Now you can see the numbers.

5개월 전

Yesterday, I just wrote a post about the upcoming rewards change for Hard Fork 21.

Three comments on the post concerned me. They were essentially saying:

  1. It's too late to voice our opinions (it's never too late)
  2. They didn't know enough about the proposal (that's what were here for! to learn and grow! Go steem!)
  3. It's only going to really affect newbies that were on their way out anyway. (Think so? Well. That's what this post is for)

Here is the problem:

Most people think that this will be a change that will "spread rewards evenly in a new pattern that we will all just eventually adjust to."

@bluefinstudios and I chose cross-section of people for this chart. Minnows, dolphins, orcas, whales.... witnesses, concensus witnesses... you get the picture. And we specifically added some people that were interacting with the last post - so they could SEE with their own eyes.

Perhaps pictures and numbers will speak louder than words.

All this information is publicly available on steemworld.org/@username, YOU TOO can find out this information about yourself - or ANYONE on the blockchain - to see how this proposed change will potentially affect each person.

Steemworld.org lists the last 30 days of curation rewards and author rewards. As much as people want to say this proposed change will help to increase curation - I'm going to show you why it won't. But I'll save that for the end of the post.

Let's get to numbers.

We can take mine for example. I currently have a project that is supported FAITHFULLY by @fundition, and my author rewards reflect that. I also spend a lot of time curating, manually - and on curation trails. I could increase my curation a bit... but I'm doing a LOT right now, and its unlikely that I'll be curating much more than I am right now. And be honest - CAN YOU?

REMEMBER: we ONLY get ten 100% upvotes a day - to distibute as evenly as we can. I currently go OVER that amount, in order to support as many people on the chain that I can. (I'm currently at 63% voting power - clearly over the suggested limit!) Could I just find the consistently "high paying posts" and just put them on my autovote? Uh. Sure. But isn't that the exact thing that we're supposed to NOT be doing? Aren't we supposed to be pushing more HONEST, manual curation? Intentional interaction? Boosting quality content WHILE supporting our friends?

See that? Everyone in the red... get prepared for that new monthly amount. Everyone in the green - CONGRATULATIONS! This proposed change REALLY boosts your wallets!

So if you're wondering where that extra 25% from your rewards is going... Now you know! The people in the green are not the enemy, mind you. I know some of them, and I think they're awesome and often fight for good change.... BUT I surely hope that the people in the green see that they are disproportionately BENEFITING from something that THEY ARE VOTING ON.

Well, hold on @dreemsteem. If I increase my curation, then won't I earn some of that back!? You sure will!!! Let's see how much you need to earn back to break even.

Well, let's see. Take me as an example if you like - but you can look at the chart for everyone! For me? I'm currently making about 9 SP a month in curation rewards. After the changes - if I do NOTHING ELSE, and just keep doing what I am doing (which is pretty heavy on curation), that will most likely double to about 18 SP. Why? because 25% curation to 50% rewards is doubling. So, my 0.05 SP curation rewards on any particular post will now be 0.10 SP.... Follow?

In order to make up for the deficit in my author rewards (which now gets cut by AT LEAST 33%) I need to WAY MORE THAN DOUBLE my curation rewards to break even....I need to take it from 18 to 121 Mine is specific to me. Go look at yours! Go look to see how much YOU need to increase - JUST to break even with the proposed changes. It's that last column. (and if you want to know how to calculate it, if you're not on this chart... leave a comment for me below and I'll show you)

QUESTION:


How many posts are you manually reading and curating each day? And how much time do you have to increase that... SIGNIFICANTLY to make up for the loss in your author rewards?

By the way, those author rewards aren't going into some balanced and distributed pool. It's MOSTLY going directly into the wallets of people who post little, curate a lot - and ALREADY HAVE significant percentages of the curation rewards (because don't forget people... curation is stake-based).

I'm just not sure why we need to motivate the big accounts even more to curate? They are essentially going to be giving out awesome votes, and then getting HUGE amounts returned to them. Why continue to make it harder and harder on the biggest population of Steemians? WHY do we continue to destroy the foundation that we should be building??

So what I'm seeing here is... The proposed changes are showing what kind of behavior they would like to see implemented.

  • Write less.
  • Curate more (on less material, since everyone is writing less)
  • And purchase and powerup 50,000 steem so you can be an orca and get a high percentage of the curation rewards back.

GOT IT.

P.S. remember also - that these are not the ONLY changes. Your payout is also going to be decreased for the other proposed changes in HF21. So even though it LOOKS like nothing changes... (your post payouts will still be shiny and high! ) What you KEEP is going to be significantly lower.

So..... as I said in the last post.

Might we REMOVE this portion the HF21 proposal and consider it for another hard fork? If you agree.... go drop your name as a comment on THIS POST Perhaps if we join together and speak as one, we might be heard.

Tagging all the people that were discussing the last post with us!

@fionasfavourites, @nickhavey, @blockurator, @cheese4ead, @bengy, @zekepickleman, @thekittygirl, @bluefinstudios, @shadowspub, @chekohler, @audreybits, @omra-sky, @greencross, @enginewitty, @eveningart, @saffisara, @penderis, @naltedtirt, @hazem91, @darrenfj, @brisby, @josediccus, @thehive - and feel free to share with anyone you know will be impacted (aka. everyone)

Authors get paid when people like you upvote their post.
If you enjoyed what you read here, create your account today and start earning FREE STEEM!
STEEMKR.COM IS SPONSORED BY
ADVERTISEMENT
Sort Order:  trending

Okay...

Let me say firstly that I don't think these changes are going to bring investors in, or drive up the price of steem.

With these changes I am set to "lose" a fair amount as most of my steem "income" comes from content production rather than curating.

That said...

...reading these comments on this post makes me sad, and a little embarrassed to be a content creator.

Why? Because it feels very protectionist.

Where do most of our upvotes come from?

I don't know about you guys but I only get paid well for my post when it is upvoted from a big account (like one of the big accounts that are set to gain from the changes). I've been here for 2 years and my posts are worth about 12-40 cents unless they are upvoted by curie, dtube or any of the others who don't create a lot of "content" but do a shit load of work behind the scenes. And most of these guys don't take a lot of steem out of the system (in comparison to what they bring to the table).

So why shouldn't the curators get a bigger slice of the pie? If it wasn't for them I'd have no bloody pie. Just a few crumbs.

I know people on here who have been here as long as I have and have bigger "earnings" on their posts but have a much lower SP than me because they take their money out of steem on a regular basis. Fine, that is their choice, but don't complain that now there will now be less of something that isn't yours to begin with (because the only reason you get the something is because someone else has bigger SP than you and gives you a healthy upvote).

As for writers leaving the network - or not writing anymore - because there is no money in it. Hello? That IS writing. Unless you are a bestseller (and even then...) if you are a writer you are poor. We write because we have to. We have something we want to say so we say it. All of us can (and a lot of us do) publish our writing elsewhere (and earn less than we do on steem).

Seriously most of us aren't here for the money. A drop in our earnings is not going to drive us away, and saying so just makes us look like children threatening to run away from home because mummy and daddy won't buy us ice cream.

With Palnet, Dtube and all the other tokens we have more ways to earn than ever. It is an exciting time to be here.

No, I don't think the proposed changes will bring about the miraculous growth that is being talked about. But I also don't think it is as bad as people are saying.

Anyway, that's my view, unpopular as I imagine it will be.

·

I have absolutely no problem with curators getting some of the pie!!! I love our curators!

And they already DO make a significant portion of it.

However, how long does it take you to write your content? Is it "just typing a few words and hitting post" as a previous commenter stated that was all that creators do?

Or do you take it seriously?

Let me ask you something... When you upvote someone, is that your motivation?

How much you're going to earn on their post?

When you buy a book at the bokstore are you wondering when your check is coming from the author?

Shouldn't they be grateful enough to send us back some of their profits? After all...we are paying their salaries.

Of course not. Curators are appreciating the content they find because they think it's worthy of recognition. They give it freely.... And.....because steemit is wanting to encourage that activity. They DO give some of the profits back to the curators.

Is 25% not enough? Honestly?

I don't know about you but I take my posts seriously and they take TIME.

When I curate posts, I usually can read them in 5 minutes or less.

For me to really equate my reading time with the time it took to create it...is rude and disrespectful to the author.

Look at @eveningart's art.... I look at her beautiful work and I cheer when she gets a Curie!!! But it takes her DAYS to create those.

And in my opinion... 25% of that Curie is more than enough to go back to curators.

She deserves 75%

In my opinion. Yes.Its only my opinion.

It we think that by taking more money off of her and giving it back to Curie is going to encourage her to post more???

I fully believe that some people will post less quality work, more often, to have a better chance of getting more rewards

The ones who work hard...will be winnowed away

(But let's see)

Posted using Partiko Android

·
·

I have worked for days on a story and it has received no upvote and another post that took minutes was rewarded with a huge upvote. Even with the biggest upvote I've ever had (back in the good old days of 150 dollar curie upvotes) it doesn't cover the hours I put in. That is not why I post here.

We don't post on steem expecting to be paid an hourly rate. At least I don't.

If curie get more back maybe they'll spread more around more accounts. Maybe they won't. Who knows?

Posted using Partiko Android

·
·
·

So what you're saying is...

We don't create for money

But curators should curate for money.

Odd, no?

That we should not hold ourselves to the same standard?

We should be minimizing what we do, while maximizing what they do.

Very interesting concept...so it looks like you will do well with the new 50/50 arrangement!

Would you also be ok with 25/75?

Just curious where the line is for you...

Posted using Partiko Android

·
·
·
·

How do you think I will do well from the 50/50 arrangement? Check out my steem world stats! I'm set to lose a lot!

Posted using Partiko Android

·
·
·
·
·

No kidding.

So I'm not exactly sure why you are so gung ho for it...

But...enjoy, I guess?

Posted using Partiko Android

·
·
·
·
·
·

I'm not gung ho for it. I thought I made that clear. I just don't agree with many of the arguments put forward in the comments

Posted using Partiko Android

·
·
·
·
·
·
·

You don't have to agree.as long as you recognize the math for what it is.

And you seem to, you think curators should make more.

And they will.
So...ok! Lol

I see why the plan makes sense to you. No need to explain further.

Posted using Partiko Android

·
·
·
·

The line for me is that any reward I get for my work is appreciated. I don't hold the opinion that curators profit from my work. Without their vote I get nothing.

Posted using Partiko Android

·
·

You know how much @steemfictions first book earned in royalties from sales on amazon? Less than 200 dollars. Not each. In total. There were 8 writers who contributed original stories of 8-10 thousand words. Despite lack of rewards (all 200dollars were spent on publishing costs, none of the writers have received a cent). Despite knowing that we wrote more stories for a second book. And now are writing stories for a third. We write because we write. Not for rewards we should have for the effort we put in to it

Posted using Partiko Android

·
·
·

The point is not our love for our craft

The point is....do you pay your readers to read?

No one is saying you can't be humanitarian and choose to do what you do for free.

That's your choice!

Why accept any payment at all? Give it ALL to the curators if you feel that way.

I'm saying...

Lol nevermind. I'm glad you enjoy the 50/50 plan. I wish you well! If you lose any money, don't think of who is getting it. Just focus on what you love and no one can take that away from you.

Posted using Partiko Android

·
·

So many of your comments could be quality posts on this thread. Finding it strange they haven't picked up on the hints from the grunts to allow the authors decide what split they feel is fair for their work. A picture of someones breakfast or latest weed acquisition does not take the same care and research as many of the posts I have written and vote for myself. Perhaps it would be an abomination if quality writers had a way to not lose their share. Or if such a slider was given, perhaps the author could keep ALL the split, and those curating would feel it was a good deal for the effort that was put in.

·
·
·

when authors have the choice - curators do too....

people like Curie could say "we do not curate anything above 50/50..." and let the authors decide...

but its power to the people.

not power taken away without permission... i totally agree

would love to see this being discussed more fully AFTER the 50/50 is taken off the HF21

·

By the way... I have never been about the money. Ask anyone who knows me.i give away so much it's amazing I grew at all.and i actually had to be taught how to keep some and let it grow..

However...taking more "just cuz you can" is wrong on so many levels

Its not about having a tantrum.

It's about standing up for what's right and not letting the smoke and mirrors cloud your vision

The people voting on this are making lots of money on it. Let them tell you whatever they like. Dem's the facts.

Posted using Partiko Android

·
·

I am not fooled by the smoke and mirrors. I've said clearly I don't think the results they are saying will happen, will. But just because I don't agree with one side doesn't mean I agree what is said on the other

Posted using Partiko Android

·
·
·

Yep... It's ok. We disagree

But let's hope that I'm wrong and newbies will come here in big numbers and thrive like never before!

We can hope, right?

Posted using Partiko Android

·
·
·
·

No they won't. It won't bring new people, creators or investors. But neither would increasing the payout

Posted using Partiko Android

·
·
·
·
·

So if it wont bring in new people... How about leaving it alone

Posted using Partiko Android

·

Also

I have never taken money out of steem

I get my upvotes usually from a community that I have poured into and been a part of for a long time...and also from followers that I have strong relationships with.

I've been here since 2016 and through sweat equity and real.financial investments ...I have finally become a dolphin

And as far as Curie? They do a ton of work behind the scenes and also pay their people to do so. This isn't for free... Surely you don't assume that?

I disagree with what you're saying and Im.proof of that.

I get a lot of small votes from small accounts that I have invested in by building relationships. I also purchase SBI (reinvesting my steem and payouts) in a way that helps me grow too.

I have also gotten Curies! I'm grateful and they make money too

The 75/25 still worked.

Thy are trying to maximize good content and minimize bad. Doing that by dropping author rewards and increasing curation rewards doesn't make sense.... Do the curators CURRENTLY upvote bad content???

Do we need to now PAY them.more to curate better? Why are we increasing their rewards to continue to do what they are CURRENTLY doing??

You see? They will continue what they've been doing and so will you

And the "bad guys" will still be figuring out ways to work the system.

Posted using Partiko Android

I like the data driven analysis that you have done on the hardfork. One area that I will disagree though, is I don't think it is possible to make accurate predictions on the effects of the hardfork. Sure, you can extrapolate data out and show how it is different under the new math, but that does not take into account all of the other factors.

For example, the price of STEEM could drop significantly if we don't move forward with the changes. The price of STEEM could also rise significantly if we implement them. It is not possible to know, but both are very real possibilities.

Another thing that is near impossible to take into account is user behavior. If more large stakeholders spend time curating quality content after the hardfork (because there is now an incentive to do so), then content creators could actually end up earning more in terms of dollar amounts - even though their percentage of the overall inflation pool is technically lower.

There are some real legitimate concerns about how the hardfork could play out, and I'm not going to sit here and try to tell anyone they are wrong. HF21 could end up being really good for content creators, but it could end up being really bad too. The reality is we are not going to know until after the fork.

I assure you the few extra hundred dollars that I stand to gain based on increased author/curation rewards have zero influence on my decision making process. I am a somewhat large stakeholder (close to 78k SP), so I am much more concerned about whether the hardfork causes the price of STEEM to go up or down, as that has a much more significant impact on my "bottom line".

I want the STEEM price to go up, which is the lense I use to evaluate the hardfork. If the STEEM price goes up, and more stakeholders start spending time curating - then it is a win for everyone. I have no idea whether that will be the end result, but it is at least the one I am going for.

I'd love a list of witnesses who would vote against these changes. I'd like to vote for them.

Posted using Partiko Android

·

I do not know for certain, but something tells me, Pumpkin is against it.
Not from any firsthand knowledge.

·
·

I love the way you think LOL!

·
·
·

The only top 20 I know that has publicly come out against it is @yabapmatt, who retains the freedom vote and ironically is #1. The other top witness that is against it is @drakos (who is now not in the top 20 - weird how that works). @thecryptodrive is hesitantly on board but wants the SPS to come from witnesses - which I totally agree with. What better way to give back to the community that supports you than by giving a meager 1% of your rewards? I think @themarkymark is also somewhat hesitant based on what I've seen in various comments the past few weeks, but then again, I could be misinterpreting what he is saying.

·
·
·

well ..... ask and you shall receive!

@shadowspub just posted this!
https://dpoll.xyz/detail/@shadowspub/poll-for-the-wtinesses-on-hf21/

I am anxiously awaiting the answers! :)

·
·
·
·

The poll is great, but won't reflect truth if all the consensus voters don't show up. That's the trick.

·

That is EXACTLY the conversation that @bluefinstudios and I had this morning. I'd like to know who can see the harm in this proposd change. Any witnesses that will stand up against it - has my vote!!!!

·
·
·

https://dpoll.xyz/detail/@shadowspub/poll-for-the-wtinesses-on-hf21/

will be interested in seeing the answers! I'm sure @shadowspub will keep us informed!

·

I would also like to know who it was that proposed this change in the first place. Any idea on that, @dreemsteem ?

·
·

wasnt it blocktrades? i cant remember

·
·

I surely don't. but I'm sure we can ask witnesses that we go to shows with and Witness chats with!

any idea @enginewitty? @guiltyparties? @jackmiller? @crimsonclad? let's see if they know - or even if they know who is currently voting against this? I'd love to support those who are supporting us!

If i don't have open votes for them - i'll make room.

·
·
·

I'm going to start this statement with a universal Steem truth that we've all been very poor at remembering: There is no one size fits all set of numbers. We all have begun painting with the same brush we rail against being painted with.

This is an opportunity to write some stuff, so I thank you for asking my opinion. You've pinged me and I think I'm feeling really kicked today, as a human and as a steemian. It's my job to respond. Don't take it as a direct response or accusations leveled at you, but rather the best explanation of the situation we're in that I can currently muster as an individual. There are some responses in this thread bordering on vitriolic, and though my knee jerk reaction is to yell "NO, not everyone is that way, witness or user" and I find a lot of the responses in both directions egregious, I'm coming to at least answer you in a timely fashion because that's the respectful thing do to. I fully understand why people feel all of the range of emotions that they do. I understand that as someone who started as a minnow and earned and bought all her steem, who's never powered down, who's never sold steem, who delegates to non-returning things even though growing myself might give me a chance to do more down the road. I learned how to build steemd and run a server and build scripts and tools and how to explain those things to others so they don't have to because they're not interested in the same things as me.

I am caught quite directly in the middle of the two "sides" that a lot of communication, top down and bottom up, is stratifying into a class war. I am the steem everyman, fighting to find time to post and pouring my best work and soul onto the chain and hoping to grow organically, and a special circle-jerk snowflake evil cabal secret society greedy centralized shill. So let's put down the classes we're bludgeoning each other with here and have a real discussion.

I will candidly say that witnessing here has gone from a fun and exciting learning opportunity to a job I take seriously with all my heart that has opened me up, voluntarily, to things approaching outright hatred from people who don't give me the same chance they demand. I see behaviour that as a small account makes me angry and has me feeling unheard, because honestly, a lot of our whales totally suck. I'm not virtue signalling with my experience above, but it is a truth and a lovely testament that a transparent chain bears. I hear where people are coming from.

I have spent actual hours probably now bordering on real days worth of time looking at this, talking to people directly, discussing it in communities, making my personal wants and needs known and navigating a populace that is hell bent on creating a bi-partisan us/them conflict over something that is contentious. My comments are on chain. They're been in the ramble, on shows, broadcast out to anyone who will listen. So a part of me bristles when I get painted with that brush again... not listening, not talking, not caring, not available... just like everyone in this thread bristles at getting painted with one by people who don't listen to them or care to consider them and their feelings of earnings. I understand you.

Here is the best summary I can give you of why this is a thing that has come up, how I currently feel, what I need to do. I imagine NEITHER side will be happy with it, but it won't change until I find more compelling reason to, and part of that is testing and part of that is hearing other people's plans on how they're going to pitch in because this is going to take A L L of us. I message people when they unvote us with much the same caveat: I can't promise to change what we're doing, but I can try to explain it on your way out the door. But right now, right here, I personally am putting my foot down on one thing; we live and die by the sword. Pumpkin doesn't whisper in our ear. We don't have magical bags of money being dropped on us by anyone. Steem pays our witness server costs, our tool costs, and our script costs. Other than that, this month is the first time in a while that I earned my own cut. 2k steem! I'm stoked. That's so much compared to almost every other user on the platform! That's $800. Holy shit. And yet.... none of it has left the platform, ever. And when I look at the hours of time I put in every day, even being generous and trimming out a ton of stuff as "normal user activity"....I'm not even making minimum wage. If you average that out over the months where there wasn't enough left over to split between the two of us, it's a dollar or less... and that's still more than some users! And yet- this is not rich. This is not a consolidation of power. I want to be very clear that the one brush I refuse to be painted with is the hateful "gilded handshake" that I see brandished in other comments here and all over the platform. I have no doubt there are activities where it happens. But, no one size fits all.

With all of that out of the way, here's the closest I can be to concise and it differs not at all from any of the other places I've said it. I'm not anti EIP; I'm Anti-EIP right now. I want a funded SPS and a downvote pool, and I'm not happy that a HF that I fully supported got a tacked on addition that doesn't allow us to properly separate implementation of these things. Jeff and I don't have a perfect consensus between us, and that is tough, because Jeff is crushed that people who should be getting paid aren't and that there should be a reason to get voting again because that's the ONLY thing that fixes distribution, and when looking at those inequities is tentatively pro-EIP. He's not wrong. It's going to be difficult for us to formulate a fair stance on the HF even between us. No matter what we do, we have supporters in both camps. People on both sides will accuse us of "caving" to the other. And no matter which way we choose, we likely will lose a voter big enough to drop us out of consensus. That's DPoS, baby. In some ways, it's the most fair thing in the world. I can't sit here crying because people are mean to me and also because we could basically lose one vote from any number of people who aren't pumpkin and drop out of consensus. If that happens, we reduce what we offer until we aren't $500+ each out pocket each month and keep on keeping on. I don't have a "salary" to lose.

The more people I talk to, big and small, the more I realize that the EIP change is likely needed in some form, but also that it's the last thing we need right now. Retention, onboarding, engagement- we try to blame the rewards for these things, but there is nothing we're doing currently that is improving these things. The EIP will do nothing about them, either way. And even if it did do anything, good or bad, price action of Steem basically nullifies that; here we are, looking at the pointing fingers, pointing more and more, and missing out on that heavenly (enlightening) glow of the moon in the sky. The problems that we have that we are solely ascribing to "FUCK YOU GOT MINE (author/witness) REWARDS" are partially caused by the fact that we think the rewards are what is causing them. The lack of self awareness for what makes for a strong blockchain and a strong coin is insane. These debates are literally the WORLD within Steem, and yet, the world is literally forgetting Steem exists. Feeling that the EIP is a fuck you to little guys misses out on some of behaviors the EIP could potentially encourage that we simply cannot achieve any other way, and pretending like the EIP can magically account for human behavior in every way perfectly is completely fucking naive. The math in this post is too simple: one size fits all. Imagining the EIP as a magic bullet is too simple: one size fits all. Imagining the EIP will destroy the platform is too simple: one size fits all. Either stance places every emphasis on the money, and if we can't fix that part, then Steem will never rise. Some people would change with the EIP, and find different routes to success, even small. Some people would change with the EIP and get crushed and give up. BOTH OF THESE THINGS ARE HAPPENING RIGHT NOW ALREADY, WITHOUT THE EIP. IT'S GOING TO HAPPEN EITHER WAY UNTIL WE ALL WORK TOGETHER.

I can't tell you what you want to hear to try to play all sides and sway the voice of the people as a Robin Hood figure- which is that without a doubt I will vote no. I can't tell you that I will without a doubt vote yes, even to try to "keep some big votes"... because the entity that many believe is slipping dollar bills in my pocket quite frankly knows nothing about my existence other than that I and my partner are great witnesses and heavily contribute to the security of the Steem blockchain (and maybe not even that ¯(ツ)/¯ )

This is a monumental wall of text that may not be called for. I can tell you that right now, it's all moot until my testnet node syncs up and I start playing with testnet condenser and we get a chance to have the testnet HF a few times. I can tell you thank you for allowing me to have a moment here to have a rant, at small accounts, at big whales, at witnesses of all sizes, and at myself, because some days I just want to sing or paint or take pictures and share them with the world and I traded that for this whole witness thing. And thank you for caring what I think (or maybe forcing me to answer you and grill me, I don't know the intent but both are fine- that's the job). I am hoping that I can keep thanking you for trying to bring people together in debate and discussion and disagreement while recognizing them as individuals who need much much more than one size, regardless of the size they might be.

·
·
·
·
  1. thank you! @crimsonclad (this was not an attempt to grill you - it's not my style - it was a continuation of a discussion where there is a lot of confusion)

  2. I have no idea who is putting money in the pockets of anyone. My point about the chart was - if there is a lot of green in the top 20 - that is a conflict of interest. And they need to be concerned about what a huge disparity that is.

  3. I agree - too much all at once. Is it too late to take away the 50/50 off the hardfork?

  4. I personally LOVE when you show up for every single witness chat that you can because you are a shining voice of reason. However, you do see that the 50/50 change in rewards will make it harder for the people coming onboard - and make a lot of people who are here - post less. I guess my question is - how is that a step in the right direction? Are we all just hoping that the little guy can eat it a little more, a little longer? and by we - I mean the powers that make the decisions. Cuz I've already lived through HF20 and watching countless leave. I know that one of the commenters was kinda like - oh well, they would probably have left anyway. when - no - they actually planned on staying and were very happy until they got the shaft.

one size does not fit all.

but we can clearly see the trend. 33% less for authors that go directly into the wallets of large curators, with NO WAY of recovering that loss. Say goodbye to that and watch it fly away to the big accounts, and no you can't debate it. We've decided for you, on your behalf, though it only benefits the wallets of the few. (you see my point?)

Is anyone seriously trying to promote that? and if so - why?

and if it's not too late - can we please take it off?

and if it is too late - i fear you're gonna start seeing a lot of powerdowns because people won't stay in a place where their former rewards are leaving their meager pockets to enter the very fat wallets of others. (for not a drop more work , mind you.)

and i've heard the answer to that... well, then I guess Steem wasnt for them! Fare the well and adieu! We will carry on without you.

But why can't it be - we are concerned about that - and see your point - and will table this for now, because we DO see its harmful to an entire THREE classes of five on this chain.

why is THAT not an option?

take it off and pass the other things in the hard fork that people generally agree with - and tackle this VERY HOT TOPIC as a singular discussion later.

(i know you took a lot of time from your day to write that post - no need to write a large one back - unless you'd like to. could you just respond to my questions?) if not - i understand! thanks for reading :)

·
·
·
·
·

not at all! I used your innocent question as an opportunity to REEEEE all over the place, precisely because I feel and hear and see your frustration alongside that of witnesses and people who bought steem and coders and newbs alike. We're all standing over Steem right now poking it with a stick saying DO SOMETHING.

So much like chatting with Bluefin earlier, the best I can do is pull some devil's advocate things out that I do think the EIP would be able to do and some truths that would be "for" the EIP, regardless of my personal feelings either way.

  • Self voters do have to share. Right now, the worst egregious (important distinction) self voters are getting the majority of their vote back as author rewards without even thinking, and sharing less of it with other people who curate them. In a 50/50 world, the self voter puts more of their cut into the curation pool to be shared between everyone. So if nothing else changes, the people also voting will earn a bit more themselves and the author-self-voter has to share a bit more. Not ideal, but also no worse than the currant 'instant' unshared return with author rewards.
  • Curation does go up. When more minnows (or more everyone) votes together, the rewards go up. The stacked effect increases. Smaller schools of minnows will be able to curate, and actually see higher potentials back from their curation. Right now, we teach minnows, hey- you should be commenting and posting because you have to do that to earn since your vote is worth so little and your slice of the curation pie is so small so don't even worry about that! There's the thought (and some truth) that smaller accounts would actually see an increased effectiveness in curating good stuff or in schooling, because the split for curating makes it more equitable for them.
  • If rewards for curation go up, then to take advantage of that, you need a bigger vote. The only way to get that is to power up. Now, don't shoot the messenger because this is a 'one size' statement, but we do have a lot of minnows who stay minnows because they pull out everything they earn and love that posting keeps letting them earn more. They're powering down already. Right now. (So are whales.) These same minnows are scared they will have to share more post rewards, but technically could be doing the same thing as the whales right now if they weren't powering down. Powerdowns are rampant already; causing more than an already increasing number is arguably a drop in the bucket of problems we already have and are already going unaddressed. So if people could earn more by having a bigger vote, which requires powering up, then there will be some (whether the number is significant or not) who would power back up to earn more faster.
  • There are no rewards at all without curation. Why don't we all buy in initially, then use that to vote our own work, and keep 100% of the rewards? It sounds like a stupid question, but we're actually closer to that than not right now. A curator whale controls just as much allocation of the finite reward pool at 0/100, 25/75, 50/50, or 100/0. Same with smaller accounts. But where smaller accounts have literally only the ability to gain by being curated, a whale may not- so while we cannot remove stake commensurate control from a whale, we can tip the variables to make it harder for them to show up, write a sentence, and upvote it to keep everything. If nothing else, changing that cut actually places them in a position to lose more than say, a minnow, who couldn't just drop a fat vote on themselves and keep it anyways. They need other voters. All content creators need content consumers. If it's less lucrative for a whale to self vote, then it starts becoming just as easy for them to start voting on stuff to earn, and that starts spreading stake to places that wasn't seeing it before, which is, overall a net gain in a lot of cases. Distribution is a huge problem right now.

people won't stay in a place where their former rewards are leaving their meager pockets to enter the very fat wallets of others. (for not a drop more work , mind you.)

  • people aren't staying. They already feel like this. They're already leaving. Any curation that leaves their wallets is a DIRECT result of them being voted by someone else already. So if we are pointing out that more curation leaves them to someone huge, it is also pointing out that they got a vote from someone huge. Right now, not a lot of someone huges are doing much voting, and not a lot of someone smalls can curate for a bigger cut. Either the huges get out and vote to collect more curation (meaning they are spreading more voting around than they were previously) or they keep voting themselves and the smalls are able to jump in and take more of that without a drop more work.

On PALnet, people are suddenly excited to curate. Some people are tired of writing but don't beat themselves up over missing a "daily post"... they just get out and vote! People are getting bigger and finding more feeds. 50/50 is looking AWESOME. But PAL isn't steem. The economic context is different. The 50/50 isn't the causation, it's a correlation with a much better distribution. Steem distribution is what it is, and there's no taking what someone has bought, earned, or mined, so we can't expect any numbers to behave the same. There are absolutely some logical conclusions about why it can and should work, but logic means nothing in the face of human behaviour. So the biggest and hardest pill to swallow right now is that the 1% have to change pre or post, yes or no EIP... and while some of those are witnesses, a majority of the green you'll find are actually going to be NON-witness whales, who have to post (and many feel to self upvote) to earn. You and me and all the red numbers... we don't get to touch that right now, and I'm not talking about downvoting (that is a whooooole other essay and I'm all for it. Plus, darling Taraz just nailed it.) They can drop an upvote on whatever they make and happily stay in their own bubble knowing they get most of the value and anything else from others is bonus. Their voters in many cases are just coming around for scraps. In the system that we have, what's better for small authors by some logic is fucking fabulous for the 1% that tend to put a black eye on our economics. What's worse for the small authors by some logic actually really does have a good chance of at the very least redirecting some of that untouchable curation to more people, which doesn't really change us much further from where we are.

The numbers above are an application of future circumstances overlaid on existing behaviour, with no accounting for the fact that attempting to accurately model future behaviour has to take into consideration environmental stimuli. The math in your post just says "here are people who have figured out the best way to do 25/75 for themselves, and let's add some numbers assuming that no one reacts with an equal and opposite reaction to the force of new numbers via 50/50." That's not an accurate picture any more than saying that the EIP is gonna fix steem and it's lambos on the moon in a quarter. But our biggest mistake is assuming that without some change in the top in ANY distribution, and HF, and any situation, that that 1% of black eyes are going to fade out and heal up just because. So slapping pieces of HF together needs to come with cultural change and a lot of that has to start focusing on uncoupling our intrinsic feel that "the money as it is RIGHT NOW is the only thing keeping people here."

·
·
·
·
·
·

I'm sorry, Crim, I appreciate your passion but a lot of this is just flat-out false. Especially the bit about how if the authors were just powering up they would be able to get a meaningful piece of the curation pie. With all of your advantages, and all of your willingness to power up, you've built a top-1000 Steem account and your share of the curation pool is... $1/day. Maybe under HF21 it will go up all the way to $2/day.

And most authors have no hope of ever getting as far as you have! They're not community leaders, or consensus witnesses. They don't have the ability to drive votes to get all the way to 20,000 SP. @elsiekjay may be the single-most-dedicated author Steem has seen in the post-HF-19 world, and she's all the way to 7000 SP, and a curation rate of fifty cents per day. Give her two more years and she'll be as far along as you are now - and still ages away from a meaningful curation income.

It's basically impossible to generate enough Steem to reach the ranks of people who will gain from curation increases without owning and operating some very successful Steem-based business. Authorship will not get you there, no matter how much the rewards pool is optimized. It's counterproductive to moralize at people for making the sensible economic decision not to power up their earnings when powering up gets them essentially nothing.

And twice of nothing is still nothing. You can look for magic motivation of the top 30 accounts if you want, but even if you get it, 50/50 makes it more likely that the top 30 accounts will be the only ones who ever matter.

·
·
·
·
·
·
·

I appreciate that you've taken time to respond, and with the greatest respect for how raw everyone is feeling, I'm sure that you read everything I said including my personal stance and previous comments and would certainly never purposefully try to imbue my words with a meaning they don't have, attribute personal beliefs I don't have to me... and I'm exponentially sure that your dismissal of "my advantages" is an unfortunate side effect of our focus on the stratification of the haves and have nots (which is why further above I suggest that we do our best to try to leave that out.) After a literal discussion of why I don't think we can so easily separate most people into classes or painted with one brush, I've just been doused with the entire can, and that's a pretty big step backwards in terms of discussion.

Dreamsteem asked me what some people who are in favour of the EIP are thinking and how they could quite possibly have any justification in doing so. I was quite literally asked to write that stuff out. That is why this comment is here: because there was an ask for the other side of things from the views of those who believe them. I've spent as much time talking with them as I have here with all of you, and I wrote it with the clear caveat of saying regardless of my personal thoughts, here are the ones that are most touted and valid. All of the statements are true. They are not false. But just like magic math and magic motivation, none of them can stand on their own. They depend on human behaviour. They depend on the context around them. They depend on other factors in the ecosystem. Which, since I'm sure you've read in my other responses or heard me speaking passionately about, I don't believe will happen, and why I don't believe the EIP will work or that it is a magic bullet that needs a HF focus right now more than Steem needs something like the SPS. However, I understand that it is easy to see the things that hurt and misinterpret, and that because of my wallet or the "green" for my account that it would be easy to view it through that lens.

With all that, I want to address your "moralization" statement, because between that and your suggestion that where I am today is simply a matter of advantages, I haven't felt so particularly like giving up in a long time. Quite clearly: we are talking about the EIP making people's work feel devalued and that people are feeling as though their effort is being taken advantage of. Your comment does exactly that to me while trying to debate that others will feel that way. One size does not fit all.

I understand that there is some sort of mental line where I became "a have" and that it becomes easier to read what I say as "from on high" and through a perceived lens of classes or wallet size answers, but that is as much a disservice to me as it is to those being disserviced by a potential EIP. I also appreciate that you've recognized another awesome Steem blogger, but not the comparison between us, because it is absolutely irrelevant. In one fell swoop there is the suggestion that "she works so hard, but look, there's still no hope for her," and also that "you've got some magical money making advantages and there's only marginal hope for you". I know what you were trying to do, but it largely falls flat.

I didn't drive votes to get 20,000k SP. I bought Steem, with fiat scrimped from a full time job, that I kept powered up (It's a net loss on investment, and I didn't power it up just to try to earn more curation. I delegate much of it and work towards trying to find people not getting rewarded.) I on average, post once a month, because witnessing and community come first. Because I don't post, I can't ever be "red" in the post's math; I have removed the only variable that can produce a negative result. That's not causation, it's correlation, and it's correlation to a stance that people believe I must have just because now "I'm big." Being a witness and a community leader aren't a magical advantage bestowed upon high, by luck. It has been two years of full time work on top of full time work, being available all day every day, paying for servers out of pocket, giving my time freely and without "return" (which is of course untrue, community is my value, forever.) If you removed what I have painstakingly saved into my account over two years of witnessing and buying, I would have as much as, or more likely, LESS than Elsie. And through that all, a truth remains: if I have some Steem, and then I sell some Steem, the result then is I have less Steem. I didn't shame those people. I didn't say they have to change. To try to suggest that pointing out that if every person sells their stake that they also will not have bigger stake is some sort of counterproductive shaming run is projection. I also think unrelated to the EIP it's a bit frustrating that everyone demands votes, but also shouldn't be expected to power anything up. Who is voting? When an author writes, who pays them, then? Why would any single person hold any Steem at all, ever, if all there are are classes that must buy Steem to pay others who will liquidate all of it? These are not questions or thoughts that are moral, but intrinsic to our blockchain's existence. It's okay to allude to them in a discussion, especially when asked to. I did not in any way, shape or form, say "if the authors were just powering up they would be able to get a meaningful piece of the curation pie."

Regardless of the EIP, let me put my face on it, so that we can try to bring the "haves" and the "have nots" a bit closer. I recognize that now, my face matters less, because of my "class". I only use the terms income and salary, because as long as I witness, they are valid. I am required to run a working server with the proper software, and there is a set amount for recompense if I do. If I do not, or am "fired" by being unvoted, that goes down or stops. Part of that job is being accountable to voters. Despite being exactly the same as other authors in every way, in the last week alone, I've been lectured on chain that as a witness and a community leader that I should never sell Steem or power down, because my responsibility is to the ecosystem around me to power it up to help Steem price and other authors. I received an angry DM from someone who was mad that I wouldn't follow their curation trail because it is my job as someone with big stake to share that with authors. I got another asking me to stop being selfish by holding liquid Steem and instead to power it up and to delegate it to smaller people's projects (which I do, but not this particular one). Somehow, I hit an amount where I went from being "one of you" to "one of them". Somehow, despite everyone saying "hands off my wallet," I hit a mark where mine became community property. Even though I don't get to be an author any more, and the income I am making from an actual set of requirements is not vote or content dependent like an author, no one will come around and defend me for "making the sensible economic decision not to power up [my] earnings when powering up gets [me] essentially nothing."

A lot of this response isn't about the EIP at all, but instead about the way we talk with each other about things like the EIP, and about exactly why I keep saying we have to treat each other as individuals instead of trying one size fits all answers. It's too easy to assume what people are saying and thinking and feeling versus what they are - and I mean that largely in a bottom up sense, but not entirely. It really is a really shitty 1% that will fuck up our economics regardless of the number spread. In any case, this has become long enough and I realize it doesn't any of the points you've made as much as I feel you didn't pick out the points that actually mattered to me. Thanks for the dialogue.

·
·
·
·
·
·
·

Thank you for stating what I tried to state... And putting it so clearly.

I tried to show that in my chart...that it is mathematically impossible to regain what is lost

We are losing 33% of something that is only OURS. And gaining 25% of something that is DIVIDED... with the highest stake holders getting the lion's share.

This isn't difficult math.

Even with all the differences of all the people on steem....no matter what strategy they employ.... They have LOST. (Unless they are big accounts)

And i showed that in the chart

And I will show it again... 30 days after HF21 has been employed, when I make the chart of the SAME people again. it's not just a prediction....it's math, people.

Thank you for making me feel less insane. 😉

Posted using Partiko Android

·
·
·
·
·
·

Read it all! and i love your passion for our blockchain. Can we just let you vote? ;)

You're right - I'm making assumptions based on behavior that i believe WILL NOT change.

but - it might

because I'm certainly going to change. I'll be posting less. That is for certain.

I don't believe in whats happening, and I actually do believe that the people who are currently curating in the green WILL ABSOLUTELY continue what they're doing and double their rewards.

who wouldnt???

and those who are in the red? need to figure out how to be in the green too. which means - change.

(by the way - you're not in the red hehehe i figured yours out and you're in the green too not by much - but it is a benefit to your account to do the 50/50)

I WILL now be self-voting ALL my posts when I do post. I need to earn some of those curation rewards back.

I WILL not be spending as much time writing, researching, videoing, editing, - to see my former rewards go to people who haven't done anything more to make my posts more valuable. I work hard - as do many many people here. It's not a equitable decision to reward people with twice as many rewards for reading a post (in minutes) that takes hours and hours to write. nope. I will never be convinced on that.

And - I bet... that If I get the ACTUAL numbers - 30 days AFTER HF21 passes? If i redo the chart with the same people..... I bet that its pretty darn close to what I predicted. That's just my guess - but I'm definitely going to be checking.

How I would be THRILLED to be wrong. But I guess we're gonna see.

Personally, I will stop filling my little section of the blockchain with Dreemie posts - and start curating newbies. It will be a better use of my time. better use of supporting the community, and actively refraining from filling the pockets of people who don't need any more curation rewards for doing the same amount of work.

i know - its my opinion... and as I said in the last comment... on Steem, opinions are stake-based LOL

so mine means a whole lot of nothing.

thank you for your willingness to get in the mix. I'll miss the interaction on my posts with people- but I will make up for it by interacting with them on their posts! :) the newbies probably need it a lot more than me .

(and you're right. they are already leaving. and my guess is when they see how much less they're making - MORE will have to leave.)

so sad.

·
·
·
·
·
·
·

This sounds about right, actually. And I do think that there's a chance that good quality content will rise based on other effects. I am for all the changes, and I can at least tell you that the motivation is that content that pretty much everyone agrees is trash that is trivially upvoted will be downvoted with the new incentives. If the changes accomplish the task of shifting these kinds of rewards, it can really make a difference. Those numbers you pulled are obviously true if everything stays exactly the same in terms of distribution. But the whole point is that the aim is that it won't. I actually think that good content creators will be gaining more when the dust settles. How do I know? I sure as hell don't know for sure though, so I can see why everyone is so hesitant or downright dismissive of these changes. Downvotes need to happen, and distribution needs to shift. Happy to talk more about specifics, but all I really wanted to start with is to say that looking at these numbers based on present distribution is really not helpful.

·
·
·
·
·
·

Funny you are saying something different than others. Others are saying it will disinsentivize self voting, but you state the correct reality that this will increase self voting, which means more will be curating themselves, leaving less for Others, especially the whales.

This means those numbers shown in the capture above will probably be higher than shown for the big guys.

Then there is the downvote pool. This again only helps the big guy, because the little guy will remain just as scared to downvote as they are currently and has always been. It'll simply fund these retarded flag wars, making it even more profitable for the Oligarchy.

None of this will change a thing. Highly followed accounts will get more empty votes to feed off the higher curation rewards and the little guy will receive fewer. So, these two portions of the HF21 proposal will only increase the bad behavior they are claimed to be a fix for.

The rationales aren't rational and it all sounds like spin from the big guys, to convince their counterparts to vote this in and our opinions dont really matter.

All of our concerns are being brushed aside, even by you with ridiculous spin.

You state, " Something must be done, this isn't perfect, but it's all we got." What a load of shit and is you just trying to quiet us down.

Steemit is just modeled after the failed American Political Template and listening to this bullshit spin just proves it further.

There are always other options, period. You don't just throw new untested, irrational abstract idea's into action in real time just to see the outcome.

You do the math, show the math, experiment and test many times over before changing the code. This is how science works, but you choose politics over science, which will fail.

There are literally 30+ competitor's for Steem right now with more coming. All their TOKENS are worth less, but author's are actually earning more there than here.

All I can do is shake my head and be glad I haven't wasted much of my time here and none of my hard earned cash.... @crimsonclad

Posted using Partiko Android

·
·
·
·
·
·
·

Again, I appreciate your response, and with respect to the fact that people are rightly emotional about this topic, I'm going to point you at this comment I made so as not to write another wall of text people won't read and then comprehend. That's a clarity issue, but I also think it's a knee-jerk, gut reaction issue.

All I can ask is that people don't assume I'm saying anything.

You state, " Something must be done, this isn't perfect, but it's all we got." What a load of shit and is you just trying to quiet us down.

No. There is no place at all that I state this, and just like I'm here having a dialogue with all of you (the opposite of telling you to "quiet down,") I also won't allow you to misconstrue my clear words- posted multiple times in this thread- because you're angry about the overarching situation. You have all rights to be angry and speak your opinions, but that's simply not what I stated and your insinuation that I am attempting to silence people is unacceptable to me, so hopefully if you get the chance to re-read my comments for what they say, and not what you feel they must mean that will help us at the very least (unintentionally, I'm sure) not put words in each other's mouths.

·
·
·
·
·
·

Right now, the worst egregious (important distinction) self voters are getting the majority of their vote back as author rewards without even thinking, and sharing less of it with other people who curate them.

Why not simply disallow self-voting, period, on both posts and comments? Would that do any good?

Oh, and yeah, turn-off the bid-bots, as someone on @dreemsteem's other post suggested.

Would those things help fix the issue, without the 50/50 change being implemented?

·
·
·
·
·
·
·

Well, I can only trace through the ideas and arguments that are made over time. A lot of people have discussed this as a possibility, and I'm sure there are even forks who have tried it. It definitely pushes us into the area of needing to discuss alts or sock accounts created to do the exact same thing and how best to handle that... which means further curve changes, account costs, or perhaps the idea that there really does need to be more downvoting by everyone... and it gets harder to "see" who is doing the worst stuff because they might actually be X amount of accounts. It means that we have to ask ourselves, "If I expect someone to buy and power up Steem to pay me via voting, then am I myself expected to then do the same for them?". And I think, most importantly, that not being able to self vote to some degree is a pretty discouraging forcing of your hand. If the curation system fails you and you write a great piece that has no recognition or rewards, do you feel that with the stake that you have earned through blood, sweat, or tears, or perhaps bought dearly with other resources you shouldn't be allowed to allocate some value to it? If you write an insightful comment and it is wayyyyyy down on a post and you believe whole-heartedly it needs to be curated up into the best version of conversation on a post, should you not be allowed to use the resources you busted ass for to do so? This is not a flip question. In fact, even without disallowing self voting, these questions are still to some degree relevant.

I'm sure you've heard me say, time and again- voting yourself is not inherently bad. Standing behind your own work and saying, "I see value in this and have worked hard to be able to allocate value towards it" is not bad. I don't care what flavour your donut is as long as it's got sprinkles and at the end of the day you feel good about what you've done and how you're contributing to the ecosystem. The problem with the egregious self voters is the same problem with the egregious bid bot abusers is the same problem with botnet accounts farming rewards without self voting at all. I wish I could say or find that one size fits all easy answer because I would be ready to stand behind it and push for it as hard as I can. For now, I'm doing my best to listen to all opinions and build the best knowledge base that I myself can work from, as an individual, working with a blockchain of individuals.

and the sneak edit: Turning off the bid bots comes down to... how do you turn them off? Do you find a way to take their stake that wouldn't then put your account in the same space? Take the stake of the people delegating without then opening yourself to that form of abuse? Do you use a front end to hide them? (this is happening on Steempeak and on PALnet and others, and I think matters a bit) Redistribute a new asset without them? How do you give that asset value? (PALcoin's new journey.) How do you take a steem account out of someone's hands, or forcefully nullify someone's stake? What does that authority look like? Who can decide? Where is the line on enough? The answers feel so easy when we look at the examples of abuse out there, but unless you can convince a bid bot author to just...stop, or a bid bot delegator to just... stop, then there becomes a whole new HF's worth of potential changes to try to do some of these things (many of which people came to crypto to avoid by bank interference,) and even now- the distribution is done. If all the bidbots stopped today, the distribution is still inequitable.

All of these things are part of the whole- that economic context I discussed above. Were there one, simple, surefire one size fits all fix that we could implement today to turn it around, it would be done yesterday. But that's not where we are, and so now we have to challenge the way we think and the way we all act to try to push things in the right direction.

·
·
·
·
·
·
·

When they cut out self-voting...people create duplicate accounts to upvote themselves.

It's what I keep saying, you cannot stop bad behavior. Locked doors only keep the honest out. Criminals will smash the window, taking your purse and leaving you with the window to fix on top of it! Lol

And so... We will make the large accounts happy by paying them more.

Because they have the voice and power.

Posted using Partiko Android

·
·
·
·

Did I just read something that caught my attention in this very emotional comment:

ref:

"The lack of self awareness for what makes for a strong blockchain and a strong coin is insane. "

So glad you said it and not me, for when I say it so bluntly I get a guaranteed chewing for it.

As with any business venture, the people running the show are the ones who call the shots.

Here those people are chosen by "the people" and hence no matter what anyone wants to yell about, the person responsible for ones actions is the person one sees in the mirror every morning!

Voted in "Governance" is the responsibility of ALL voters when it comes to a business venture, let alone an entire economy such as Steem.

With all the talk about "anti establishment" one would have hoped to see a difference between human behaviour in "real life" i.e. voting in national elections, for those who shall govern and manage the economy etc etc etc. and that of what we can see in our governance and management of our economy etc etc etc.

Won't go into a ramble, just had to react to this as it literally caught my eye and all I can say, no matter what you may have been thinking when you wrote it is:

HEAR HEAR!

"The lack of self awareness for what makes for a strong blockchain and a strong coin is insane. "

·
·
·

It has been thrown out there many a time by various Steemians during the course of the past two years that I recall.

In various conversations, post comment threads, discord chats written and voice.

But not to throw the blame on people who don't understand and who maybe sincerely believe that this is something that could make Steem great, I will throw in a comment I made on the topic just last night in a voice conversation in The Alliance Bar:

"How many investors do you know out there who are willing to give 100% effort into their investments/businesses only to see their potential profits cut by 33% or 50% without them being able to do anything about it?"

Seriously, think about it!

Then there is another aspect to this:

As a backup witness, if let's say these changes go through as per the votes from the existing governance (top20 witnesses) maybe I as a backup witness may not have to update to HF21 in order for my server to perform its set tasks as far as the blocks go.

However, sooner or later there will be another HF and another and another, eventually one that has to be implemented by ALL witnesses who wish to ensure the server is active and not "in the red".

So there is no choice in the matter for backup witnesses, eventually one day it shall be a "must".

Nothing wrong with doing what needs to be done, but yeah, when we look at things realistically, the question(s) posed should literally be answered by those who are pushing it.

& NO, I don't believe in any "juggling of figures" as far as the "post rewards" go to be important at this stage.

We have definitely outgrown "a blogging site" we now have various sites on our blockchain and we need to be looking at the needs of them as private investors.

Each site = an individual business and as such they should be promoting, working on and doing everything possible to make their site known of, used and the talk of the town!

We are now in 2019, almost in 2020, yet we are still talking about obsolete, totally outdated topics as if we are still in 2017 with only one blogging website (front end) using Steem.

ref: Responsibilities of Front End Owners. (ref: HF21)

& as for the funding of projects/proposals, hell, with all the Steem being produced and nobody wanting to invest a part of it back into the further expansion of Steem, I mean, seriously. It takes money to make money. Steem did not have an ICO and now that we have come to a point where we are finally filling in the gaps, people can't decide on where to fund them from. Seriously?????????

Won't continue on from this point, have said all I am going to say on that matter.

·
·
·
·

blue and I said the SAME THING .... go into work, and have your salary cut by 33% and see how long you stay before you're looking for a new job.

it's ridiculous.

·
·
·
·
·

Even got me to the point where I commented twice on one thread!

Knowing all too well that too many hate hearing something that they don't want to hear, especially that they have a responsibility on an individual level within any governance model that is voter based.

Let alone any of the other responsibilities that lay out there.

Geez. Hell, imagine what this would look like if "free downvotes/flags" were a part of the game!

Holy mackerel, I refuse to comment any further.

Cheers.

·
·

no wait, i think it was an acc by name trac? gees am forgetful

it was mentioned on steemit blog, i believe, like who came up with the idea as to try to curb the self voting etc.

·
·
·

self-voting....

I can't curate any more than I am right now. I'm doing almost double the curation that I'm supposed to be allowed daily.

i do that to SUPPORT people on the chain and it drains my voting power. I dont do it for curation rewards.

but now? I'm losing 33% of my author rewards and there is mathematically NO WAY for me to make that up in curation rewards (aside from my purchasing a LARGE amount of steem, and powering up, increasing my stake)

but you know what I know? Every time I work hard on my Fundition project posts - they come support me!

You think I won't self-vote those posts to try to gain back even a LITTLE bit more of curation rewards???

self-voting curbed??? LOL um. try not at all.

someone made the point in a DM that if we want to increase our curation rewards - we need to go to the posts that consistently make a lot of money.

so are we all gonna go put haejin on our autovotes now? this makes no sense at all.

It takes me 4 hours to write a good post. Longer if I have to create and edit video - find suitable pictures - make QUALITY CONTENT that they keep pushing for.

Now.... we are making LESS for working harder. but the large accounts are making more for doing NOTHING more.

????

I am failing to see how this is seen as a good thing.

·
·
·
·

you should check steemitblog account and state your concern there as the dev and steemit inc do read those comments and occasionally reply :P

btw!!! i will be in LA and SD next week!! will be meeting up with @mariannewest and @derekrichardson . would love to see you as well, let me know! i dont bite, seriously, ask @enginewitty lol

·
·
·
·
·

I will be there July 8!!!! will you still be there then? I am too far to drive down twice hahaha

·
·
·
·
·
·

Yes I will be there July 8.

Marianne invited my family and I for dinner at her place. I think thats when Derek can come as well. But most likely not July 8 tho as Derek works that date.

Let me know where you will be on July 8 and we can figure things out 😊

Will message on discord!

·
·
·
·
·
·
·

Sounds good!!!!!

Posted using Partiko Android

·
·
·
·
·

She doesn't, TK is one of the sweetest lil cupcakes on the chain so if time permits, do have a bite with her!

Posted using Partiko Android

·
·
·
·
·
·

Well.SD is 8 hours from me...lol. So if she is there for July 8... I am all in!!!

Posted using Partiko Android

·
·
·
·
·
·
·

Wow that far hey.

·
·
·
·
·

I'm in la, too!

Posted using Partiko Android

·
·
·
·
·
·

Well get down to San Diego!!! Lol cuz I guess thats where they will be!!!

Posted using Partiko Android

·
·
·
·
·
·
·

I will be in LA as well.

Will land in SD, drive to LA for sight seeing, stay for 2 nights at least, then drive back to SD

·
·
·
·
·
·

Like @dreemsteem said 😁 the more the merrier altho am a shy person! Have our paths crossed before???? I am meeting my #thealliance and #powerhousecreatives family, so am less shy 😁

And also, hahahah where should we all meet tho???? Marianne invited my family and for dinner, but I actually dunno where exactly Marianne lives 🤣

·
·
·
·
·
·
·

She's in San Diego. When are you in Los Angeles?

Posted using Partiko Android

·
·
·
·

Honestly I see nothing wrong with self voting. If you are writing something you of all people should like it....

AND

Every smart person pays themselves first. Like with any paycheck you should be “paying” your savings or retirement plan or whatever first. No one came to Steemit to make money for other people. If your self vote is worth $0.01 or $5.00 of course self vote.

·
·
·
·
·

I agree.... I have always agreed.

However... What most people don't like is when someone writes "i like cheese" as their post and then upvotes that for $300

Every hour.

Lol

So... Now they are pushing the free downvotes... So we can "disagree with the allocation of funds" on posts like that.

The system was designed in a way that allows for abuse.its that simple. If a whale wants to earn money by upvoting their own trash posts... THAT is the system that Steemit allows.

We can be mad about it, and use our downvotes. But big whales upvoting their own trash posts can outlast our pitiful little downvotes. Lol

They can post " I like cheese" every minute of the day if they want... Because THAT is what is allowed on Steemit.

Guess what? Downvotes won't change the bad behavior of whales. (Or anyone else for that matter)

And here's another little gem.

If a whale is making 75% of author rewards on that cheese post... And upvoting themselves-they are getting the majority of the 25% curation rewards too... SO..they are getting almost 100% of the profits.

If we change it to 50/50 as proposed...

They are getting 50% of the author rewards and almost 50% of the curation too.

Which is..... You guessed it!!!! Almost 100%

Absolutely no change for large accounts!!!!!

You know who will feel the change??? NOT whales. Lol

The small accounts who cannot compete with whales. If you downvote a whale.. good luck seeing the impact and also...hope you don't catch their attention and retribution.

And if you're minding your own business, just putting your content out there, earning crypto (like most of us) . You're about to get whacked with a 42% tax on your rewards that went right to large accounts. (33% for the EIP and another 9-10% for SPS)

Why is this money headed to large accounts you ask? It does now. That's where the majority of the curation rewards go now and always will go...to the stake based large accounts.

Make no mistake about it. This proposal is telling you that it's here to curb trash posts and encourage the use of downvotes to distribute the rewards evenly.

That's the script they're all reading from... But I just showed you who makes money on it.

But wait...theres more! lol. There are already people who are self-voting comments and posts and they get flagged for it cuz people don't like the mindset. And after HF21, more people will have flags! And they ain't using them on whales, sista!!!! Lol

THIS proposal is to make money to draw more investors/curators here. The same way thay they lured people here with 'you can earn more for your content...'

Well.they have the content creators now, and now they want to lure content curators.

So they're taking that money to lure more content curators... From us.. and saying that we should be grateful, cuz more content curators will make this place better.

Umm sure. In theory, that would be cool, and I ACTUALLY COULD SUPPORT IT if the "tax" was evenly distributed... but the point is.. they AREN'T taking that tax from everyone. They're only taking that tax from the people who can't afford the loopholes.

Sound familiar??? Lololol

Posted using Partiko Android

·
·
·
·
·

aah true hahaha

thanks boss

·
·
·

Thanks! Looks like he isn't a witness, so we can't un-vote him. And with the large earnings on his posts because of the big-name upvoters that support him, no wonder he isn't worried about slashing author rewards. Heck, he earns more off one of his posts that I would earn in 4-months-to-a-year of researching and writing. 😕

·
·
·
·

but Shadows just posted a poll - we can see who is voting which way!

·
·

https://dpoll.xyz/detail/@shadowspub/poll-for-the-wtinesses-on-hf21/

will be interested in seeing the answers! I'm sure @shadowspub will keep us informed!

·
·

@kevinwong has been advocating the 50/50 split for a while.

Posted using Partiko Android

·
·

I think it was theycallmedan , there were couple of articles from him asking people thought because they are going to implement it. Blocktrades was in huge support too.

approved.png

I would suggest every Steemian DM their individual witnesses and just ask their position on this portion of the proposed HF21 and concerns we may have.

Very few witnesses have made their position publicly known through their blogs. I realize they are very busy ensuring the blockchain remains functional and stable.

Rich getting richer. That's decentralized, right? That's helping people progress, right? That's the giving spirit! I am so in love with this! Why didn't I think of it before? I would totally be voting for this if I was top 20 and it fattened my wallet and it's what I was told to do so I could stay in the top 20. I totally get it now.

·

I certainly hope that the top 20 witnesses will take a look at how blatant this is - and pull this off the HF21 proposal. Isn't @shadowspub having a witness forum on Sunday? Would be interested to see who is still voting for this after seeing the blatant disparity on that chart

·
·

Definitely going to show who cares about what.😏

Posted using Partiko Android

·
·

The witness forum on Sun-30-Jun is hosted by Aggroed in PALnet discord.
The witness chat hosted by ShadowsPub in TheRamble is on Wed-17-Jul.

·
·
·

ahhhh thank you! Shadows told me about it today and I assumed she was doing it on a different day! hahaha thanks @thekittygirl

If everybody writes less and curates more, wouldn't that mean that the people still writing earn a lot more than before? Slicing the same pie fewer ways, as it were...

Kind of sounds like it might result in low-quality poor-performance posts being reduced and higher quality high-performance posts continuing. Tell me again how quality improvements are a bad result?

I'm against the overall package of changes, but 50/50 is the best piece of the package, and the one getting all the negative attention.

·

No...because the people (like me) who think it's inherently WRONG to allow people to take more money from our hard work...will leave.

Leaving more people who say "wo cares about principle!!! I'll leave my trash post in thr mix and get more "

And when whales vote... Do they get more or less money for upvoting trash or quality content?

Hmmm?

I'll wait... Lol

EXACTLY . No difference. So where is THEIR incentive to CURATE more quality work???? They can vote on trash, drop a $200 upvote an get nearly $100 back.

And what are we doing about that? Downvote wars are the solution.

What newbie do you know that is gonna step into that? So that a whale can downvote them back and take away the 3 cents they are earning???

Quality improvements are not a bad thing. This proposal is not gonna force quality improvements.

It's going to.... Let me say it again...
Take money from the authors and out it directly into the wallets of large accounts.

Why...oh why... Do we not want to accept that this is....IN FACT....what is happening.

Oh..cuz quality improvements sounds so much better than that.

50/50 is getting all.the negative attention because it's an awful way to treat people.

Work harder, and we will take a bigger cut.

But... Investors will be happy. And top witnesses.

Blech. Gross.

Posted using Partiko Android

·
·
  1. Stake is held by stakeholders.
  2. Stake is devalued via inflation.
  3. inflation is contributed to reward pool.
  4. reward pool is split up between curators (stakeholders) and creators

I may have missed the point where creators are entitled to a share of the inflation tax levied on stakeholders. The move to 50/50 isn't a tax on creators, it's a change in distribution of the existing tax on curators. A change that could improve the incentives to curate quality content. A change that might result in a redistribution from entitle shit-content producers to actual quality-content producers.

Remember that 50% of $2 is a little more than 75% of $1.

·
·
·

No one said anything about entitled.

We are accustomed to a certain standard that is now being changed in favor of large accounts.

Is anyone still honestly denying this??????

Just stop

Stop with the smoke and mirrors. It's so condescending.

The people voting on this are the people set to make the most money. It's a conflict of interest.

But they get to double their money for doing absolutely nothing. Annnnnnd ding ding ding...seek out more investors who can do the very same thing!!!

Once again....haejin is the absolute poster child for the argument against what you're proposing. Anyone who wants to upvote trash posts and make 50% curation on that can do exactly that. And NO little newbie is gonna flag that and get retribution and lose more money.

They fear it. And they cling to their very small (becoming smaller cuz more goes to fat wallets) payouts cuz it's all.they have.

Go ahead and take the focus off that. I'll wait.

Posted using Partiko Android

·
·
·
·

We are accustomed to a certain standard that is now being changed in favor of large accounts.

image.png

Inherently deserving of 75% author rewards because it takes more effort to type a few words and click 'post' than it takes to click upvote.

Stop with the smoke and mirrors. It's so condescending.

Agreed... lets stop the smoke and mirrors. I don't think that any author legitimately wants to get only one upvote. So let's get rid of the smoke and mirrors and break down the numbers you showed by number of posts. How much curation per post did each 'winning' account earn? How much author reward per post did each 'losing' account earn?

But the core of the matter is you and I have different values. You think that value comes from creation, and under-rewarding creation is an affront. I think that value comes from exchange, and a move to 50/50 will encourage exchange (and therefor value creation).

There is no middle ground when the disagreement is at such a fundamental level.

so I will step of your page now and leave you in peaceful misery.

·
·
·
·
·

"Type a few words and click post."

Ummmm

Wow.

I would really love to share your view on content creation with all my content creator friends who simply type a few words and click post.

I can see why you value content creation so little now.

I also value interaction...which is why I chose to post my book on Steemit rather than publish it.

I have absolutely no idea what you're talking about with one vote .not sure who told you authors want one vote.

Go back and read the posts and see the points I made.or not. Everyone else seems to see.exactly who is voting and exactly who is fattening their wallets.

I shall also leave you, but in peace.

Posted using Partiko Android

·
·
·
·
·
·

I'd like to apologize for being harsh with you. While we disagree about 50/50, we are in agreement that the EIP is a potential disaster.

I've been advised by @improv (correctly, I think) that arguing about why the part I like is good is counter-productive when we are ultimately allies in the bigger picture ...

With CLRC and downvote pools wreaking havoc, 50/50 will likely prove to be irrelevant, and time spent defending it will have been misplaced.

I am very concerned about the role downvote pools will play as whales get creative about how to monetize that. At a minimum, I foresee anonymized downvoting (via encrypted bids) that will be much cheaper than upvotes.
As a worst case scenario, I foresee bid-bots running protection rackets (all posts above X value get downvoted unless they have paid votes from the bid-bot).

The only protection against abusive downvoting from whales is other whales stepping in... and the track record for long-term thinking from whales is not exemplary.

·

@josephsavage

Take a look at Haejin's Posts.
Literally 3 words at best, why would I not simply CURATE his posts from here on out, instead of real content creation? this teaches me it's worth more to simply CURATE large reward low value posts

·
·

why would I not simply CURATE his posts from here on out, instead of real content creation?

and why shouldn't you? If you curate, it's with your stake to do with as you please.

The ratio of curators (content consumers) to content creators on Steem is very abnormal because content creators are disproportionately rewarded. But that results in a low-price equilibrium where nobody earns as much as they should. Giving curators back more of their own stake ('Come earn money curating quality content') for being effective curators will improve the amount of organic curation taking place.

I oppose the EIP because there are serious issues with downvote pools and the new rewards curve, but 50/50 is the best part of the proposal. If we could have just 50/50 and SPS I would be a strong advocate for the HF21.... because it would almost certainly result in a rising STEEM price (even relative to bitcoin).

·
·
·

So, rather than make posts, I stop being a content creator and only curate?
What happens if we multiply that by thousands of creators and authors?

·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·

Each user will make their own judgment call about whether to continue as a content creator. It won't be everyone, and if enough organic curation remains then the remaining content creators may do better than they were before.

My concerns are more about the impact of CLRC (convergent linear rewards curve) and downvote pools. Those I think will be devastating impact and make change to 50/50 totally irrelevant in the broad scheme of things.

·
·
·
·
·
·

the 2 or so free downvotes will have ZERO effect.
What user with a rep of 45 or 50 is going to downvote a user with 100,000 SP and a rep of 70?

·
·
·
·
·
·
·

Exactly right. Economic costs are gone, social costs remain... But social costs are zero for accounts with no social standing to lose.

The upcoming downvote was will likely be devastating and their impact will have a massive impact.

I'm told by dependable sources that at least 10 million SP will be brought into downvote action. It's not about the tiny accounts, but the mighty and rich.

This post is supported by $2.77 @tipU upvote funded by @penderis :)
@tipU voting service: instant, profitable upvotes + profit sharing tokens | For investors.

How much of those author rewards are from voting bots. If they are bought votes as a means to grow SP over time vs just a straight power up, won't the impact be less as the ROI calculations will adjust to the new curations %?

Side note, I wonder if we will see a shortage of vote availble on vote buying markets after the HF...

Posted using Partiko Android

·

I can speak for mine. (cuz i'm not tracking bid bot use across the platform LOL)

I have @fundition votes for my project that come in maybe 8-10 times a month? Every time I do an update (that takes me hours to write....) they faithfully support my project!! and I'm GRATEFUL! LOL There are also projects like @helpiecake @helpie @curie @c-squared @c-cubed and COUNTLESS other curation projects that help the little guy!

All those votes that help the newbies to grow will be CUT IN HALF. PERIOD. and the overwhelming majority of the money is going BACK to large accounts.

yes - there are bid bots across the platform, but bid bots are used for SO MANY things. I often will buy a bid bot purchase for people who win a contest of mine! And if this proposal is meant to cut out bid-bods.... it is so RIDICULOUSLY skewed in favor of large accounts - HOW is this actually seen as a correction?

If they want to outlaw vote buying... its very simple. eliminate them.

Don't try to make it "more difficult" to make money on them, while allowing other people to benefit GREATLY off the solution.

it's smoke and mirrors. if there is a problem - go after the problem. Don't "sneak the potential solution" into a win/win situation for whales that JUST HAPPENS to double their wallets too.

honestly - this is so bad - that i can't believe that the people in GREEN aren't speaking out about how shameful this proposal is!!!! It's kind of embarrassing. A case could potentially be made if they were working twice as hard for making double the money.

but they're not. its literally just a windfall for doing not one thing more. (and worse - its taking the money from authors - most of whom are LITTLE accounts!)

·

I think it may actually create a higher demand for bot votes as people will be accustomed to higher payouts and as such, seek what they are about to be missing.

Posted using Partiko Android

·
·

Not sure if you are playing next colony.. but there is possibility if you are lucky. Some are selling Explorers for 10 STEEM, and transporters for like 5. I think those are crazy prices but its happening. Others are selling planets for 25-150 I think.. but its all about the type and the location. I have not made anything and only spent 10 STEEM so far.

·
·
·

I've got it bookmarked, have yet to dig in but if things are that low atm...

Posted using Partiko Android

·
·

I was thinking of SmartSteem. They give you a guaranteed 5% return on your bid. But after the HF if you spend $10 STEEM bid, they need to give you a $21 STEEM bid. It will require a lot more SP to give a profitable upvote. The reduced rewards may really drop the number of content producers and create more people who just sell their votes for growth.

·
·

I think you're right that people will be looking for any way to make more money again...

The premise behind the 50/50 rewards is that with the 100% increase in rewards curators will now look for the best articles to curate. This has always struck me as basically dumb, just think, why would a big old whale whose vote is worth $20.00 right now and is giving out 10 100% votes a day (it doesn't matter if he curates manually but randomly, actually reads posts or has a voting bot or delegates to bid bots) and is earning $50.00 in curation rewards , change his voting habits because now he is going to make $100.00 a day?

·

exactly.

not only that - how can WE (the little guys - are already going BEYOND our 10 100% upvotes) how can WE curate more? we can't. the system isn't set up to give more. we only get 10.

if we go beyond that - we can - but our curation rewards decrease.

Curators curate what they want. and always will (that goes for all of us) Taking money from the little guy and putting more into the whale's pockets will change one thing

further division of classes.

Thanks for the tag! I appreciate you putting your argument in numbers and I can understand your point on why you are worried but we also cannot account for all the widespread behavioural changes that will go along with it it won't be a simple case of A and now its B.

  • Yes people will get less for posting
  • Yes people won't earn that much from curation

But STEEM is starting to outgrow the one use case, which is blogging, there are plenty of ways to earn steem now as well as tokens that can now supplement your efforts.

  • What if your rewards go down but the value of steem goes up? Does that offset the change?
  • What if those who aren't bloggers and want to be passive consumers of content can now have more of a place and say in the system? Is that such a bad thing?

We all know the system isn't perfect and no matter how you slice it the haves will always benefit over the have nots. I just see it as the harder it is to earn the more you value it the less likely to sell, the more pressure to HODL and the better the scarcity which is good for the community.

As a tech entrepreneur myself, I side on to take a chance, fail fast and learn from it, making a decision has never been a bad move, not making one has always been a bad move. Take a step back, take step to the side or take a step forward all creates momentum, but taking no steps will see you quickly see you fade into obscurity.

As someone who makes their living on the internet, I know exactly how hard it is to generate an income and I've diversified into various streams both in business and personal income streams to mitigate any risk. Which is why I strongly feel people shouldn't make this one platform there be an end-all for rewards.

If this HF is truly the end of steem, I will have lost some money but have fond memories of my time here. I know hardly anyone feels this way but yeah I still believe we're in a position to become something better. Call me an eternal optimist

·

I will keep my relationshiops here no matter what!!!!
In that sense...I won't have lost anything that truly matters.

The money? Eh. @crimsonclad mentioned that she doesn't make minimum wage for her time here and I agree. I think i make 30 cents per hour on a good day. (And I work very hard for that 30 cents )

So I think we can all agree we aren't here for the money.

Here is my point.

THE HAVES DO NOT HAVE MY PERMISSION TO HAVE MORE. Especially out of my 30 cents an hour.

And the point is not the value of steem. The point is we earn something now as our Steem salary, and just like any job...you are coming in the next day to a 33% salary cut.

The boss is getting that in his paycheck to go on vacation.

You ok with that? If you are...lol you're the exactly the type of person that they want here.

No. Not me. Taking from my wallet and putting it into theirs is not acceptable.

For what? What is the benefit???

If more people want to have more say as curators... Let them

What's stopping them? Want to curate? Do it!

That's what they tell us right?

If we want to create content we should do it for the love of it and not for money... Ok so then that applies to them too. You wanna curate? Go for it. Money shouldn't matter. do it for the love of it like we do.

Fail fast happened with HF20.

Not real keen on going through that again.

It's ok. I don't need to produce content.i can easily still be a part of the steem community and be a curator, solely.

It's not like steem is gonna die without my posts!

We can all sit back and curate all the big accounts. That will be fun, probably.

P.s.

No one yet has said anything about the VERY REAL FACT that there is a LOT OF GREEN bars on that chart .... And they are the ones voting FOR this proposal????

I'm not talking about back room deals or conspiracy theories. Im talking about FACTS on a public blockchain. That is exactly what is being proposed.

Still waiting to hear why anyone is ok with that.

·

But STEEM is starting to outgrow the one use case, which is blogging, there are plenty of ways to earn steem now as well as tokens that can now supplement your efforts.

So what ways of making Steem other than creating content is there? Note, I said creating a content... not all content on the platform is blogging.

When I can get this for two months and less time creating posts because the UI is significantly better, and don't have to push my content out to several Discord channels every time I post in order for people to see it, why should I stick around?

NRVE earnings as of June 26 2019.JPG

Seriously, two months. And my Steem account right now, after a year-and-a-half, is worth less than $500. I spend more time on Narrative now. Several other Steemians have jumped ship for Narrative, as well.

·

I am on Narrative but not doing anything on it. People complain about Steem being involved to learn, Narrative sucks big time on that point.

·
·

Yeah, it's not like any other website. That's for sure. My problem with Steemit is the primitive UI and lack of development. Plus, I have to go off-site to promote posts to get anyone to read them. It's very time-intensive. I picked up on Narrative pretty quickly.

·
·
·

I don't really have an issue with the UI and there is development starting to take place. It's not all that much different than the UI used on other sites including Medium.com where btw, promotion is done more off the site than on even with them having curators (real curators not just upvoters) on staff to find content.

There are several FB groups where content is shared from Medium and of course on Twitter. Having to share on other sites to get notice on one is not that big of a deal.

·
·
·
·

I'm not talking about promoting on other websites. I've been doing online marketing since the 1990s. I'm talking about having to use Discord to promote to other Steemians because the trending pages are eaten up by low-quality posts propped up by bidbots and there is no simple way to promote to an audience without tagging individuals, which is tedious. Curation trails are only a small help, and it's all for a pittance.

·
·
·
·
·

So, apparently you didn't get the clear message of what I told you. On Medium one needs to go to groups on Facebook that have been setup to promote their posts... just like Steemians go to discord.

Even though Medium has tried to put a system into place for content discovery.. it is not enough so people have to go off site to promote their to other Medium users.

·
·
·
·
·
·

I understand what you're saying. I don't think you're understanding me. Sharing Medium posts on Facebook is just like sharing any other post on Facebook. With Medium, if you're a member of their get-paid-to-publish club, they may or may not put you on the front page. But they have other avenues baked into the system. I submitted a story to Hacker Noon and it was widely read. Got a few claps. Okay, yippee yi yay.

On Steemit, today, I can make $2.00 for a post. It's almost guaranteed--if I am willing to spend an hour promoting that post on a dozen different Discord channels. If I don't do that, I'll likely only make $1.00. On Narrative, I'll make a dollar if I fart.

·

So as I understand it at a glance, as the SF niche owner you should be looking to recruit people with expertise and subject-based writing skill to participate in that niche, right? So tell me why I ought to come and start generating content for you.

(Also, is that posted fiction or articles about SF or some of each?)

·
·

So as I understand it at a glance, as the SF niche owner you should be looking to recruit people with expertise and subject-based writing skill to participate in that niche, right?

Yes, that is correct. I prefer to cast a wider net and just invite people to Narrative because it's a platform with a ton of potential for many niches.

So tell me why I ought to come and start generating content for you.

That's a great question, but you wouldn't be generating content for me. You'd be generating it for your audience. But there are a ton of reasons why you might be interested.

  • For starters, 85% of the generated rewards go to content creators, niche owners, moderators, and other community members. 60% go to content creators.
  • Beyond that, there is a growing community of great spec-fic writers forming there. Just take a look and see if you might fit in.
  • Not long ago, the Spec-Fic niche hit the top 10 in terms of number of posts. That's fairly significant considering the specialized nature of the niche. Among the fiction writing niches, we've got some of the best engagement.
  • I'm considered by a good number of content creators to be one of the best and most active niche owners (just ask around). I am not a passive niche owner. I am involved in the niche and take my responsibility to support the authors who pour blood, sweat, and tears into their craft as much as I can.
  • I am about to launch routine contests, writing prompts, and other exercises, with rewards.
  • Read my post on brand-building. It applies to fiction writers.

(Also, is that posted fiction or articles about SF or some of each?)

Yes. We have fiction writers, reviewers, other types of non-fiction writing about spec-fic, a podcaster, and poets publishing within our niche. If it's about speculative fiction, it's welcome.

I'd love to see you aboard. I go by @gardengnomepubs on Narrative.

Great points! When you show how the people who are mainly posting and getting small amounts of curation, it's easy to see who will benefit the most. Sadly, it won't be most of the content creators. I believe JustineH did a post where she calculated that with all the changes, authors will see a 42% drop in rewards. That's a big decrease!

·

Yes, by all means, go see all the extra curation that @steembasicincome will be passing through to its member base in the form of substantially larger upvotes.

It's substantial, and enough to almost entirely offset the decrease in author rewards that members will get from our votes, in spite of the decreased author rewards that will be earned. It won't be able to offset the convergent linear curve, unfortunately.

I am opposed to the EIP, but in my opinion, 50/50 is the best part of it.

·
·

I think SBI is in a good position to adjust and be just fine even with 50/50 rewards. One option would be to reduce the cost to sign up for each share. Another is to decrease the amount of leases that need to be bought, thereby increasing the value long-term by powering up more Steem.

·

You should go see how much steembasicincome is about to make.

With ALL their different accounts

By the way... When you check steemworld, you'll have to refresh their page because their curation rewards are disabled at first.

Geeeeee. I wonder whyyyyyyy.

Posted using Partiko Android

·
·

I'm actually not too worried about the affect that 50/50 would (or will) have on SBI. They've been really good about returning value to members, so I imagine they'll just give bigger votes or lower the signup cost. That's one silver lining in the gray cloud of all these changes.

·
·
·

Bigger votes and less dependence on leased delegations...

·
·
·

yep! thats' what @josephsavage said! so I'm glad that will benefit everyone!

i need to find out how to transfer all my SBI to some lucky person LOL

I wont be posting anymore - so I need to know where to go to transfer those SBI shares.

·
·
·
·

If you have at least 25 units, you can request transfer by 0.001 transaction. (Transfers are done manually, thus the minimum)

#sbi-skip

·
·
·
·
·

yep - I have 785... well actually no, I think I have more since we got some airdropped to us at the Alliance meetup.

I will most likely transfer them all to one special newbie.

!sbi status

·
·
·
·
·
·

Hi @dreemsteem!

  • you have 803 units and 8 bonus units
  • your rshares balance is 2476678967057 or 1.455 $
  • your next SBI upvote is predicted to be 0.291 $

Structure of your total SBI vote value:

  • 85.05 % has come from your subscription level
  • 0.11 % has come from your bonus units
  • 8.63 % has come from upvoting rewards
  • 6.21 % has come from new account bonus or extra value from pre-automation rewards


    To reduce blockchain clutter, you can also check your status in our Discord server!
    https://discord.gg/VpghTRz
·
·
·
·
·
·

The airdrop units will show in your bonus units.

But again I'd like to apologize for being rude before. Steem is losing a valuable asset if you really do go silent as a content creator.

#sbi-skip

·
·
·
·
·
·
·

I appreciate that. Apology accepted - thank you for turning your curation rewards back to the community.

and thank you for saying that the steem is losing a valuable asset. I honestly don't think they feel that way - but that's just opinion.

Ill have more time to focus on Spunkee Monkee now.

I will transfer all my units to @dutybound. He's an amazing artist and a generous friend. I hope that the SBI will help him to grow here. Is there a post that tells me how to transfer? Or I can literally just write a simple memo with 0.001 steem transfer saying how I'd like all my shares to be donated to him?

·
·
·
·

Sorry you won't be posting anymore. It's too bad to see so many people leaving. I don't know if SBI is transferable because I don't help run it, but if you can, you could always transfer them to ssg-community. I'm sure the shares would be appreciated and would help a community. ;)

·
·
·
·
·

yes - but i think one newbie will benefit from this. I love my SSG community - but i think they're doing ok.

This newbie is going to feel the hurt from HF21 a lot. and my 785+ shares will help him a lot!!! ( well. i hope they do)

·
·
·
·
·
·

No worries. I'm just messing around. I'm glad that someone is going to get to benefit. It's hard enough to make a progress here without having rewards cut by 42%.
Best of luck to you!

·
·
·
·
·
·
·

Hehhehee. Believe me.. i thought about it. But I think the newbie deserves it.

And it makes me so happy to give it to someone who ... As you said... 42% cut! Lol

It's another silver lining

Posted using Partiko Android

Yet another example of Steemit.com scraping cream off the top for themselves and the whales.

So the content providers, with whom the platform would have died at the outset, have to give up even more of our rewards, again, because those at the top have zero imagination regarding how to actually craft a realistic win/win/win scenario.

Decentralized my ass. Pathetic. Still.

I'm still committed here long term, but it's in spite of the udiocy and greed at the top, not because if it. I have faith in the people who use the platform. I have zero faith in those who control and abuse it.

And we've yet to see whether they break the flipping platform, like they did last time. Bunch of useless dweebs.

Posted using Partiko Android

·

well - discord still allows me to interact with all my steemit family - for free!! hehehe and i will STILL be going to the meetup! ohhhhh yes i will. I won't be able to upvote - but I'll be able to comment !

·

just to be clear @crescendoofpeace this HF is not being driven by steemit.com ... or steemit inc.. it is the witnesses who vote on it and steemit inc who codes it when they decide.

·
·

Thanks for the clarification.

It still takes away rewards from creators, giving them to those who have not created, so I'mstill not in favor of that change.

If they rely want to help creators and the platform, they should go back to 30-day payouts, as it was in the beginning.

That would help creators and curators, without taking rewards from anyone, and would help the whole platform.

·
·
·

If they rely want to help creators and the platform, they should go back to 30-day payouts, as it was in the beginning.

that 30 day payout was not all that it was cracked up to be. The reality was if you didn't get upvoted well in the first 24 hour window, you would be lucky to see even a few cents in the next 29 days. Then, like now, content was buried pretty quickly.

·
·
·
·

No doubt.

But by taking rewards from content creators, and awarding them to curators, they are in effect directly awarding them to abusive whales, since we already know they will be the first to game the system.

Not exactly upholding the promise of holding abusive whales in check, is it?

Thanks for this info. @ned's an idiot and what's the point of voting for witnesses if nothing is ever actually contested in the end? They always just do what Steeminc wants... Steemit probably won't even be worth me dumping posts I write elsewhere, let alone creating it here first.(it isn't now)

There are literally 30 new blockchain platform's out now with many more coming out soon and I'm already signed up on at least 12 of them...

·

You know me...I love steem as my home.

That's why I feel it's worth fighting for.

But I have to say I agree... Aren't representatives supposed to represent us?

Very sad state of affairs right now.

Posted using Partiko Android

·

got a list of that 30?

·
·

Cent, Trybe.one, Pocketnet.app, Narrative, Friendster.io, Jamaa, HyperSpace, Tapatalk, U°, Uptrennd, Foresting, Sphere, Belacam and Minds off the top of my head that I find usable. Many more I forget, because I didn't like them. Then there is Voice and Openbook that are under development that show promise with many more that aren't worth mentioning yet. I hope this helps.

Posted using Partiko Android

·
·
·

i have accounts on some of them. I don't really use the accounts but have tried them out. Trybe has some promise.

·
·
·
·

Trybe and Narrative are the best if you want quality, but both are in early beta. Trybes new UI is worse than the old one and Narrative just opened to the public Apr 1, and is going through growing pains with spam and plagiarism, but the community cares and is tight enough. It will only grow more tight. I prefer Narrative myself, but am going to get more involved in Trybe. Pocketnet has a good development team, but it is Shitpost central. Mostly conservative and a lot of youtube video's being posted that aren't the author.

Posted using Partiko Android

·
·
·
·
·

I don’t find the quality on Trybe Any better than STEEM. As for Narrative... definitely not impressed. 0x is interesting but not enough to hold my attention yet.

Posted using Partiko iOS

·
·
·
·
·
·

Lol, I never said they were better, but I don't consider them worse. Of course that simply an opinion. But...I do know that when you are accustomed to doing things a certain way, you tend to be too critical at first. Things change once you really interact an understand what's going on.

Posted using Partiko Android

·
·
·
·
·
·
·

I’m not just on STEEM. I publish on Medium as well so not exactly adverse to learning when it appears worth the time

Posted using Partiko iOS

Cool analysis.
We have to keep in mind that currently many users behave the way they do to maximize author rewards. Once people start behaving differently to maximize curation rewards or at least balance between author and curator, it will change a little more.
Also, there are rewards from using bots or delegating to them that are just too difficult to analyze which will be impacted.
Personally I think 2e12 regressive reward curve is the worst change because that only benefits huge payouts.

Atleast with curators technically they are choosing to give me 50% of their rewards via votes. They ain't taking anything from me.

Posted using Partiko Android

·

I can't give any more curation than I'm.giving. I'm already currently giving more than I'm supposed to.

I'd rather not post than have more be taken from me by people who are doing nothing more than what they were before, and earning double the rewards (from my own pocket)

I'll just spend my time curating and upvote my own comments, I guess.

Yes I will make less, but so be it. The principle is more fair than the alternative.

If investors want to make money, let them post instead of taking from small accounts to line their own pockets.

Posted using Partiko Android

·
·

I think it is just a matter of perspective. Your post is worth 0 until someone decides otherwise.

I have always been in favor of a curation slider, but I would set it to at least 50%. I don't mind giving back more to my supporters since it is their vote. They could always go vote for someone else.
There is way to much mediocre content here that seems to only have a function of getting rewards for vote trading or other self voting services. It is cool and makes sense for the people doing it, but it doesn't really add value for anyone not involved.
There are exceptions, but I think we need to discourage selfish behavior and I see increased curation rewards as a safer way of accomplishing this. Technically you can still get it all back if you trade.

I'm an investor, but as and investor I don't want more Steem I want the market price increase. As a posts I want my posts to earn more Steem. As someone with Steem power Inwamt to increase my curation.

Few people have a single goal. I hope we see better content and not the same boring posts or authors constany. I'm doing very well umder the current system, but I also.see how it is unsustainable.
How long can Steem remain in the top 100? Some of the altcoins ahead of it are a joke....what does that say about Steem?

Posted using Partiko Android

·
·
·

I like the sound of that curation Slider.
It's an interesting perspective.
I'd love to see it implemented.
IF people chose to be altruistic, great, if not, we can't judge the reason why, maybe they have legit reasons?

·
·
·

You're very right.

People set the value of your posts and that is thanks to curation. Absolutely right.

However as I stated somewhere in another comment hahaha..it takes me MUCH longer to write my original content than it does to curate that same type of post.

Honestly? Curators don't even have to read. they can just click and vote.

I don't have a problem with rewarding curators with part of the rewards...but as you can see in the chart... It's pretty skewed.

Rich get richer. End of story.

(As far as the same boring content... You should read the story that I wrote exclusively for Steemit... Hehe. It not boring...and got a LOT of steemians very excited for more. I'm currently releasing bits of the sequel daily... Also exclusively for Steemit.)

·
·
·
·

I suspect for the most part your ideas are correct. I'm just trying to e optimistic now that it seems inevitavoe to pass HF21.

I'm definitely going to check out more of your work.

I do hope this change has the desired effect to reward good content rather than bad content. However its much easier for bad actors to exploit loopholes and just start over if they do something unacceptable.

Posted using Partiko Android

·
·
·
·
·

Well, I can tell you how I will behave.

Less content. More curation

And I can't wait to TRACK how much more money the whales will be making over time.

Every month I'll go into steemworld to show the last 30 days of activity on the same accounts.from my chart (and more!) To show the people EXACTLY where their money went to after these changes are implemented.

When people talk about "oh ...it will eventually be an equilibrium"... you know what they mean?

They mean ...eventually, the people who leave will take all prior knowledge with them and we will only be left with the ones who don't know any better.

But numbers don't lie. And the blockchain is forever.

Posted using Partiko Android

·

do you actually believe any substantial change in behaviour is going to happen? I don't. Currently I read and upvote content as much as I can. I rarely ever bother with being concerned if my timing is good for curation rewards... i'm merely supporting others and if some curation happens great. That is not going to change. Others have a list of people they auto upvote and rarely look at the list as long as they get rewards. now they will get more by default. Then there is the whale who has been vocal about this change so he could get some more Steem and invest more in curation bots. That is not actually seeking good content that is sending a bot out to upvote on autopilot

·
·

There will be a little change. Those who change will benefit and those who don't will fall further behind. For now I make between 1 and 1.5 Steem / 1000 SP in a week of curating and I selfvote which tends to be most profitable.
I hope that atleast doubles, but I imagine it will triple. It may affect profitability from other ways, but it's going to be hard to isolate with the SPS and new curve coming in as well.

·
·
·

Yeah, hard to isolate.

It's almost like someone should suggest to make changes separately so we could see what actually worked and what didn't

Huh

Someone should really do that.

😂

As far as self voting being the most profitable option.... I agree....I think that is where more people are heading.

Most people dont upvote their own comments, but... Think about it..
If they do..they get all the author rewards and all the curation rewards.

Well....unless the downvote police come and express their disapproval for people trying to earn what was taken away

Seems like they're setting up a system for people to do exactly what they DONT want to happen

When they see this happening, they'll probably punish every one a little more! Lol

Bad little money-grubbing Steemians!!! We want you to do it THIS way. Why won't you obey?!?! Hehehe

(Im laughing cuz it's better than the alternative)

Posted using Partiko Android

Hello!

This post has been manually curated, resteemed
and gifted with some virtually delicious cake
from the @helpiecake curation team!

Much love to you from all of us at @helpie!
Keep up the great work!


helpiecake

the post we needed yes
Manually curated by @vibesforlife.

Hi @dreemsteem, on a different (but related) matter, I see you have some MAPX tokens - you need to stake them to activate upvotes (2% from 33k SP is not bad!)
Unstaking takes just 2 days.

·

they are unstaked because @eturnerx gave them to me to juice up my "pot" for the Name the Monkee contest hehehe - thank you for reminding me that I need to update that post to tell people the prize is bigger. I'm just going to give them away... so i think the winner needs to stake them - right ? :)

·
·

Unstaking only takes 2 days, so you can stake the MAPX and use them until just before your contest deadline.
To award the tokens staked, use the staking icon on steem-engine and add the recipient's Steem account. That way the recipient doesn't need to do anything.

Posted using Partiko Android

·
·

You can award them staked. Push the staking button in steem-engine wallet and change your username to theirs. Done. I normally give MAPX staked so the recipient doesn't need to do anything.

Posted using Partiko Android

·
·
·

Oh. My gosh!!!!!! I forgot to transfer them! Lolololol

I will do this tomorrow morning...if I have issues...I'll DM you 😂 thank you for reminding me! Lol

Posted using Partiko Android

!SHADE 2
Thanks for sharing on Pimp Your Post Thursday

Congratulations @dreemsteem!
Your post was mentioned in the Steem Hit Parade in the following category:

  • Comments - Ranked 1 with 113 comments

It seems the intent is right to increase the curators as it is much easier to join, curate and not have the pressure to author.

What they seem to be missing the boat on is that the awesome content we already have is because of the author rewards. Why deflate your strength in order to promote growth in a weaker area not even knowing that this will work? I don't flatten 3 tires on my car to even it out with a low one. I pump up the low one.

I do feel like a dog barking at the mailman though. He is just going to deliver the package anyhow.

Great to hear from you on #pypt!

·

hey! good to hear you too!!!

i don't think anyone is missing any boat ;) i think all is known. but tricksy rhetoric is being played to the masses who don't know any better.

and the low tire analogy - freaking brilliant.
BRILLIANT I SAY! hahahaha

and we are all dogs barking at the mailman. i supposed it is life. LOL the money makers will always make their money. one way or the other. theyre getting that money LOL

·

!SHADE 1
Thanks for engaging with posts presented on PYPT

·



Hi zekepickleman the SHADE tokens are on the way.
Thanks for sharing SHADE
To view or Trade SHADE visit steem-engine.com

Although I don't say that this won't happen... I think the analysis is a little bit too simple. From what I see, you have just doubled the curation rewards and taken a third from the author rewards. Yes, definitely in the short term this is what will happen... but there will be a new equilibrium point for the system to settle into. I'm not saying that end point will be like this or not, but I don't think it is quite correct to assume the start and end conditions and assumptions to be exactly the same... I think two states will be different. ...

... but that isn't to say that it will be better... just different!

·

That is EXACTLY what they are proposing.

the new equilibrium will be - welcome to your new lower author rewards, and scramble for curation with the diminishing voting power that you have.

I am currently at 67% voting power. How long can I curate more before I deplete my VP to 0? (which means 0 curation rewards)

The point is. Look at how much curation rewards the big accounts are getting. They are already getting the lion's share and now its DOUBLING. They will do NOTHING more. no more curation. no more commenting. no more posting.. and they will automatically DOUBLE their already MASSIVE curation rewards

Where do you do think that's coming from? Its coming DIRECTLY from everyone's author rewards.

For people who don't post - what do they care?

So should we all just post less and curate more? What I showed on that chart was actually best case scenario (because it doesnt' even take into account the money being reduced by the SPS!!!) MORE money is coming from rewards than is even shown there.

If it's proposed as a new way of rewards - then it also must be shown how people can recover their losses - at least potentially.

there is NO way for them to make it up - ASIDE from purchasing a massive amount of steem and increasing their stake. is that honestly what we just keep being pushed towards? that was the solution for HF20 also. (if they can't pay to play, then they should just leave.)

the only people benefiting are the large accounts who do not post, and only curate. Should we follow in their footsteps?

Has this place not turned into a ghost town already? Can you imagine FEWER posts?? LOL LESS interaction?

This just honestly boggles my mind.

and a comment was made by one of the top 20 witnesses saying - going to 50/50 will relieve the pressure of powering down and selling

Interesting. What world does he live in that you can make less money and have LESS pressure to sell? Don't people usually save when there is surplus.

When people are making 100SP a month - and now they are making 66SP - the pressure is not to save. It's to take it out to make up for the deficit. If they want us to save - they have to push it in the other direction.

and - we have settled into a new equilibrium after HF20 too. bye bye newbies. That's our "new normal"

How long can we sustain the constant bleed?

·
·

Newbies don't have anything to compare to, so no, not necessarily. In fact some might even do well from the get go. How do we know? We don't.

And if you think the amounts there are bad, think about the amounts that are siphoned through other means such as bid bots and self voting with large stake. Much easier money, and much more significant. If we can reduce incentives for these things, it can make a difference.

·
·
·

It just seems sad to me that they felt the same way about HF20... That "we don't know" what will happen.

When WE all did

And we were all right

This place has become a ghost town because so many who enjoyed what steemit was... Could no longer. It takes newbies SO LONG to grow organically. YEARS to become a minnow!!!!

And now it will take them even longer.

They can't afford to come here and interact with the community without paying into the system, (I talk to newbies all the time who stop speaking for 5 days while they wait for their RC to charge) and they can't EARN that money fast enough through post payouts because they're making so little.

Curies used to be a great way to get a boost....and now that will be cut in half for them

Author rewards were so great because it was a way that YOU could earn on your own content.

This will teach the newbies "come and autovote big accounts so you can try to earn as much curation rewards as possible"

Has absolutely nothing to do with content, just sitting as close as possible to whales.

Or... Actually... They can make a lot more by playing games. Drug wars can give you 70 cents a post each day. For adding NOTHING to the chain. Absolutely no significant content .

So this is what the chain will become.

And what amazes me is that we all see it.... And yet the top people (who are all IN THE GREEN... ) Just ....can't ...seem to see it. Hmmmmm

Its honestly a HUGE conflict of interest to have people voting on something that will literally DOUBLE their steem salary and DECREASE everyone else's.

And you can all say ... All you want... "We don't know"

Yes. I do know. I cannot curate any more than I am right now. I am currently curating almost double what the chain suggests daily. Which means I have only two recourses to make up the SIGNIFICANT money I will lose.

(Money that I will lose that will go DIRECTLY into the pockets of everyone in the green .... Interestingly enough... I believe that we looked at your name too and you were also going to financially benefit from this change... I could be wrong but pretty sure you were in the green)

  1. I can purchase a large amount of steem and power up, so I can be an orca and throw my vote around and earn 50% of my vote back. (Sure. Let's all do this!!! Don't we all have $20,000 just laying around?)

Or

  1. I can just autovote all the big accounts and hope to catch some crumbs.

Im so glad that I have a cross section of people in that chart.... And I'm pretty sure I'm gonna grab some more names.

So when everyone wonders if this is working... I can show them the reality before and after HF20. Because numbers don't lie.

And show them that all the people who were "for" 50/50 are doing pretty well for themselves with the extra chunk of money taken from our author rewards while we are crawling along even slower.

And newbies??? They will have nothing to compare it to? That is a very odd statement to me.

The newbies after HF20 had nothing to compare it to either. I would ask them how they like steem.... Except they aren't here anymore.

It feels like people in the green are either out of touch with reality, or intentionally being obtuse because the change in their wallets is a pretty nice windfall.

A windfall for doing NOTHING more.

While we will all have to scramble to make that up.

But we don't know....

Ok. How about we say let's make it 90 author rewards and 10 curation ... We don't KNOW what will happen there either, right? Right.

I can tell you what MATH says... The ones in the green will now be red, and the ones in the red will now be green.

I'm sure they all know enough to say "no" to that.

Posted using Partiko Android

·
·
·
·

👆this... All of this 👌

Going to be hard to curate good content when all the authors leave isn't it? 😂

Posted using Partiko Android

·
·
·
·
·

And you just got my 100% upvote.

Lol why???

WHY NOT.

But just so you know.. as soon as HF21 happens...I'll just be taking 50% back off that vote to make my curation rewards rise. 😂😂😂😂😂

Hmmmm I'm gonna be upvoting my own comments too!!!! Lolololol

This is gonna be awesome hahahhaa
(She says with sarcasm)

Posted using Partiko Android

·
·
·
·
·
·

Hahaha!

Get yourself in the green, let's upvote everything, steemauto, where you at? Follow all major curation trails, see you in a year 😉

No need to even make comments any more!

Love the caveat too "if this works".

I am done with this conversation around hf21. It's going ahead regardless and we all know how it will end. Just wonder how much further down the coin market cap rankings steem will go when they keep making terrible choices.

Posted using Partiko Android

·
·
·
·
·
·
·

Hehehehe this totally made me laugh!!!!

Posted using Partiko Android

·
·
·
·
·

Except they won't because good authors will stand out once the all the dust has settled (caveat: if it works).

·
·
·
·
·
·

Well we know one thing will work!

Check the green accounts.

They're gonna be pretty happy!!!

Posted using Partiko Android

·
·
·
·
·
·

And when will that dust settle? Hf22?

I wish I shared your optimism but I can't see how reducing author payouts by 42% is going to encourage them to stay.

Posted using Partiko Android

·
·
·
·
·
·
·

Nah, probably within a month or so is my guess. I expect good content payouts to rise. If I'm wrong, which is a possibility, then we can revisit.

Posted using Partiko Android

Oh my word! Hearing all these for the very first time. Dammit!

·

Well sadly, I hate that this is coming now to your ears.. but better than when you look at your first payout afterwards and see half your author rewards gone...

Now at least you know why. Sorry, friend :(

Posted using Partiko Android

Thank you for this data... although I am prolific, and although I do what I do for the future here, I do see in the red and green a problem. And then there is also the fact that the creation of new accounts has been tailing off all year (@penguinpablo's daily data shows that clearly) even though engagement is up.

I'm a newbie. A lot of us are smart enough to track the steps that Steemit is making to make life better or worse for newbies. There are plenty of places newbies can go too, and fewer are coming and staying on Steemit. HF 21 may not be helpful in attracting and retaining new users, because newbies WILL be able to find out what the trends have been, and can find out if HF 21 fits the trend of helping or hurting new users.

·

Interesting...so if creation of new accounts have been trailing off ..and posting will be trailing off...

Hmmm.

Sounds like this place will be hopping! Lol

Sadly, I believe HF21 is going forward without any hesitation (from.those who are set to make much more money) so that's that.

The people have spoken and been promptly ignored. I guess we all hage choices to make!

Posted using Partiko Android

@dreemsteem, I never want to see this Ecosystem going towards the state of Down Phase but when someone is putting efforts and travelled a long journey while adding more power to the Foundation, they doesn't deserve cutting off of these Author Payouts.

Changes should empower not depress anyone's efforts. Let's see which destination is wrote for the Steem Blockchain. Let's hope for the best and stay blessed.

This really hurts the creator. The creator is the hard worker and although there are posts that arnt necessarily good quality you can find posts that are very high quality and this new thing will really hurt the content creator especially the newer members because they will now be shewed away. It’s a shame most people go mad with power. Thank you so much for sharing on PYPT

·

!SHADE 1
Thanks for engaging with posts presented on PYPT

·



Hi chris-the-batman the SHADE tokens are on the way.
Thanks for sharing SHADE
To view or Trade SHADE visit steem-engine.com

I have a question. Curating means Resteeming? Sorry for the stupid question. I am still lost.

Posted using Partiko iOS

·

It's ok - its not a stupid question. You were gone for a long time and now you're back ! (welcome back heheeh)

Curating is when you upvote someone's post or comment. When someone creates a post, let's say they have a $20 post! (maybe they earned a Curie for an awesome post!)

Right now - you only get to keep 75% of those rewards. 75% goes to the author (which is $15) and 25% gets split amongst all the people who upvoted your post (the curators)

but see.... it gets SPLIT amongst them.

so $5 is being divided. If 400 people upvote. then - that $5 is being divided among the 400 voters.

is it being divided equally??? NO.

If you have a 100% upvote with only a little SP in your account - maybe you will only receive 0.005 SP for that curation.

But if you give a 10% upvotes with 1,000,000 SP in your account - maybe you will receive $3 of the curation rewards!

See? it is based on your stake.

So - if they are dropping your author rewards to 50% now (instead of 75%) then you lose money there... that you can NEVER regain in your curation rewards.

Even though they are increasing the curation rewards from 25% to 50%..... the small accounts make SO LITTLE in curation - that doubling 0.005 to 0.01 - means almost nothing!

but - for the large accounts??? doubling $4 to $8 - means A LOT. (or doubling $3000 to $6000 in one month.... that is ALL being taken FROM author rewards - and going TO curation rewards - and they are doing NOTHING more to earn that.)

do you understand now? if not - ask questions :)

·
·

This means upvoting also is curating.

Posted using Partiko iOS

·
·
·

yes - that was my third sentence hehehe

Curating is when you upvote someone's post or comment.
·
·
·
·

I read it for the second time and finally understand what is going on. Reading this and seeing red and green got me really confused. I see a lot of red in the chart.

There will always be more people reading than creating.

More readers will be good for us creators.

So if they take away how much we creators I making, I guess we will have to churn out more.

Like the music industry with Apple Music and all.

Maybe it is a good thing.

Or we can curate more than we create.

We only have so much time in a day.

I now have 5 businesses to run. Time isn’t getting any more.

If I can just do one thing in the world, it would be writing.

But life sucks.

And we do other things.

Posted using Partiko iOS

·
·
·
·
·

See?

This is exactly the problem it creates.

Work harder for less. You are proving the point beautifully!!!!

Time isn't getting any more... So if they are trying to make it harder for authors to survive here... They should just come right out and say it.

·
·
·
·
·
·

Hey. If we can’t beat the system. Join it.

If evil ever takes over. I ain’t going to join it. I hope I will never live to see that day.

Posted using Partiko iOS

·
·

Perfect explanation, @dreemsteem. Excellent on all counts.

Posted using Partiko Android

·
·
·

Thanks for visiting my friend!! I would so prefer.to be wrong on this..but I don't think I am.. ☹️

·
·
·
·

Nope, I don't think you are either. Drat. ;-)

Posted using Partiko Android

·

reading, voting, commenting, resteeming

no qs is stupid ;-)

·
·

resteeming is NOT curating

By the way @josephsavage...i checked your account also, and saw that you would lose in this proposal. I was confused (temporarily) why you would be so passionate about this change that would put you in the red.

just checked steemworld and saw just how much you stand to make with these changes on all the @steembasicincome accounts.

I am no longer confused.

Wow. Just.... Wow.

Posted using Partiko Android

·

Curation rewards earned by @steembasicincome accounts pass through directly to members. Did you also look at the upvote distribution while you were checking the curation earnings? We have delivered more than 700,000 total upvotes... 3471 in the last week.

I am opposed to the EIP, and have publicly posted that on my own profile and on the @steembasicincome explanations of EIP impact.

I do think that 50/50 curation will be better for content creators, and I'm on the record saying that at least 18 months ago, long before @steembasicincome was earning much in the way of curation rewards. Even before I started @steembasicincome, I started with a curation digest that rewarded curators much more than featured authors... also to incentivize curation.

@steembasicincome is a curation initiative that shifts the emphasis from curating content to curating accounts (via sponsorship for dedicated stake). It has always been 50/50, as each time you curate an account (by sponsoring it for SBI) you are enrolled for the same level of SBI support. The success of the model shows that people are more than happy to curate at 50/50...

Good curation results in better rewards for high quality content. In spite of the other EIP components that I think are very problematic, I expect to see a long-term equilibrium where higher curation rewards results in a much higher maximum payout norm on organically curated content.

My passion for 50/50 is because I think getting curation rewards right will attract more organic curators, make it easier for quality content creators to get organic rewards, and result in dramatic long-term price increases. I stand to gain a lot more from long-term STEEM price gains than from a little more curation income... especially since that extra curation income passes through to SBI members.

·
·

Awesome! When you start making twice as much curation - everyone's votes should increase too! Cuz you'll have all that more to give back to the community!!!

yay steem!

·
·
·

Yes, that is a very brief summary of what I just said.... and what we published in our analysis of 50/50's impact on Steem Basic Income:

https://steempeak.com/hf21/@steembasicincome/sbi-in-an-hf21-world-part-1-50-50-rewards

I am in the camp that doesn't want this portion of the HF21. I've always been of the mind that those who do the brunt of the work deserve the brunt of the rewards (along with the responsibility that the work done is accurate and of quality). I remember reading about a proposed 50\50 split some months ago and I'll say now, again, that I feel a content creator should be given more of a percentage than an investor (curator). Not to knock the importance of investors but my feelings tie back to my above view that those who do the work should reap the benefits.

laughing hard gif.gif
My two cents put me in the green! Bwahahahahahahah!!!!!

Granted, this chart doesn't include the time people spend commenting, working on other projects that aren't their own, or how much they delegate/donate/lease steem/ paypal funds for various projects/people in need, etc. but that isn't it's function.

I'm for removing this portion the HF21 proposal. I don't see how it will help our community.

At 100% (which I'm rarely at thanks to my manual curation and being on two voting trails - I'm often somewhere b/w 60%-90% ) my upvote is worth 0.02. (Personally, I love this and giggle over being able to give my 2 cents. 😂)

Sure, some of the people I upvote make a decent amount on their posts. Some of these people are my friends and I'm happy when content of theirs does well. For some of these people, Steem is their only source of income so I want them to be able to make a living from their work here. Now, though it may seem from the data above that I upvote and carry on my merry way to happily take in some mula but, I do not. I spend hours commenting (and working for other projects as well as giving delegations and what not) so I understand that there are others who do the same. (No idea if they're some of the one's in green as well. I do know that there are so many people in our community that give endlessly on top of/aside from posting content. <3)

Again, I do realize that the point is to draw everyone's attention to something that they should know and should voice their opinions about. And again, thank you for doing so. I AGREE that I don't want creators to take a heavier cut from the rewards payouts for their work, and also know that there is more to one's interaction on the chain than can be seen with this table.

Basically, at the end of the day, I want to see this platform thrive with both veteran users and new coming together to laugh, share, create, explore, and earn. 😎

Hope that you're having a good day, Dreemsteem!

Does these changes bring back the sp back to user wallet who have invested in different bots or upvote scheme? To get more curation with more upvote value?

Posted using Partiko Android

I am so glad you wrote this post (and the others) regarding the upcoming HF21. And glad you shared in PYPT so many more people could see the numbers, which might have been missed otherwise! 🙌

·

So sorry i missed this!!! it's my pleasure- i'm glad it got more discussion out on the table - regardless of whether we are being heard - we are hearing each other! :)

·

!SHADE 1
Thanks for engaging with posts presented on PYPT

·



Hi thekittygirl the SHADE tokens are on the way.
Thanks for sharing SHADE
To view or Trade SHADE visit steem-engine.com

Such a difficult time and set of issues. Hopefully the downvotes will be used.

·

difficult times seem to surround us here for quite some time. I can walk away proud that in almost 3 years i've never powered down, i've invested my own money, i've created two communities, I've had a voice amongst my peers, I've written two books for the Steem community that I could have just released into the public market, I've treated people with respect, I've only complained about"author pay" when it was being siphoned to large accounts... and! i became a dolphin.

pats myself on back LOLOLOL

onto new worlds!

No matter what anyone says - I'm thrilled w

I would like to get a simulation done by the top20 witnesses in order to reply your post.
Thanks for doing this work, for me it is evident that this HF21 is going to benefit the big accounts and not the content creators.
We should change our witness votes as a selfdefensive action if we don have news about the results of the tesnet trials also.

·

You need to do whatever you feel is best for you! :) I know what I will be doing!

thanks for being willing to discuss it! that's more than I can say for a lot of higher ups.

This post has received a 20.00% complementary upvote from @swiftcash 🤑

Hi, resteemed and, hopefully, linking you in to the post I just published that (without my knowing it) lends some support to your predictions.

An Analysis of 50% Curation Rewards in EIP and HF21 - All Delegators Should Read This

You have a lot of comments for me to read through....

·

ok! i'm actually getting ready for church - but I will read your post when I get home tonight ok?? :) promise!

and yes - a lot of comments hahahahaha

Congratulations @dreemsteem! You have completed the following achievement on the Steem blockchain and have been rewarded with new badge(s) :

You made more than 15000 comments. Your next target is to reach 16000 comments.

You can view your badges on your Steem Board and compare to others on the Steem Ranking
If you no longer want to receive notifications, reply to this comment with the word STOP

To support your work, I also upvoted your post!

Vote for @Steemitboard as a witness to get one more award and increased upvotes!