there wont be much to attract people to even look at the platform and all it has to offer. That is the longterm loss we're looking at.

crypto.piotr (70) · 6 years ago

Dear @shadowspub

I will read your post right away. Thx for sharing link.

I'm glad to see that you accepted my invitation and you enjoyed this publication.

I only just realized that I never thanked you for your comment. Appreciate it.

Piotr

$0.00

oivas (66) · 6 years ago

@crypto.piotr and @gandhibaba, good post and great thoughts. Did anyone realize that HF21 is going to happen without much of debate? That is what bothers me. It looks like the 50/50 plan appears to be a blunder knowingly deployed. If the idea is to stop bot voting in favor of authors them the 50/50 program does exactly the opposite.

This is bull idea and I don't think they should go ahead with it. But then again the proposal is voted by people to support those people ONLY. I doubt anyone is really thinking about the community.

I am happy to be proved wrong with the implementation. But honestly, would be more happy if it did not happen in the first place.

Posted using Partiko Android

gandhibaba (72) · 6 years ago

Although I do not agree completely with your thoughts but you've made some vital contributions, which I very much appreciate. Cheers!

$0.00

oivas (66) · 6 years ago

I am sure you wouldn't because your post already says so. But think from the perspective of those who buy bot votes. Assuming nobody else votes, the bot which votes on your article takes 50% of the cut.. Now, not owners will close down their bots or build more? And if the answer is the latter would it be good for Steemit? That's my question. Anyway, I myself use bot votes, so just saying.

Please feel free to express your opposition. Opposition does not make you my enemy but allows me to know you better. And that's definitely good... 😊 😊

Posted using Partiko Android

gandhibaba (72) · 6 years ago

Of course, @Oivas opposition does not mean that we are enemies. And I will also like to know you better. I do not agree that 50/50 will completely empower bots as you put it. Yes, bots will earn more from curation but will bidders find such business lucrative? The answer is a NO. Using bots after a 50/50 is introduced will make the bidders LOSE their money because you will need at least a 50% ROI from the bots to make any profit. And with that, only a few people will be able to use the bots within a voting round. That will make vote buying less attractive for the bidders and even for the bots owner because, in theory, there will be too many bidders chasing a few bots within a limited time. I trust this meets you well, friend.

oivas (66) · 6 years ago

Fair point. So two things can happen. Either people stop using bots altogether (favorable situation) OR more bots will spring up to cater to demand and the possibility of making Steem during bids (unfavorable situation). Let's see what happens.. 😊

Posted using Partiko Android

crypto.piotr (70) · 6 years ago (edited)

Dear @oivas

It looks like the 50/50 plan appears to be a blunder knowingly deployed.

You nailed it buddy!

Thank you for accepting my invitation.

I realized just now that I never actually thanked you for your amazing comment. I appreciate your time :)

Have a great monday.
Piotr

$0.00

shadowmask (55) · 6 years ago

One of the often overlooked parts of all this 50/50 split is that in HF21 there is also a proposal to take from all rewards a part to pay for something that I really do not understand, other than a bit of all rewards will be used to pay for something and that it will come from all pools and people, from witness pay, curation, and authors. I do not understand it because it was only talked about as a side note it seemed in most post about the EIP and HF21.

The other thing that people are ignoring or have completely forgotten about is the ability of any of the dApps to charge a beneficiary fee for using it, such as the cut d-tube takes from peoples rewards, thus lowering the content producers rewards even more.

I know the arguments people will give are yes but how much do you get from sharing on facebook or youtube. If it is the goal of the investors to have eveyone return to facebook and youtube then they are doing a fine job of driving people away, and keeping them away from steem blockchain.

The mention of Palnet above is pretty disingenuous in my opinion, it should have been noted that with palnet even though it is a 50/50 reward system, there are two types of payment regular Steem tokens and the new Pal tokens, so while it is 50/50 split there are two different paychecks so to speak for the same content.

crypto.piotr (70) · 6 years ago

Dear @shadowmask

Thank you for accepting my invitation.

I realized just now that I never actually thanked you for your amazing comment. I appreciate your time :)

Have a great monday.
Piotr

$0.00

guifaquetti (66) · 6 years ago (edited)

I do not know what to expect with this hardfork, we all want steem to increase its value, and today with the sidechains we have the possibility to perform backtests and see how the token economy behaves. I think any change in steem should be tested on sidechains before it is implemented.

The way it looks at steem publishing platforms seems to be the kind of creator written platform for content for other content creators, not for consumers. And every content platform must foster the consumption of the content that is created in it. I'm not really worried about the bidbot owners, they are interested stakeholders in the development of this blockchain and the economy that revolves around it as well as all of us.

My biggest concern is the traffic that the front-ends generate for those who consume the content that is created here. This hard-fork can be good or bad, we can not predict the future, but we have how to test the changes and decide for the best. If steem is much more than its content creation front ends, I think devs can create ways for steem to circulate in other ways as well, look at other blockchain projects and develop solutions in which the steem can be served from several ways, like bat for example.

crypto.piotr (70) · 6 years ago

Dear @guifaquetti

Thank you for accepting my invitation.

I realized just now that I never actually thanked you for your amazing comment. I appreciate your time :)

Have a great monday.
Piotr

$0.00

akdx (66) · 6 years ago

I fully agree with the concerned expressed by @crypto.piotr on 50/50 issue. In steem environment, upvotes are everything. Whoever can exploit its system, earns huge profit. 50/50 system would discourage the content creators while it cannot solve the problem of self voting.

crypto.piotr (70) · 6 years ago

Dear @akdx

I'm glad to see that you accepted my invitation and you enjoyed this publication.

I only just realized that I never thanked you for your comment. Appreciate it.

Piotr

$0.00

akdx (66) · 6 years ago

You are always welcome dear @crypto.piotr. You are such a nice person whom I respect.

$0.00

drakernoise (60) · 6 years ago

Hi @crypto.piotr,
You did it again 😂, I’m here due to your memo. You’re a great content finder, content that awakens my interest on interacting on the platform. You make me even feel as if I were important for the ecosystem when asking for my “human” opinion.
That “human” word is key on my view, I’m one of those and cannot avoid it even in my real life. I’m not a benefit machine on this growing greedy robotic world nor a sheep. I do think and do feel and not all can be explained using maths nor algorithms...I guess that’s why I love music 😀
From A “human” perspective I’m quite with your comment so I’m not going to repeat the ideas you stated.
I will stick on the “bid-bots” issue: why don’t we implement ‘captcha ‘ on the platform?, is that difficult? we’d easily get rid of bots doesn’t it?
I made my comment to the post where you can read more of what I think about the subject.
I put the link to it to it, I know how busy you are reading comments here: https://steemit.com/@drakernoise/pt6til
Thanks for bringing me here and your support Piotr

Big hug

$0.02

crypto.piotr (70) · 6 years ago

Dear @drakernoise

You’re a great content finder, content that awakens my interest on interacting on the platform.
You make me even feel as if I were important for the ecosystem when asking for my “human” opinion.

I'm blushing again! :) And I'm glad to hear that you like sharing your "human" opinion with me.

ps.
Thank you for accepting my invitation.

I realized just now that I never actually thanked you for your amazing comment. I appreciate your time :)

Have a great monday.
Piotr

$0.00

drakernoise (60) · 6 years ago

Sry Piotr, It wasn't my intention to make you blush, maybe it's just me being too thanky and worried about others virtues to be exposed or recognized.
I'll try and be more ”plain” or objective on that sense.
Have also a nice Monday 😊

$0.00

distantsignal (64) · 6 years ago

I completely disagree with this proposed, 50/50 rewards split!

In fact, I would want to go in the other direction. Those who create content deserve the vast bulk of the reward. I would put the split at 80/20 or even 90/10 towards creators.

I sometimes spend hours creating content. Researching, writing, proofreading, image creation, video editing, et al. A curator is a much more passive participant. They MIGHT spend only a few minutes reading said content and that somehow entitles them to 50% of the rewards?! No! Absolutely not. I cannot agree to this. I dedicate a lot of time to enhancing the network with good and thoughtful content and this new split proposal makes me viscerally angry.

This is outrageously unfair and this is guaranteed to act as a disincentive towards creation! Creators do the content heavy lifting! Curators are important, but their participation is not worth half the reward for the work I put in. This would effectively tax my efforts and when you tax something you destroy it.

If you want to decrease self-voting, then punish self-voting. If you want to get investors, create better and easier to use software. Go and innovate. If you want to decrease bid-bots, then come up with a solution that does that, but DO NOT think that just because someone reads our work, comments and re-steems entitles them to half our reward. It will not make the network better, it will make the network worse.

It will make it worse be making the rewards inherently unfair. Curators have not earned the privilege of that much reward. This is not a share and share alike platform or world. I've earned my place on the network. I've invested a lot of time and actual capital into it and if you take 25% of my rewards away to fix problems that aren't even the big I will be inclined to stop creating.

The top earner is @crypto.piotr according to https://steempeak.com/steem/@steem-data/steem-statistics-16-06-2019

Why do people merely commenting on this thread - that he created - think they deserve half the rewards? I don't think I do. I mean, could you imagine a world where authors who write real world novels were forced to share 50% of their earnings with readers? How unbelievably stupid and greedy.

The biggest problem the network has is not the rewards system.

It is... EASE OF USE! Self-voting only accounts for 6.4% of total votes according to the same source cited above https://steempeak.com/steem/@steem-data/steem-statistics-16-06-2019

EVERY. SINGLE. PERSON... I've gotten to sign up became frustrated because of confusion and an inappropriate amount of Steem Power for interactions on the network. They don't like that they can't vote a lot during their first day or two. It frustrates their efforts to explore the network and they GIVE UP. Facebook and the other horrible networks got one thing right. EASE OF USE! They're so easy a literal moron could use them.

If you gift newbies more, initial SP, they will be able to participate more.

Passive interactions with the Steem Network need to be made more effortless for Curators, not more profitable! Good grief.

$0.00

binkyprod (67) · 6 years ago

I'm glad I'm not the only one feeling very passionately emphatic about this change. I like your idea of going 80/20, but again, I'd need to see stats and proof that it would benefit. More SP is necessary for curators, that's for sure. "more effortless not more profitable!" YAS! I am so opposed to this and I feel like the Elites of Steemit decided this on their own without consulting creators, only consulting curators. It makes me feel so poopooed as a creator. We are not going to be compensated with double the upvotes or anything like that, we are going to lose so much of what we can earn on Steemit for the quality content we create. And them deciding on their own this change, makes me feel this is a centralised dictatorship where the whales dictate everything and care not for the smaller fish in the sea.

Good grief indeed. How did they decide this without taking us into consideration? Oh wait, they didn't!

crypto.piotr (70) · 6 years ago

Dear @distantsignal

They MIGHT spend only a few minutes reading said content and that somehow entitles them to 50% of the rewards?! No! Absolutely not. I cannot agree to this.

You nailed it! :/

If you want to decrease self-voting, then punish self-voting.

Actually self-voting could be switched off by Steemit Inc.

ps.
Thank you for accepting my invitation.

I realized just now that I never actually thanked you for your amazing comment. I appreciate your time :)

Have a great monday.
Piotr

$0.00

distantsignal (64) · 6 years ago

Thank you for inviting - and alerting me - to this development. The community and witnesses need a much better structure for debating these huge changes. I am not satisfied that the witnesses are doing enough due diligence and community outreach in a clear manner. Feel free to message me again about these sorts of discussions.

Posted using Partiko iOS

$0.00

pibara (60) · 6 years ago

The EIP will create incentives that are likely to increase both bid not usage and delegations to bid bots.

I believe the EIP could be fixed in that respect (while also attenuating part of the negative impact of some of the measures on new users and the potential to onboard new content creators) with a few simple changes, most described here.

One simple change missing, I think, is bringing down the dust level treshold from $0.020 (after curration) to $0.007 (or less).

I feel that without these fixes, the EIP lacks any kind of holistic attributes, and simple simulations will show the insentives created by the EIP will:

Hinder onboarding and with it ecconomic growth.
Increase bid not usage
Increase delegations to bid bots

$0.00

crypto.piotr (70) · 6 years ago

Dear @pibara

Thank you for accepting my invitation.

I realized just now that I never actually thanked you for your amazing comment. I appreciate your time :)

Have a great monday.
Piotr

arthur.grafo (69) · 6 years ago

Sorry, but this time I have no interesting comment to make. All I intend saying is that he is wrong, many from Steemit have moved to other equivalents of Steemit. Even I signed up, though I was reluctant to cut ties with all the friends I have made here.

I see only one solution...one way for me to ensure the curators make flat out zero from me: I will set out my payout to : Deny Payout.

If we all do the same, for how long will the so-called curators (the "true motivators" of steemit) see this change as being profitable to them.

I suggest everyone take a look at :
PocketNet
Whaleshares
Weiku

and others...

As for income on comments: I have been withdrawing from that because of the witnesses becoming so clever. What do I mean?

When I made a post, up until recently, I would submit my post and the page would change to show me a feed of the new Posts. I would go through them, looking for new posters who I felt deserved some encouragement.

Now, if we DARE to upvote someone within a period of less than 15 minutes, we are penalised by having our participation in the curatorship cancelled to zero. We now MUST wait 15 minutes, as if we have nothing else to do with our time...

I honestly did not care about making a curator fee, since most of those who I voted for were new and very low Rep posters. But now I am told that I must wait for 15 minutes, like an idiot, instead of getting on with my life. Even if I go look at something else, with the intention of returning, I forget, since there is so much else to do.

So...sorry new posters, I am withdrawing from this side of steemit life. No comments and no upvotes from me to any of you.

I have enjoyed making comments and upvoting new posters....but now it has ended it seems. Not satisfied with causing damage through Flagging, they are now getting greedy while also claiming they are the only ones who contribute to the success of Steemit. There is NO point in debating the matter, since they are so convinced they are in the right, that they do not honestly debate, just ram their point of view down our throats and suggest we are stupid for not agreeing with them.

$0.00

shadowspub (70) · 6 years ago

the 15 minute time period is actually a reduction from the original 30 minute. It was and is intended to reduce the ability of bots to get the curation rewards. Since we're loaded with bots, not sure how that works but that is the intent.

$0.00

arthur.grafo (69) · 6 years ago

You say it used to be 30 minutes? I seem to recall that until end of lasst year, when we made a post, we had the choice of setting a self-upvote instantly and I remember being told by those with higher reps that I should not set for a self-upvote, as it means I get the lions share of the curation pool and no whale will ever vote for me if they see I self-upvoted first. Are you telling me that many of the old-timers lied to me?

Also, if that is the excuse, it is a stupid one, since the time rule is known, so all owners of bots only have to adjust them to start at 15 minutes. No, this is just to make it more difficult for human beings, so that the bots of the whales can get the rewards.

How often do people go searching to find out what new posts were made? Do not most of us only look when we have submitted our own post and the page then automatically shows us the latest posts? So, we then see a post we like and want to reward. Our choices are three: either forget about it, or wait 15 minutes or just click an upvote even if it is within the first minute or two?

Till now, I just upvoted and moved on, more interested in helping the poster than getting a tiny share of his reward.

That was fine for as long as I did not think about it. Once I realised this was deliberately done without a real reason, just to ensure I do not wait, as the bots of the whales do, I stopped upvoting all and sundry - excellent, good or bad posts, they are all ignored now.

Multip[ly my reaction by thousands and I am certain it works to the advantage of Steemit and the new posters - who mostly get ignored by the whales, anyway (that was sarcasm, just in case you did not pick it up).

I have asked others and they all say they skip the feed of new posts and only check, now and then, the feed of their followers....so I am right, we have condemned the new posters who have a low sp, since no whale wants to waste many upvotes on non-profitable upvoting of newbies.

I would love to learn that I am wrong - but sadly, logic does support my arguments. A pity, as I genuinely enjoyed the thought that I am helping a number of new posters...

$0.00

shadowspub (70) · 6 years ago

yes previously the 30 minute reverse auction would benefit the author. the benefit would decrease until the 30 minute mark where the curator then gained.

With the 15 minute reverse auction the rewards are burned in decrease amount until the 15 minute mark.

Same auction, just where the rewards were directed changed.

$0.00

arthur.grafo (69) · 6 years ago

I wanted to be certain that I am not being pigheaded, so I asked all my friendly posters (all are writers or artists or musicians or poets - in other words, they are not crypto experts).

They have told me that as soon as the reward changes to 50 / 50, they are moving elsewhere. It seems I am the only one of them who will keep posting - though all my posts will refuse payments....

$0.00

worldtraveller32 (64) · 6 years ago

be interesting of what happens on the next fork

$0.00

petermarie (57) · 6 years ago

Hey Piotr,

I TOTALLY agree with you. 100%! Personaly, I've never had any issues with self-upvoting, especially when the author does create good content. This proposal will benefit those who invest without creating content (mainly for upvoting) but take away from those who create content, including those who invest to do so. Also, I'm getting confused. Wasn't Steemit created to be a social media blockchain for rewarding content creators? Investors' reward should be expected when the token increases in value, which should be a natural result of the platform increasing in value... an event I don't have any issues with either.

Cheers!
Peter

$0.00

crypto.piotr (70) · 6 years ago

Dear @petermarie

I'm glad to see that you accepted my invitation and you enjoyed this publication.

I only just realized that I never thanked you for your comment. Appreciate it.

Piotr

$0.00

g-shot (58) · 6 years ago (edited)

For me as a creator it seems i may lose here. Its already hard to be seen and growth is very slow. Iam here now for a few months and i have about 100 people apreciating my content. I can hope that the hubs share my content more and i get double the reach. Is that so i may be happy. But iam not sure. Time will tell. If people just act the same i will be on the losing end of things. Also i dont think that selfvoting will stop. To be honest I would continue doing so. Yet there is enough good content to also vote on.

My hope! Stayes with hubs creating reach for creators. They hopefully have more motivation to share good content. So we dont get double the reach but may be even better curated content. Right now iam relaxed - its nothing i will have much of an influence on i guess.

Again - Time will tell!

$0.00

crypto.piotr (70) · 6 years ago

Dear @g-shot

I'm glad to see that you accepted my invitation and you enjoyed this publication.

I only just realized that I never thanked you for your comment. Appreciate it.

Piotr

$0.00

mintymile (67) · 6 years ago

Well, if authors upvoting themselves is a problem, just make a feature which does not allow them to upvote themselves.

I don't see why voting yourself is such a issue, its ok, just give them that leverage and leave, not a bg deal.

$0.00

safetony (47) · 6 years ago

I'm not sure how I feel about this, too many pros and cons on either side, will be interesting to see how this plays out. I guess if its a disaster we can always fork again.

$0.00

quochuy (72) · 6 years ago

I'm also an author on Steem so this 50/50 switch would affect me as well, however I'm not so much concerned about it. Compared to other blogging and vlogging systems, I'm still getting paid more. As an author, I'm more focus on the product (my content) rather than how much money it will bring me, I'm playing on the long run: the more quality content I have, the more readership I will build and that's when money will come into play. Steem is still young so I think focusing on the financial aspect is too early.

We can't really predict how this will affect the whole user base globally but I believe it is worth the try and this can still be disabled in the future with another HF anyway.

A 50/50 split also means curators will receive more. Curators are those who you money by upvoting your content so I'm OK with them getting more and this might attract more new users in the future.

I believe we need to be "Agile" with how we go with the development of Steem so we need to keep implementing solutions, test them, modify them and so on. If we can be responsive and deliver quickly then we can adapt and make the product better. This is why we need more developers from the community involved in the development of the Condenser and the blockchain software.

However, I would like to see the 50/50 split and the SPS features isolated into separate HF so that we can launch them independently.

$0.00

crypto.piotr (70) · 6 years ago

Dear @quochuy

Thank you for accepting my invitation.

I realized just now that I never actually thanked you for your amazing comment. I appreciate your time :)

Have a great monday.
Piotr

belkisa758 (70) · 6 years ago

Thanks for the invitation to debate @crypto.Piotr. I, like you i think that this is an abuse. This new change, rather than attract, alienate users, I don't know if this is what you are looking for, if so you will succeed without any problem.

The theme of the bot, very well what poses, will not fail to receive huge profits at the expense of the work of others. Another important point will be the production of quality content, I do not believe that we dedicate ourselves to produce good topics knowing that repartiremos profits with those who already have it all.

If we observe today the movement on the platform, it is undeniable that have lowered the frequency of publications, that is to say, something negative for the ecosystem. At least for small users what will be our benefits? I do not see anything yet.

$0.00

crypto.piotr (70) · 6 years ago

Dear @belkisa758

Thank you for accepting my invitation.

I realized just now that I never actually thanked you for your amazing comment. I appreciate your time :)

At least for small users what will be our benefits? I do not see anything yet.

Neither do I :(

Have a great monday.
Piotr

$0.00

kaylinart (75) · 6 years ago

Yikes, This is something that hasn't crossed my mind. I think it could realistically go either way. But in the grand scheme of things, People will always do what benefits them the most.

Even though the auto botter could be abused. Maybe this would be a good thing to a certain degree, Because it would require people to use their votes? Not everyone wants to create content. So leaving them out has never been good. But I also noticed that people have been largely inactive which makes it difficult to get votes.
This could change that.
I also see what you are saying about a ponzi scheme. But to be fair, A lot of investments pay in a similar matter. You make money with little effort, The more money you have, The more you make. because you are putting up a certain degree of risk.

$0.00

crypto.piotr (70) · 6 years ago

Dear @kaylinart

Thank you for accepting my invitation.

I realized just now that I never actually thanked you for your amazing comment. I appreciate your time :)

Have a great monday.
Piotr

$0.00

kaylinart (75) · 6 years ago

Maybe in the short term we will also see higher payouts as authors too.

$0.00

bembelmaniac (65) · 6 years ago

So im goin to write these short thingy, because i get really really angry. CMON Really , set to 50/50 from 75/25 Writers/Creators/Streamer get less for DO something and BOTS getting more for do NOTHING only being a bot. And Yes this is the way coming up but what will happens... People will stop creating new POSTS, so BOTS dont get enough to Vote, so they will start to Vote their own POSTS to gaiun the POWER they n want to have... This is the GRIMREAPER of the SYSTEM of STEEM/it . Its the complete wrong way how to handle it, they had to start to power the CREATORS not the BOTTING systems... but they fu**ed it up... i know at least a lot of people which start to power down now and going to leave this system. Im really sad because i loved this amazing THING STEEMIT when i joined but with HF 20 and upcoming HF 21 they destroyed it !!

$0.00

crypto.piotr (70) · 6 years ago

Thank you for this your comment @bembelmaniac

I only just realized that I never thanked you. Have a great monday ahead :)

Yours
Piotr

$0.00

bucipuci (64) · 6 years ago

Thank you for your invitation to the discussion. It took me an hour to get through and read all the posts.

Google translate from Czech
Each of the discussing parties has strong arguments. One and the other can be understood.
As for my point of view, I'm about to do this:
The authors of the content will be reduced with the proposed modification. It is a question of whether it will be to the benefit or to the detriment of the platform. Many shitpost authors will move their initiative to curatorship. Maybe we get rid of looking at posts with one photo for dozens of SBDs.
The only thing I don't really understand is a downvote. What is it for? If I don't like the post, I don't vote for it and it's done for me. I rather understand the downvote as an unfair destruction of competition.
It is soon to evaluate what the changes will bring. This will show the time and willingness of users to keep this platform moving and of good quality.

$0.00

crypto.piotr (70) · 6 years ago

Dear @bucipuci

Thank you for accepting my invitation.

I realized just now that I never actually thanked you for your amazing comment. I appreciate your time :)

Have a great monday.
Piotr

$0.00

bucipuci (64) · 6 years ago

It's my pleasure

$0.00

tsnaks (63) · 6 years ago

Well personaly I am fine with 50/50 rewards

Since I just got my SP up, and I am curating now quite alot

$0.00

src3 (54) · 6 years ago

Probably people will still self vote...I hated this in the beginning, but a lot of orcas and dolphins told me to do so for growth purposes. We'll see ;)

Posted using Partiko Android

$0.00

cwow2 (65) · 6 years ago

I have the same though as you with the 50%.
I dont create great content, by now I can grow twice as fast? Doesn't feel right. Not sure I would call it a ponzi scheme tho :p
There might be less demand of bidbots, but what about bots which you just delegate to and give an upvote? They can give out bigger upvotes faster.
Or paid upvote services.
Or sbi share x)

Posted using Partiko Android

$0.00

crypto.piotr (70) · 6 years ago

Dear @cwow2

I'm glad to see that you accepted my invitation and you enjoyed this publication.

I only just realized that I never thanked you for your comment. Appreciate it.

Piotr

$0.00

anroja (79) · 6 years ago

Thank you @crypto.piotr, for your invitation to comment on HF21. I take the middle ground for this HF21, maybe with a higher percentage of content creators, for example 60-40%. That would be very fair in my opinion.

$0.00

crypto.piotr (70) · 6 years ago

Dear @anroja

I'm glad to see that you accepted my invitation and you enjoyed this publication.

I only just realized that I never thanked you for your comment. Appreciate it.

Piotr

$0.00

camiloferrua (68) · 6 years ago

I really don't think this change should be implemented alone @crypto.piotr. I think other measures should be added to make it more impactful. I don't know what these should be, but if the problem is that people self-uptvote, Steemit can change the way the platform works so that no user can self-upvote.

Maybe users should be rewarded just for being investors holders. I mean... In our wallet is the SAVINGS field. Maybe users who have Steem in there should have a % of rewards depending on the amount of Steem they're holding there, and maybe that should be like a amount of Steem that users are indirectly delegating to the Steemit account to be use to vote the content creators in general.

I don't know, we need to start thinking in new ways to work with the Steem on the blockchain.

$0.00

crypto.piotr (70) · 6 years ago

Dear @camiloferrua

Thank you for accepting my invitation.

I realized just now that I never actually thanked you for your amazing comment. I appreciate your time :)

Have a great monday.
Piotr

$0.00

cloudblade (69) · 6 years ago

My understanding , like you said that mean.
so I feel you are right!

$0.00

khussan (54) · 6 years ago

I think it will have a huge impact especially on bidbots since they would have to squeeze in more power to give returns or they would have to stop business in one way it would allow manual curators to earn more on the other hand like you said autoupvotes will start being abused as well

Posted using Partiko Android

$0.00

doifeellucky (64) · 6 years ago

Hello Piotr,

not much to add for me here! You said it all. We're on the same page with this. In general if you leave room for exploitation it's gonna happen. I also see bid bot's growing even faster.

Cheers!

$0.00

crypto.piotr (70) · 6 years ago

Thank you for this your comment @doifeellucky

I only just realized that I never thanked you. Have a great monday ahead :)

Yours

$0.00

doifeellucky (64) · 6 years ago

Sure! My pleasure! You have a great Monday too!

Cheers

$0.00

beerlover (62) · 6 years ago

^{To view or trade BEER go to steem-engine.com.}

Hey @crypto.piotr, here is your BEER token. Enjoy it!

$0.00

thecryptodrive (70) · 6 years ago

Hi friend thanks for sending me a memo, BuildTeam has recently created a forum where structured and easily discoverable discussion can take place around HF’s, please visit https://neosteem.com/topic-list?category=hf21 and have your say.

$0.00

crypto.piotr (70) · 6 years ago

Dear @thecryptodrive

I only had a chance to read your comment just now. thx for sharing this link. will definetly check it out right away.

Yours
Piotr

$0.00

ahmadmanga (65) · 6 years ago

To be honest I'm not optimistic about this HF and since my earnings are mostly from uncertain curations (read: don't always happen.) I think I'll earn less from now on which is discouraging.

I understand both sides point of view, and I"m leaning more on your view piotr (It will not stop abuse!) Though I agree with someone here that no one knows what will happen yet.

$0.00

crypto.piotr (70) · 6 years ago

Dear @ahmadmanga

I'm glad to see that you accepted my invitation and you enjoyed this publication.

I only just realized that I never thanked you for your comment. Appreciate it.

Piotr

krischik (61) · 6 years ago

After all they can switch on auto-upvotes

I noted that on my #utopian-io posting. They attract quite a few upvotes from user who I suspect never actually read the posting as some upvotes come in quicker than you can read the post.

I can only guess those curators don't know of the 15 minute limit. And after said 15 minutes there is a huge wave of upvotes. Anga

My impression is that Steemit is turning into ponzi scheme.

Maybe it was one all along. Time will tell.

would HF21 help or destroy bidbots?

Hope dies last. So those who, in the past, put their hope on bitbots will continue to do so. So bitbots will, for a while, make a huge profit.

PS: Quite a lot of curators don't know how votes work. Beating my on drum I like to point out Part 9 of my tutorial:

https://steemit.com/utopian-io/@krischik/using-steem-api-with-ruby-part-9
´
And here screenshot at the end:

Three out of of nine votes were worthless. And that is normal.

$0.00

thecryptodrive (70) · 6 years ago

Hi @krischik can I ask you to share your opinion on our forum https://neosteem.com/topic-list?category=hf21

$0.00

definethedollar (67) · 6 years ago (edited)

I find the speed with which HF21 has gone from proposal to potential, the disagreements between witnesses, and the HF20 debacle combine to make me very wary of this fork.

I don’t think bidbots are such a big problem that we need to keep redesigning the system to try and stop them when they just alter or adjust their code and keep right on while the rest of us deal with the fallout.

Also, it’s extremely frightening when the argument is “well, users have no other alternative”...’cause that means there soon will be.

$0.00

crypto.piotr (70) · 6 years ago

Dear @definethedollar

I'm glad to see that you accepted my invitation and you enjoyed this publication.

I only just realized that I never thanked you for your comment. Appreciate it.

Piotr

$0.00

kharma.scribbles (57) · 5 years ago

I think bid-bots are having some problems because not many of them stayed profitable to those who bid minimum bid or less than some certain amount of STEEM.. in many cases, due to the 50/50 split, you are lucky if you break even on some of the bots..

There is one bot I know of that remains profitable, I won't mention it here because it will attract the attention of the serial downvoter trails.. which I don't agree with that either btw.. I consider auto-downvoting to be abuse, since you have no idea what you're downvoting/punishing.. discriminating only because the post received a bid-bot vote is irresponsible. So those that use it are just as abusive as the 'bid-botters'.

I have definitely received more curation rewards. I disagree that comments shouldn't be upvoted and I wish that movement never started. I understand the reasoning but at the same time, people have to remember that your vote is only worth less than it was worth before the HF.. What if a user joined after the HF? They have nothing to compare their vote too, so to them their reward value is normal!

Sadly, there was so much misinformation and negativity before the HF even happened that noone even gave it a chance once it did.
People just hopped on the 'no vote comments' bandwagon because that's what they think they are supposed to do, I don't even think half the people understand the curve and are just echoing misinformation and moaning about their rewards instead of focusing on finding out what works now and putting in the effort to do the work.

I became active a few weeks before the HF, and my intro post was posted before the HF but it paid out after the HF so it's rewards were adjusted.. However, I still have 0 complaints as I'm making decent earnings for how long I've been here and how newb I am to blogging. My account is constatnly growing so I can't complain about my vote worth since it's always bigger than last week..

The universe will manifest what it thinks you want.. if you keep entertaining negative thoughts, that is what the universe will think you want and it will give you negativity.

*The word 'you' used throughout this comment has been used more in a general context and not meant towards any one specific person or group.

$0.00

fucho80 (71) · 6 years ago (edited)

Dear @crypto.piotr and all who participate, is a very good discussion raised here, the real analyst is the one who will benefit the HF21 the most and I believe that a balance point should be created in which we all benefit, I understand that we need the investors to maintain the platform but the content managers are the ones that give life and add to this platform the real value of what it is now.

In my opinion we are always afraid of the changes, but any change introduced needs some time to see what results it brings, I think we should wait and see what happens, but if the result is the balance welcome.

Now, when I speak of balance, I refer to the fact that this not only commits us as creators of content but also as curators since we will obtain equal profits from both activities.

That is my opinion.

$0.00

gandhibaba (72) · 6 years ago

Thanks for this balanced opinion shared here. It is a noble one. We all will benefit one way or the other from the proposed changes. Regards.

$0.00

jacksonchakma (64) · 6 years ago

The quality content creators are at loss, and the one who is at profits are those who can play a game with the bots...

$0.00

victorbz (65) · 6 years ago (edited)

Hello there Crypto.Piotr ! i just got your meme and was intrigued to read about this HF21 with the goal to understand what is going on on Steemit. I was in a long pause away of Steemit something like around 6 months bcos of my deep disappointment in the scheme how this system is working and where the money is going. Right now I'm trying to invest to my posts with the power of the OCDB bot - initially, i hate this idea to pay to bots with the goal to make my posts more "trending" in terms of payment instead of to make it more interesting in terms of the content inside these posts. I don't know how long i will continue this game, cos i finished almost all my Steem and SBD already :-)) This way is wrong but as i know - another way is just to leave this place, no matter what HF we - 20 or 21.
I really understand how the situation with "50/50" is confusing.

$0.00

crypto.piotr (70) · 6 years ago

Dear @victorbz

Would you perhaps consider using "enter" from time to time? To separate blocks of texts? It would make it much easier to read.

Thank you for accepting my invitation.

I realized just now that I never actually thanked you for your amazing comment. I appreciate your time :)

Have a great monday.
Piotr

$0.00

victorbz (65) · 6 years ago

yes, I can but why? :-))

my text was too short and everything about the same theme. It's really interesting how completely ppl (sorry for saying this) lost their ability to read some "long" texts" in one time. Mostly I use paragraphs when I change the topic of conversation, not just because it's the right time to add another "enter".

Same on Whatsapp - some people write me messages and use the enter after every two-three words - this sounds like warnings or alerts and I hate to get this amount of notifications and finally someone wanted to write: "hey, howru, I have some question, write me when you can"

never mind - severed my text to a few parts, hope this helps you
Victor

$0.00

famigliacurione (70) · 6 years ago

Thank you for reaching out to me for my thoughts on these important subjects of our time.

Self Votes

I believe self voting should be automatic. In other words, when an Author writes a post, there should be a slider near the POST button to determine the self vote %. If 0%, then no self vote is cast; however, if you set, for example 50%, your account will upvote your post after 6.5 days. Why? Because investing in one's own ideas or projects is in alignment with the entrepreneurial spirit. When the true entrepreneur is bringing his or her idea into the world, they are looking to offer it for the benefit of others, and self. Often, entrepreneurs put all of their personal funds into a project because they are the first to believe in themselves and what they are creating. But what they create is ideally intended to be of service to others. Hence, my reasoning that the self vote should be scheduled for 6.5 days, because it would add to the curation pool, adding value to those who upvoted you in the previous days. It's a win/win. Otherwise, we should simply eliminate the self vote.

50/50 Curation

This is fair to me. The Steem community does not consist of 75% Authors, and Authors should not be given a greater role on this blockchain, because the blockchain is maintained by thousands of witnesses, hundreds of developers, thousands of curator, hundreds of investors and last, but definitely LEAST, Authors. It's true that Authors create content for the community, but Authors become irrelevant without readers. And I've seen excellent Authors walk away from Steem because there was no following. 50/50 curation will also increase the number of Authors being curated. I presently support about 200 content creators; if my curation rewards are to double, I will add another 200!!! This creates more distribution.

Downvotes

What is the real value of downvoting? Why should we have the right to interfere with what a person earns from what they create? When have you ever not watched a video on YouTube because of the amount of dislikes it received? Can we truly demonstrate that downvoting has helped Steem?

If I place my vote for an Author, which adds a monetary value to their post, why should someone else be allowed to cancel out a part of what I've wanted to give that Author? If I were to pull my money out of the bank and place it in a bowl, together with others, to give to someone because we like what that person has done or created, how dare someone come and take money out of that bowl to give back to the bank!!! I would go ballistic, and forgive me, but might actually hurt the dude!

To be honest, I'm afraid to downvote for fear of retaliation! And I know I'm not alone! I don't have a lot of Steem Power, nor do I get a lot of votes for my posts. And there are moments in which I would like to hit the downvote button to show discontent with what I've read, or a person's behavior, but I don't!

And this is where I believe the real value of the downvote should be focused. It should be a tool for the expression of discontent, and not a determination of whether the Author, or his posts, have value. Who are we to decide what others should like or dislike? The only reason a downvote should take shares out of the reward pool is to counter a self-vote. In this way, you are directly challenging the Author, and not interfering with the decisions made by curators.

Dear @crypto.piotr, thanks again for reaching out to me for my thoughts. I enjoy these kinds of discussions. Feel free in the future to simply tag me in your posts or comments, rather than transfer funds with a memo, unless that method is easier for you.

$0.00

crypto.piotr (70) · 6 years ago

Dear @famigliacurione

Thank you for accepting my invitation.

I realized just now that I never actually thanked you for your amazing comment. I appreciate your time :)

Have a great monday.
Piotr

$0.00

cwow2 (65) · 6 years ago

What about bots or platforms like smartsteem? Wouldn't they be able to provide 201% roi since you are paying for it and they use users votes??

Posted using Partiko Android

$0.00

udow (61) · 6 years ago

Thanks for your message, so I read your really interesting post and I should say you have more than right.

I have one more point whom you don't touched.

Everybody who have at least 5.000 Steempower can create new steemit account for free and I saw people here you saved nearly 100 steemit accounts.

So it's very easy to get full reward like before. You just open second account transfer their half of your steempower and than start that both accounts vote eachother.

You are owner of both accounts so you get all rewards.

In every case this change will be a benefit for all big accounts here at steemit and the small account will be the looser and maybe with some post in future not even reach the payout limitation.

$0.00

don-thomas (68) · 6 years ago

Dear @crypto.piotr you asked for my opinion regarding the coming HF21 and your comment on @gandhibaba´s post so here we are.
I´m not sure about if you looked in my profil before (I guess, or hope so), if I heard the first time from that a few days ago it was like a sledge hammer what hits my head, I thought I must have had some serious difficulties with th eunderstanding of this issue.

I couldn't stop thinking about consequences of this vital change. After all moving from "75/25" reward model to "50/50" is a huge deal.

First of all I agrree fully with that it is a huge deal but let´s see what´s next.

In other words: content creators doing actual work will have it even harder to be rewarded. In order to get any rewards they need to create content.

YES that´s also effecting me and my posts (like all of us who´s posting here), and this is not the sort of posts what I will call abuse.

At the same time curators do not need to do any work. After all they can switch on auto-upvotes and simply enjoy growing twice as fast.

This for sure is something what I can´t accept like you wrote it, I only will accept it for the curationbots, but please think about that also:
I am one of the curators from the German Steem-Bootcamp and there we read manualy all posts in the TAG GERMAN and when one of us means one is worth to get an upvote its done. This process takes at least 2 to 4 hours from my very small daily freetime, and its all for the community we are voting with an community account and use this to boost the community nobody from us had any gains except the votes we get from other curators from the team.
We don´t vote our own content (I specially not even with my own account, except the vote what comes from the trail I don´t see a chance to change or avoid that).
So not everthing is black and white there are some shades as well, like you possibly can see now.

But at least I mean just like you the HF21 makes everything worse for the authors and it opens the door for the Bots to plunder the pools, and nobody is there to avoid that sh... :(
Zwischenlinie-2 für Steem-Post 940x120.png
with sunny greetings from Andalusia

Don Thomas

$0.00

crypto.piotr (70) · 6 years ago

Dear @krischik

Thank you for accepting my invitation.

I realized just now that I never actually thanked you for your amazing comment. I appreciate your time :)

This process takes at least 2 to 4 hours from my very small daily freetime

Wow. Respect! How long have you been doing it already?

HF21 makes everything worse for the authors and it opens the door for the Bots to plunder the pools, and nobody is there to avoid that sh

You nailed it :(

Have a great monday.
Piotr

$0.00

don-thomas (68) · 6 years ago

Tank you @crypto.piotr for the reply, I´ve been doing this for now more than 10 month.
Wish you also a great week and a lot of fun with the climbing prices from the rest of the cryptos ;)
Zwischenlinie-2 für Steem-Post 940x120.png
with sunny greetings from Andalusia

Don Thomas

$0.00

littleboys-faiz (59) · 6 years ago

very interesting conclusion ... before I wanted to give you a thumbs up for your efforts regarding HF21, and I think that something you describe about it is not a mistake of your thinking. I agree what you say and of course we have proven it equally, abuse is indeed a great opportunity for content providers that are not perfectly controlled. everyone can do it and everyone can be so easy to divert.

$0.00

crypto.piotr (70) · 6 years ago

Dear @littleboys-faiz

I'm glad to see that you accepted my invitation and you enjoyed this publication.

I only just realized that I never thanked you for your comment. Appreciate it.

Piotr

$0.00

littleboys-faiz (59) · 6 years ago

when you invite me, for me it is a sincere intention, and when you do not reply to comments, I feel that is normal, because so many comments you have to face, I understand @crypto.piort

Posted using Partiko Android

$0.00

cryptogee (75) · 6 years ago

The main reason I don't like the switch, is because Steemit came into being saying that they were there for the content creators. It was a case of "tired of getting ripped off by all the other platforms? Well come to Steemit and get rewarded".

Now they are just treating us like everyone else. Someone clicking a button is seen as the same value as someone creating content. Also Steemit now make money from those awful Google ads on content that I was paid out (or not) weeks, months, or even years ago.

To be honest the whole thing is putting me off this platform, and is why I hardly post on here anymore, and rarely bother checking my messages.

$0.00