But just because you're a good person doesn't mean you know what's best or understand what it's like to feel pleased about a post worth 3 Steem. That's the reality for most good users.
If you want to scroll back to the beginning of my posts (3 years ago) you will realize the incorretness of this statement. I started out just like every other minnow and worked my ass off posting and building a following. My "graveyard" of posts that I spent hours on and made nothing is likely 10 times as big as most of the people complaining about not earning enough on posts.
Just speaking for myself, the platform doesn't seem broken the way witnesses talk about it. I get there are abuses, but they seem like they require attention, not EIP.
Every single "regular user" I have recruited to the platform has left because it sucked. Every single "investor" that I have tried to get to invest has not put any money into the platform. My experiences are not isolated. Sure, there are a rare few who stick around or invest money - but the platform is not going to scale in it's current form.
Again, I wish we could have had real conversations with users on chain.
There have been thousands of conversations between witnesses and regular users prior to approving this. We have likely heard every single argument that you are going to make against it, and responded somewhere. Part of the problem is that this is a decentralized platform, and these conversations are happening all over the place - comments sections of the hundreds of posts about the hardfork, podcast interviews, discord, steem.chat, etc. You seem to think that because we are moving forward that we just haven't heard the arguments against it, and we are ignorantly running off a cliff. It is really more that we have heard all the arguments, listened to all of them, and this is what we decided.
If everyone you've brought to the platform has left, I suggest you check out @freewritehouse. We bring new users and retain them, and many buy steem. I have tips about how that's accomplished if you're interested. It does have to do with consistent interaction, community building, and niche interests.
Posted using Partiko Android
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
There are definitely niche groups here that are doing well. I didn't mean to imply that nobody sticks around.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Also I haven't really gotten a good response to "rewarding comments will become a thing of the past"
It seems important to me. Am I wrong?
Posted using Partiko Android
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
I don't know.
Whether you/we like it or not, Steem is a stake based system. The largest stakeholders are going to have the most influence over what gets rewarded. Historically we have not done a good job at getting the large stakeholders (who's votes matter most) to pay attention to "the little guy".
One of the main goals of HF21 is to get the more larger stakeholders actively participating in curation. Whether they decide to curate posts or comments or both remains to be seen. I know in the past, @blocktrades has done a lot of comment curating.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
The corollary is also true:
Those who have focused more on doing what's best for the platform and less on ROI therefore have smaller stakes, so we're taking power away from them.
Posted using Partiko Android
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
You can frame it however you want. At the end of the day, there are very few (if any) minnows on the platform right now earning enough rewards to make it worth their time to contribute. You can fight to keep the status quo - which already sucks for minnows, or you can get behind a change that has the potential to make things better.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Not to be snarky, but one could rephrase this to say
Historically, the largest stakeholders have demonstrated their unwillingness to do what's best for the platform, so we've decided to give them more power.
Posted using Partiko Android
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Having minnowhood three years ago and having it today are very different experiences. I was a minnow starting out 2 years ago, and the culture of steem was just different. It's changed. And I even recognize in myself an impulse to identify with the people who are in my steem station. But we shouldn't forget that new users who become old users are what we need and we need to hear their voices.
Anyways. I do hope you have those numbers about how much reward pool will theoretically be freed up if the abuses stop. That's the only thing that I can imagine would explain why after listening to all these arguments you've made the decision you have. I just haven't seen data.
Posted using Partiko Android
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
I have not forgotten. I want more large stakeholders to curate content, which means voting on more content from minnows.
I am voting based on my subjective opinion of what I feel is right for the platform.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit