Let's do some quick math.
Youtube payout is about 2 USD per 1000 views.
A brand new steem account with no activity has a vote worth about 0,002 USD which is effectively equivalent to 2 USD per 1000 views, so let's take the 0,002 USD per view as a base reference.
How is this going to work?
Whenever a user watch a video 0,002 USD of his power is given to the video creator regardless of the user's steem power.
- Every user's would need to give the website voting permission.
- The voting would be done by the site automatically whenever a user watch a video.
- Users's steem power would also be checked automatically to determine how much % of the voting power should be used
to reward 0,002 USD. - (optional) New users would only be able to watch 10 videos per day ( 10 votes at 0,002 USD )or 70 per week unless they buy more steem power.
- The site would record only views made by users who were logged in.
I realize the 0,002 USD figure is a bit low considering steem has a lot less users than youtube and that views can only be recorded from users with a steem account, but this is an arbitrary number that could be increased.
Could something like this work in practice?
Views to me is a fairly good metric to gauge quality, or at least popularity. The point of such site would be to remove the unfairness perception that users have on steemit. I can understand why some users are frustrated but I don't think it's warranted. Steem is not unfair, 1SP = 1 vote can't get any fairer. This rule applies to everyone. The fact that some users are more wealthy than others is not a steem problem, it's an existential one.
The unfairness sentiment is something that can be improved with better UI/UX but first a better understanding of human psychology is required. A good question to start with is: Are steemians frustrated because they don't earn enough or are they frustrated because others earn more?
I love this but i think the payment of 0.002 USD/view should come from steemit itself then other steemians can also upvote according to how much they want.
This could also be the basis of the trending page. More views = more popularity should be there not how much upvote.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
So if I clicked on a post, that would automatically make it good?
No.
If someone didn't look, that would automatically make it bad?
No.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
I agree actually it's not really a good metric to gauge quality, but it's still better than circle jerk autovote so that tells a lot about the current system.
Views however are good to gauge attention which is what makes a site valuable.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
So you're thinking people will stop following their friends and viewing their posts just because the platform changed?
I would agree to a BONUS for views. I do see a lot of people earn a lot while their views are quite low.
For instance. You have 20 views now and nearly $40 for this short little post with your opinion. I have 60 views and just over $10 for something that includes a new work of art and 6 other works of art that I produced along with creative writing. All of that took well over 24 hours to produce.
Maybe this post of yours could be penalized and the money could come to mine? I think that would be fair.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Or maybe try and post it on facebook see how much you earn...
I think you should stop comparing your earnings with others. In a stake weight based system, that's the best way to go crazy
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Don't get smart with me. I'm simply pointing out the flaws in this logic using real world scenarios.
I'm not comparing, I'm just showing you what's happening.
According to your logic, you should be earning less here, so don't start telling me to leave. I've been here a long time. I've been through it all. Highs and lows. I've been grateful for everything and there's proof of that all over my blog.
Don't come at me like that. There's no point to it.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Your example shows that rewarding users based on view would be fairer, which is my point. What flaws are you refering to?
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
You weren't impressed the moment I said I should get more. You lashed out. Therefore, it's quite possible, changing something won't be the solution to these problems.
Real world scenario:
People on Youtube don't like it when others earn more than they do. They work hard too, and others earn more.
People on the job. Same thing. People quit their jobs because someone else got a raise. Know what I mean? Plenty of jealousy in the workforce.
Changing things won't take this problem away. It's actually not a problem. It's normal for people to feel like they deserve more than others. That's life.
No matter what systems are in place, we will still see people thinking it's unfair.
Catering to those people rather than the hard workers who don't mind starting at the bottom and working their way up is always a step in the wrong direction.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
I think you are reading a little too deep into this. I'm just proposing an alternative voting model. There will be many of these in the future simply because the one we have today is far from optimal.
That's where you lost me...
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
That's a great idea. I support you on this but they should do this as you say,
The site would record only views made by users who were logged in.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
I think ads should be implemented on posts more than 7 days old. Youtube can afford paying based on views because of adds. Why not let apps start using ads and use proceeds for older posts based on views instead of solely relying on reward pool?
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Rewarding views should certainly be considered on the Steem blockchain. We need to bring a lot of traffic to this site. Here's my thoughts, should external views or Steemian account view be considered?
Here is the possible scenario, accounts with more SP would certainly attract more views, because people try to get whales' attention to get an upvotes back.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Only steem accounts. To use external views would require an entire new design, I'm not sure if that's even possible.
The idea is to create a system where your SP doesn't matter.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
How about including that they'llbe no iota of censoring or taking down of channels for fear that the truth will be exposed like YouTube does . I think its important to include that
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
You can't take down channel or delete content on steem, the only censorship possible is to remove monetary reward. ( which I think is still a big issue)
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
I actually made a post about the viewcounts day ago: How to judge if a Steem user is popular?
The biggest problem to implement this idea is that our Steem blockchain do not record the viewcount...
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Though I like the idea, but don't think that up-voting would be the best way to go. What about each day that you are using the youtubelike service, you automatically upvote a post at 100% made by that service, no matter who you are. Once SMTs are released, you can send the videomakers some SMTs per view they get. The funds acquired by the upvote for the post at 100% can be used to rebuy the SMTs from the market to payout more users as time goes on.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
I completely agree with this suggestion. But about the number of videos per day. It won't be a bad idea if it is increased to say 15 to allow for more leverage.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
The restriction of 10 videos per day is because beyond that a new account's vote worth will be under 0,002 USD. So this would only apply to brand new accounts.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
It would be fair, but I think it would make users to0 hesitant to open videos of content they don't know yet, especially new users. A system where once a certain level of SP is reached, an auto 0.002 up-vote per view would be a really good idea indeed though!
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
I suggest that the arbitrary figure of 0.002 USD should be increased. I agree with every other thing
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
I love this, also a good thing about Steemit is that you can share pictures in comments, for example my DOG PORTRAIT project i am working on...
visit @mentederufus for more! and spread love :)
Thank you!
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit