You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Investing through delegation and curation
I really don't know much about SMT, but I'm a bit skeptical about how this will positively affect small account holders and new on boarders. So I will appreciate if you can through more light on this, probably in your next article
I'll make a post explaining my view on this, there will be plenty of rewards for content creators, just less steem. :)
I'm looking forward to it...thank you
Posted using Partiko Android
Why skeptical?
With every new development or initiative on the blockchain, there have been promises made that are still far from being met. We are still faced with a plethora of problems that existed some years back. Maybe I'm not well abreast on the potentials of the SMTs that's why I'm a bit skeptical. But I reserve my comments till then. I want the best for the blockchain and if SMT is the way forward then so be it. I'm just keeping my fingers crossed.
The most important question now, for me, is how SMTs will affect small accounts like mine. You might say that is selfish and maybe it is. I'm looking after my interest and that of the blockchain but mine a little more
At the moment whaleshares is giving the most to content creators. So yes I agree with you there. I'm really not sure if Steemit inc is pro-Content Creators. It seems more as many Stake holders want to implement some communist 50/50 system that would crush content creators in the long game.
I'm so tired of lazy entitled high stake holders that has too much free time and comes up with: "You know what would be great? Let's take 25% more from the already poor content creators! They never detect it.. let's just say to them that the system is broken and that we have a fix" They try to sneak it in at the moment. So produce on whaleshares atm I would say. You will earn Stake 15-19x faster.
I tried opening one recently but I dunno, I did not get the said email notification. I would like to experiment on other platforms, but steem is where I want to make my home.
On a lighter note, I support one of those communist pushings for the 50/50. He has done a lot for me in terms of upvotes but I do not agree with the 50/50 reward ratio proposal. It will not solve the fundamental problems here, rather it will increase and there will be more rewards for these said bidbots. I don't speak codes but common sense tells me: more curation rewards, more incentive to rape the reward pool
Posted using Partiko Android
You are right!
lol
How are content creators better off with no curation at all? How did you not learn anything by being all over the posts where this has been discussed?
Please make your own posts if you want to shill a fork with retarded inflation and no liquidity in the markets. Don't buy bid bots on comments to get the visibility on someone else's post.
It's amazing how much anti-capitalism is going on in here. Can Steem thrive with being anti-capitalism? I don't think so. To think people have a hidden agenda when they give a tip...
Do you really think I wrote that to "shill" something? Just lol, I always speak from my heart. If I tip someone and someone comes and steals that away well I have a hard time to see it thrive in the long term. If it's anti-capitalism and panics over a small tip ---> Will fail, as it's not empowering anymore. But about policing every word to create a yes men comment section. That will completely make the whole place non-vibrant and boring. It becomes about "mine", instead of a shared thing.
And I'm not saying you don't need curators. But it's a logical fact that Content Creators is doing most of the work. Curation will mostly be automated. It's not many that do it manual. Even if they did they are doing 10x less energy spend than a content creators. Yes there are exceptions. But Creators they should have the most wealth. Or it's communism. History has proven communism always fails.
"How did you not learn anything by being all over the posts where this has been discussed?" I wrote a 300-400 word comment to smooth. Never got a reply, @lordbutterfly still has authority on this question as he has been writing the most clear way why it will fail. He also never got a reply. That tells me everything I need to know. People care more about their Stake than human relationships and empower creators. Click upvote and only give around 50% is not a loving act. It's a selfish act as you know you get most back.
What I see is Stake holders getting pissed off at a few dollars here and there. They should be in thriving mode. Not realising that it will cause a brain drain effect as it's leech energy.
What will happen is low effort content creators + high stake holders will win. They want to cut off the healthy upcoming Middle Class of Content Creators.
I think you acidyo is one of the best high Stake holders in terms of integrity, but in the end I don't think this place can thrive on other high stake holders as human behaviour shows most will be selfish. You are not but the majority is. 50% would make it 10x worse.
...
Well this would sure change the game if you had moderators.
That would put content creators as the highest authority. By putting content creators at a higher authority than what it currently is. Now it's just that people create whatever without really focusing on 1 niche or community. As those systems hasn't been built. So at the moment it only exist Stake holders that are a bit over powered and then smaller content creator accounts at a few thousand Steem.
It all comes down to making it a bit more serious then and have people in proper roles. And that all play their role well. With the current system it's just a game where everyone tries to grab a big slice with no accountability. But then it seems still that a proper system is at least a couple of years away. I do agree that ideally 50/50 could work potentially in the future and as people reach a higher level of abundance. But with the current way things are being run I would say stick to 75/25. People will surely just automate more with a current 50/50 plan.
And I can get a feel of many high Stake holders that they are not really caring that much about real content and never will. They only have limited Tokens. Content Creators have limitless material. They are what creates the magic, they are what pulls in people to the system. When you empower these content creators a long time and nurture them they will be the best authority to curate new material. As they have earned their role and position. They have made themselves vulnerable by producing something real.
A content creator has usually way more influence than a high stake holder as they daily can create new connections with others that has invested equal buy-in. I am still very skeptical about a high stake holders that wonders about ROI every single second when they already have enough to live in abundance for the rest of their life. Clearly the highest ROI is to invest in people producing quality content and leverage human energy.
Lavish abundance should be re-invested into people with massive buy-in and that can master leverage. I'm just too worried 50/50 would create more mediocre stuff. When I came into Steem Jan 2018, it was the lavish abundance of a dtube vote that made me invest thousands. If 50% would have been taken away I'm not really sure if I would have had buy-in. Some content creators are a million times better than others. So they should have way more for that. As that will inspire others to act the same and aim up. People have always loved the idea of a hero.
Yes this is very much true! Thanks for a great logical comment that covered some stuff I never would have thought about. This is what makes up big value on a Blockchain. Real comments with great input.
Thanks for your more professional in-depth comment on this subject. I will think about it a bit to see what my views are.
Thanks for taking the time to respond to him, I couldn't bother after seeing that pointed out all over the place.
I see what you did here trying to take credit for the above comment XD This comment from @kendrahill is not talking about the same system as High Stake holders is talking about. This comment is talking about more empowerment to content creators hands. If you make 50/50 system wrong then it will surely end up in communist system with lots of low effort stuff be produced.
Especially this part is talking about more empowerment to content creators:
But if you just make a system where High Stake holders can run wild then it will surely cause Chaos.
If you are just taking this out:
You are taking it out of context. The context above is extremely relevant. Or else distortion effects will very easily be created.
See, thats exactly whats wrong with this proposal. It makes people jump to what could be best described as the "most intuitive conclusion" without actually having to look deeper into their arguments.
Its great that you have a lot of faith in "humanity" but the facts point into another direction.
We need to try and analyze behavior patterns before making such a drastic change.
Im sorry to say but not a single thing you said here is likely to happen.
I appreciate your positive outlook but everything points in another direction..
Under 1. you just put all your faith into the hands of a few whale curators that might or might not know whats best. Might or might not increase their effectiveness. You widened the overall wealth gap between have and have nots.
Under 2. that standards will be raised? Not really. If people dont leave they are actually more likely to increase their content volume because you just cut their earnings. Instead of putting hard work into a 1-2 post/videos per day... They will put in less work per post and increase the number of posts made.
... high, low quality, etc, it doesnt matter. .. What matters is increased centralization in token distribution.
On the 3. point.... This proposal makes upvote buying cheaper and completely destroys the trending page. Trending will actually look far worse then it does now.
Unfortunately no one is willing to even consider that, because large accounts, even if they are nice enough to curate, like @acidyo here, the prospect of having such a big boost to earnings just closes their mind to any valid criticism. Witnesses follow in suite because these curation accounts are vocal and have indebted thousands of people with their work over these last 2 years..
Not until passive investors start taking back their witness votes will witness resolve start to buckle.
anyways...
..
This comment is supported by $2.85 @tipU upvote funded by @phoneinf :)
@tipU voting service guide | STEEM Monsters Lottery | Quick SBD <-> STEEM Exchange | For investors.
Thanks @phoneinf :)
Posted using Partiko Android
This is why I don't like bid bots on comments, now it seems like he did it to shill whaleshares.
Well, the comment can be downvoted :)
Posted using Partiko Android
Flagged your first comment due to manipulation of order int he comments to receive visibility on shilling in the next comments, voted up this comment to make up for the reward you lost.
Too much conclusions. I didn't boost my comment response as you try to make it sound like. You are speculating that I did a tip for other reasons. Can people not tip each other these days for just kindness? Please... Visibility is just how this Blockchain works. Just because I mention something in the crypto industry doesn't mean a person has a massive conspiracy plan.
You are welcome