Steem experiment: Burn post #2

geekgirl (72) · 7 years ago

Interesting experiment. Burning should be streamlined, which could be possible with fixing promoted feature. If promoted feature is incentivized to use, burning could become a common practice and as a result benefit all.

$6.07

7 votes

smooth (70) · 7 years ago

Yes the promoted feature could be improved in a number of ways.

$36.51

6 votes

ravenground (43) · 7 years ago (edited)

Trying to make a difference in steemit so that it does not collapse and make it more stable and stronger than the one before. It's good if it does. The question is: will we make it possible? The people are swayed by the money that steemit offers, but what if steemit suddenly collapse...?

$0.00

geekgirl (72) · 7 years ago

I think influential, respected, and witness members such as yourself should start a conversation on the burning Steem/SBD and fixing promote feature. I have some simple ideas, but you and other witnesses and whales probably would have some great solutions on this matter. Just the fact you are doing this experiment tells a lot. I will be burning all earnings from my comments in this post as well.

$0.00

jsteem (52) · 7 years ago (edited)

I dont get it
Edit, nvm intersting concept

$2.43

https://steemd.com/tx/9544f67b6c2070d8c862e8f62b7c24366118a615

smooth (70) · 7 years ago

Proof of burn

Author reward 314.966 SBD, and 64.636 STEEM POWER for smooth/steem-experiment-burn-post-2

Sold 314.966 SBD for 482.688 STEEM on internal market

Total burn of 64.636+482.688 = 547.324 STEEM

https://steemd.com/tx/192da72e0d2a36fdd583d67f2ebfb5974fc90124

$0.47

whatsup (75) · 7 years ago (edited)

While I understand burning Steem will add value to the "Surviving" Steem in theory.
This means anyone taking this action would rather burn the steem than use our tools to distribute it.

In a platform that a distribution problem in that too few people hold too much of the supply, I would like to hear more about the "thinking" this is a good idea, if anyone would like to spell out your thought process, I would enjoy reading it.

I've been here a while, but find I am always learning from real discussions.

Flagging to save the Steem from burning. :)

$0.46

3 votes

steemmatt (69) · 7 years ago (edited)

I can't believe that as people all over the world are potentially starving and desperately working for Steem to support themselves, an initiative has been created to burn Steem out of existence.

Is there any reason that it wouldn't be better to spread the rewards from an effort like this across underprivileged Steemians around the globe who have been scouted as worthy?

I appreciate the concept's mission to help the reward pool's health in the long run, but this makes me sick to my stomach. Perhaps I'm misunderstanding the mechanics or logic behind burning valuable Steem which minnows and human beings are desperate for.

I vote for an experiment to share the Steem more fairly from a benefactor pool, not destroy it. Thanks for your reply if you get the chance.

$0.45

3 votes

smooth (70) · 7 years ago

Is there any reason that it wouldn't be better to spread the rewards from an effort like this across underprivileged Steemians around the globe who have been scouted as worthy?

To the extent this is successful in increasing the price (which is quite likely since a significant amount of STEEM will be directly purchased from the market for the burning process) then it does benefit all Steemians, whether underprivileged or not.

$34.42

5 votes

steemmatt (69) · 7 years ago (edited)

Thanks for an amazingly quick reply and vote. I hear you, but want to propose the counter-thought that perhaps people in need are a higher priority than making sure every investor gets maximum return on their holdings via market price value.

For example, I haven't had 100% voting power in months, stuck well under 60% down to 28% because I love voting for others to help them. I don't care about maximizing my rewards because helping others is my highest priority.

To this end, I suggest a simultaneous experiment to see if people would vote to distribute the rewards, and let the numbers show which is preferred, or just do both at the same time.

I'm not nearly as experienced here as you are, but perhaps a different perspective could spark some additional positive change.

$0.00

smooth (70) · 7 years ago

suggest a simultaneous experiment to see if people would vote to distribute the rewards

All stakeholders already have the ability to do exactly that, by voting for the posts or comments they believe should receive rewards as you suggest. So I would claim we are conducting that exact experiment already!

$0.09

steemmatt (69) · 7 years ago (edited)

Understood. But you have the platform most don't. While all stakeholders have the ability, we both know well that many of the influential ones (via SP) sit on their hands, vote for their favorites, or let their bot delegations do their curation.

In principle, what you said is completely correct. In practice, watching on the ground floor daily, consensus seems to be that it's a miracle to have that occur in meaningful ways. Most stakeholders are minnows playing with bingo chips.

I really appreciate you taking the time to engage in discussion.

lexiconical (72) · 7 years ago (edited)

"people in need are a higher priority than making sure every investor gets maximum return on their holdings via market price value."

This would seem demonstrably (and obviously) false, as Steem is definitively NOT a charity, and definitively IS something you can invest in, ie. an investment.

What makes you think this is a charity, or that others who put real money in should?

You do realize what engaging in Steem charity does, right? Tiny mouths all dump immediately to feed, suppressing price. Investors may hold, increasing price.

$0.03

steemmatt (69) · 7 years ago (edited)

Thanks for catching my comments and sharing valid points. Since you asked:

In my view, in any society, platform, or world, People > $.

Charity > than building investor wealth.

Helping others in need is the best feeling in the world. Burning $ to make holders with real money more wealthy is beyond upsetting, etc., in my humble eyes.

"Charity" increases global awareness, goodwill, adoption, and utility, which would actually make Steem worth much more in price in the long run, if it's truly supposed to develop into a worldwide global currency. Is that logic not fair?

$0.38

matt-a (65) · 7 years ago

I'll up this one too in a bit after I help some folks I brought on board recently. Are you going to upvote this one? Don't see ya on the list yet.

smooth (70) · 7 years ago

Yes I'll be voting on these.

$0.42

katharsisdrill (71) · 7 years ago

I'll burn 10%

There was talk about burning money that was the revenue from ads. What happened to that idea. Commercials are annoying, but It did make some sense in terms of an economy that was based on other things than speculation.

smooth (70) · 7 years ago

I don't know what happened to that idea.

$0.10

katharsisdrill (71) · 7 years ago

I made this icon for the burn-posts - use it if you like.

$47.36

smooth (70) · 7 years ago (edited)

Thank you! I will use it.

If you want to make a new version with a little signature on it (say down in the bottom corner), that would be even better.

$0.37

katharsisdrill (71) · 7 years ago

Here it is:

Happy burning and thanks for the enormous upvote!

$0.47

katharsisdrill (71) · 7 years ago

OK, coming up.

$0.00

katharsisdrill (71) · 7 years ago (edited)

Nah, right now there is Gold-rush and gaming and euphoria, no one needs to talk about ads - being on Steemit feels just like going to vernissage in 2006 - everybody wanted a painting because that was what rich people had and they all suddenly had money. Many artists started making crap art to keep up with the demand. I made good money too, but I just waited for the down, and boy was that a down. Looking at the trending page here is a bit depressing. I respect that you try to do something in due time.

inertia (73) · 7 years ago

#1 is currently at 969.941, which is 0.024% of the reward pool. But as I understand it, the pool is for 7 days, so really, #1 is at 0.168% for the day it pays out.

Are these the kinds of numbers you were looking for?

$0.42

smooth (70) · 7 years ago

It's entirely up to the voters. $0 is a valid result, as are higher amounts.

$0.00

smooth (70) · 7 years ago (edited)

One thing I'd add is that a single daily post can really only receive a maximum 10% of the total assuming voters are using all of their vote power (of course this assumption is not entirely accurate, but probably somewhat accurate). That is because each voter has ten full-power votes to use per day, so if every single active voter supported the post it would get about 10%. A full realization of this concept would require multiple posts/comments per day. With only one post per day it is more of a proof of concept.

$0.00

inertia (73) · 7 years ago

This is entirely academic, but if one person really wanted to vote n times on the same post, they could vote, then delegate to another account ... n times. :D

But yes, point taken.

$0.00

smooth (70) · 7 years ago (edited)

You can vote then delegate and vote again, but you can't repeat the process because removing/changing the delegation takes 7 days. So you only get a one-time boost this way.

$0.00

nonameslefttouse (74) · 7 years ago

@smooth, I'm supposed to be on vacation. It's hard to put this place down.

In a comment here you said:

Yes the promoted feature could be improved in a number of ways.

In this post I explain the difference between true trending content and the paid programming we're actually seeing under that tab. I now believe this burning process could work alongside the solutions/suggestions I presented within that post to further the benefits of taking an honest approach to all of this.

As it stands now, we've been presented with a problem and offered a solution for a fee. That's the oldest trick in the advertisers book. A few more minds looking in to what I mentioned in that post could easily put a halt to exploits and abuse.

Have a good day.

$0.41

thabiggdogg (56) · 7 years ago (edited)

$0.00

netuoso (70) · 7 years ago (edited)

Do you tell people not to do X with their money in real life or just in SteemIt?

Btw just for some constructive insight, you would do better adding a small story or something to do along with your posts that just contain a title and a photo.

Your dmania posts do ok.

If you are capable of posting how tos or tutorials you should try using https://utopian.io because the bot will give you a very large vote if you follow the rules and your submission gets approved.

If you keep building a following and growing your community your posts will also earn more.

Smooth is an early investor and has been on Steem for a considerable amount of time. You shouldn't expect to earn like him after about one month on Steem.

$0.00

lexiconical (72) · 7 years ago

"I haven't had a job since 2006."

So, apparently you are useless to the world market, and think you somehow deserve the charity of those who do work and invest?

$0.00

fracasgrimm (60) · 7 years ago

Daaaaaaaammm. Snaps yo.

$0.00

mahmoodulhassan (24) · 7 years ago

I could not understand the concept of the series on Steem experiment: Burn
Someone would like to explain it in some simple and easy way

$0.00

moos (51) · 7 years ago

your post is very interesting, I like your post, because it can add insight to me, hopefully in the future can provide better postings, so I can know many things in my life, thank you very much. and also hopefully useful for other stemit friends.

$0.00

cryptojenn (42) · 7 years ago

I am working hard in the Steem community to get where I want to be, I know that it takes time and effort when being in a growing community like Steem. Thanks for blog!

$0.00

top5everywhere (48) · 7 years ago

i worked elegant and very useful information but i didn't got any reward.

$0.00

whatsup (75) · 7 years ago

I looked at your posts, and they included copy and pasting other people's work and pictures that were easily googled.
Don't expect rewards anytime soon.

$0.00