You are viewing a single comment's thread from:

RE: Proposed Changes to Steem Economy

in #steem8 years ago (edited)

I'm unsure about the gradual part. Other than the large impact on witness projects, I mostly feel that "ripping the band-aid off" might be the best approach.

For the existing SP holders, one possibility would be to support two different power up periods permanently. There could be more incentives for 2 year holding, like a higher interest rate and possibly increased voting weight/curation rewards. You could also offer a one time window to convert from long to short.

Sort:  

I think it is harmful on the blogging side too. While the cut isn't quite as severe, it is still almost 40%. That is enough to accelerate the pace at which people see the site as not worth the effort and quit. A more gradual transition (on both) makes a lot more sense to me.

Again the main thing from my perspective that is clearly positive and almost without any disadvantages is replacing the hyperinflationary model, and I rather see that done as a clean change that does one thing that everyone can get behind rather than introduce large immediate reward cuts that could be good, could be bad, but are less obviously an overall improvement.

I do think the witness projects (and witnesses who are personally involved full time and relying on witness pay) are a big deal. This platform needs continued supporting services (such as anti-abuse work), investment, and development. Cutting that off abruptly without a transition period to develop new models and funding sources will certainly hurt on the platform side, but it is only speculation whether a more immediate cut in rewards would actually help on the investor side. As an investor, I've been skeptical that the rewards (all of them, but especially the high blogging rewards) are bringing the value to the platform that the are supposed to, but I'd also be concerned about disruption of platform investment and potential loss of users really hurting the platform longer term.

If it would flush out all the shitty writers, I'm all for it!

In fact, take away all rewards for writers so we are left with those who do it for survival, out of a sheer desire. Then resume payment after those have been established. Create a real culture.

Why do you feel Steemit should be an unpaid writer's hub? There are plenty of places already for that. The major selling feature of Steem/Steemit is getting paid to use a social network.

Thriving social networks include all calibers of content producers and consumers but the vast, vast majority of user generated content is shit. We just need better tools sift through the shit and personalize it to our tastes so we can wallow in our own shit.

Check out Tumblr, that's where we are most likely headed on the content quality front but it's not a bad thing. More and more crappy content will be the price of success.

oh i like it! very much. Allow to powerUp for 6 month or for 2 years. With 2 times the benefit for the 2 years.

Yeah, something like that :)

Yes this allows the reduction of risk Dan pointed out would discount the price and others to still invest long term.

I very much like this idea

Choice and having options is always wonderful. I would say 3 months or 2 years. 6 months starts getting into long-term territory (ask all my previous relationships)