Authors do not get 75% reward. That's a lie. Authors get 0% reward. Why? Because nobody is out there looking for what to upvote.
Minnows and redfishes like myself who are lucky enough to have votes trailing their accounts should not make the mistake of thinking that's what goes out there.
Nobody's gives a fuck.
The few that do what do they get?
Ned mutes them.
That's right.
The CEO of Steemit is muting an old respected hardworking veteran of Steem for taking a time out of his busy schedule to care about Steem
As far as rewards go, a 50% split between the author and curators is a better bet. Read again. I said "better" bet. And come to think of it, if a post has 30 real curators, is it really that terrible to share 50% of a $100 post among them while the author takes the other half? Plus if you feel the curators are taking too much did it ever occur to you that you can I don't know partake in that same art of curation?
Rewards are a big part of the foundation of this platform. If that same reward continues to be tilted out of balance, how on earth is the building not going to collapse?
If it ever looks like this dude complains alot well guess what? So do you.
If you've ever felt disinterested in making a post because of all the shit flying around, ever asked yourself "what's the point?" that's you complaining against the current system.
If we don't have a win-win or at least a near win-win situation, this shitfest will last long enough to watch wallets get devalued all the way down to zero.
Proposals have been made countless times. Cervantes put together a post concerning this proposal.. Top witnesses voted for it. Not a word has been heard since.
.png)
Everyone yaps about mass adoption yet the only people that can afford to stay put on this blockchain are folks whose financial muscles are totally dependent on their jobs offchain?
You want people - the resourceful full-time content creators - to dump their blogs, Instagram and its likes and move to Steem where there's neither an audience - our blogs don't even have a view counter - nor reward.
Isn't that fucking stupid?
Where are the @hodgetwins today?
Powering down and leaving just like all other content creators like them that came over from YouTube.
If @theycallmedan didn't have the offchain means to buy 1 milllion Steem and power it up, you really think he'd quit YouTube for Dtube? Dan be truthful to yourself.
Nobody is getting any 75% reward. That's a fucking lie. Being lucky doesn't count. This was supposed to be Proof of Brain not Proof of Luck. It's easy to get comfortable when you have buddies upvoting you regularly.
If that continues to be the case, we will have to perform a miracle greater than Jesus' conversion of water into wine: get to the moon without mass adoption.
People here say nobody would produce content if there was a 50/50 split. They can go ahead and tell that to everyone on Youtube.
At least here, 50% would go to any stakeholder who wishes to participate, instead of padding the wallets of a select few billionaires.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Plus whoever thinks he or she is missing out on the other 50 should put on a Curation robe and hit the streets in search of content. After all it is very easy and doesn't require work.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Many seem content with earning 10% of the reward pool, if that. That's what they want though, when they produce content, purchase votes, then walk away and call it a day. If everyone did that, 90% of the reward pool would go to people who are paid to look away, and the content producers would continue to struggle, lacking a viewership/readership. They'd prefer 10% of the entire reward pool, and cringe at the possibility of earning 50%. Their heads are screwed on backwards.
And honestly, if people think I complain too much. Fuck 'em. I put my ass on the line to stand up for people because I was sick of watching them earn pennies and go unnoticed. I was sick of being one of the only voters with a valuable vote when I vote for certain people and watching their content stagnate while others steal the spotlight with shit posts nobody cares about and paid votes.
I'm done talking about it now and these folks can continue to take it up the ass because that's what they want.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
The dollar signs at the bottom of our posts are the things screwing a lot of people's head. And then there's a shocking disregard for the art of being realistic. With how hard it is to make it as a content creator that is.
And then math! Most of them can't add numbers to save their lives. You think those popular folks on Trending are aware of the 10% as opposed to the 50% analogy? Your guess is as good as mine.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
They're somehow happy to make it possible for others to earn far more money from their work, than they earn from their work. If I bought $100 worth of "rewards", I'm supposed to be incredibly happy if I see a 10% "ROI" (they actually have the nerve to call this an investment). That means 90% of the value created from my labor goes to someone else. I don't even a know a country with a dictator that takes 90% income tax. That 90% can't even exist without the one doing all the work pressing the buttons. If they simply skipped the vote buying, everyone would earn more, even with a 75/25 split. If you take the bidbot Rshares out of the equation, stop them from dipping in the reward pool, all of our votes are then worth more, even the newest minnow. If these people stopped handing over 90% to vote dealers, pulling thousands of meaningless rewards from the pool, daily, we'd probably see our previous post value increase overnight. People here don't get this though. They literally have NO IDEA how this place works.
If you were offered a deal to paint a fence. One contract said you earn $1000 and the other contract said you earn $1000 but 90% of that goes to someone else who did nothing, and the only way this perfect stranger can earn 90% is if you agree, otherwise they get nothing... which contract would you choose? You're going to take the one that says you get $1000. Here, people take the one that says they get $1000, but 90% goes to someone else for doing nothing. Never, in all my years, have I seen such stupidity.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
From what I can tell, it seems that the audience comes when the money comes, when there's earning potential for interacting on the blockchain.
For now, we're doomed to aquire cheap steem while we wait for the next big rally.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
If Steem increases in price and people swoon back, it still won't necessarily mean there's earning potential for interacting with the blockchain. In the true sense of the word that is.
Voting will still be agnostic, same circles will keep voting for themselves and selfvoting / vote selling will be more profitable.
It will just be another Bubble Fest. Like December last year.
That's not sustainable.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
If downvotes get their own pool, it will be the end of content.
Over the past year I have spent every day (I think I may have missed 2 total) actually looking at and voting on funny posts. I have rented SP to use on these posts, have recruited some accounts to follow my voting trail and have spent quite a bit of time each day on this.
If there is a separate downvote pool, I will spend zero seconds on this. I would have to be insane to spend any time on curating when there is a very strong possibility that someone will just come by and flag the posts I choose or my own post I make in order to help pay for the rental of SP.
The only safe/flag proof way to interact with the platform will be to not interact with the platform and just sell my SP to a bid bot. I would imagine it won't take long for the few others who actually care about content to figure that out and do the same.
I don't mind losing money. I do mind losing my time. There is no way in hell I would lose both.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
The Curse of Decentralization then. So many perspectives and nobody or policy can satisfy everyone. I look at the separate downvote pool and the only thing I see is a stocked rifle meant solely for killing off spam. I will be dumb not to admit there's the possibility of an uprising screaming "how the hell do one get $10 for a gif!" and thus click the red flag.
No matter what gives, I will keep rooting for policies that always tend towards the midpoint of everyone's general satisfaction.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
It sure would be great if that loaded rifle were used to do good things for good content and the platform. Just like it sure would be great if people used their upvotes for good content and the platform. That simply does not happen. It is absolutely silly to believe that the same people who use upvotes to only benefit themselves will use downvotes to help others. They will do the exact same thing with downvotes that they do with upvotes, use them to benefit themselves. Except in this case they will fill the platform with negativity and make it impossible for the few people who actually care to do any good. At least right now, no one is stopping curators who care from assigning rewards to quality content. That will change if there is no financial cost for downvotes.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
A big obstacle on this platform is that we never know how a proposal will turn out until will test it.
The only hindsight we've had at any juncture, is taking what's currently happening and using to predict what will likely happen.
As a result, you're very much correct when you say people will continue to use it to their advantage.
It also means not everyone will abuse the downvote pool. The ones who're currently using upvotes for the betterment of this platform will also use downvotes for the same cause.
Other than using downvotes for whale-fightings, the JerryBanfields of Steem and spammy contents, I have never come across a scenario where well known/well established content curators/curation movements get flagged.
But again no matter how many years one spends on this blockchain, it remains an unknown beast.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
But isn't the exact problem you are talking about? Not enough people are using their upvotes to help the platform and content. Why would anyone believe there would be enough people using downvotes to help content and the platform?
The reason you have "never come across a scenario where well known/well established content curators/curation movements get flagged" is because it takes money out of the pockets of the self centered people in order to flag. They can choose to vote themselves or they can choose to flag. Not both. Unless of course you give them a separate pool of flags that does not hurt their earning power.
And is it really the established content creators who need protection or is it new people starting out who could possible bring great value but they never get a chance?
Right now the self centered people have a way to help themselves and indirectly hurt others. A separate pool gives them a way to help themselves, indirectly hurt others and directly hurt others.
You are correct that it is impossible to tell unless you try. It might work. But then again monkeys might fly out of my butt.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
I can see it being abused. People already buy votes and push other content producers aside and out of sight, so I have trouble seeing these people start caring about others with free flags to use.
I like the 50/50 though. People say it means the ones selling votes will earn more. Well, yeah, so why buy the vote? Who's going to buy votes if it always means a loss for buyers? How will vote sellers "earn more" if there's no demand to buy votes? If a content producer is set up to earn more, organically, why, in the actual fuck, would they waste money on vote dealers?
A content producer today loses potential views and money, therefore wasting time producing content, due to simpletons purchasing votes. I'm sure you've noticed a few thousand leave since you've been here. I have trouble finding reasons to stick around, but I do, because I'm crazy. Those who left, I get it. You curate, I curate. Our efforts should be helping people. The moment I vote for someone who needs it, their content gets buried by a shitpost promoted by charlatans who don't care about anything or anyone and holy fuck I'm sorry for this rant.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
'Please don't follow me. You will be dissapointed.'
I'll take the risk. Like ur style. CU
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Haha.. At least I warned you xD
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit