I posted a comment that I like the proposal. I downvoed it because I don't like seeing thousands of dollars sucked out from the reward pool day after day every time he posts a proposal or update on the development process. That's not Dan's fault, it is just my disagreement with some of the other voters.
@liondani, Yes communication from the team helps bring confidence but I'm pretty sure this is not the way to do it. When investors see thousands of dollars being paid to founders day after day, including voting for themselves to do so, it contributes to the narrative of this being a scam that is set up to enrich insiders. It isn't necessary at all, since the team already has a $100 million "pre"-mine and should be sufficiently well-compensated to post updates without draining the reward pool doing it. If not, then something else is very wrong.
As far as the trending list, i want a sticky feature for team updates or some other way of organizing them that does not drain rewards. 100% of well-run projects already keep their investors and users well-informed without being individually paid thousands of dollars for each update. This is not rocket science!
I still think Daniel's post's bring more value than it "sucks out" due the confidence it brings to the shareholders ! At least that is the case for me! Every-time he post's updates it gives me one more reason not to Power Down but to Power Up... I certainly want his posts on the top of the trending list to be sure nobody misses it...of course it doesn't need to be on first place or having a big gap from the next posts in value...
@smooth I agree with your action. Ned downvoted Dan's previous post from the same reason - to remove the reward from the post.
As Dan mentions below, an option to 'not pay rewards for this post' would be nice.
Also, did the Comment Reply chain get reduced to 4 instead of 6? I would have replied below to @liondani's comment but can't anymore.
Maybe votes' functions should be tied to how those votes are voted by others. You know, similar to what we have with typical democracies, not like the USA though. Current voting structure with Steemit resembles American elections - Money talks. Votes' effectiveness should move from bottom up. That is votes that are upvoted should count.
@smooth I think it would be helpful if there were a feature to "opt out" of the reward pool. still show the "value" for trending but some way of saying that you are giving the reward back, and have that be built into the system.
I posted a comment that I like the proposal. I downvoed it because I don't like seeing thousands of dollars sucked out from the reward pool day after day every time he posts a proposal or update on the development process. That's not Dan's fault, it is just my disagreement with some of the other voters.
@liondani, Yes communication from the team helps bring confidence but I'm pretty sure this is not the way to do it. When investors see thousands of dollars being paid to founders day after day, including voting for themselves to do so, it contributes to the narrative of this being a scam that is set up to enrich insiders. It isn't necessary at all, since the team already has a $100 million "pre"-mine and should be sufficiently well-compensated to post updates without draining the reward pool doing it. If not, then something else is very wrong.
As far as the trending list, i want a sticky feature for team updates or some other way of organizing them that does not drain rewards. 100% of well-run projects already keep their investors and users well-informed without being individually paid thousands of dollars for each update. This is not rocket science!
I still think Daniel's post's bring more value than it "sucks out" due the confidence it brings to the shareholders ! At least that is the case for me! Every-time he post's updates it gives me one more reason not to Power Down but to Power Up... I certainly want his posts on the top of the trending list to be sure nobody misses it...of course it doesn't need to be on first place or having a big gap from the next posts in value...
@smooth I agree with your action. Ned downvoted Dan's previous post from the same reason - to remove the reward from the post.
As Dan mentions below, an option to 'not pay rewards for this post' would be nice.
Also, did the Comment Reply chain get reduced to 4 instead of 6? I would have replied below to @liondani's comment but can't anymore.
Maybe votes' functions should be tied to how those votes are voted by others. You know, similar to what we have with typical democracies, not like the USA though. Current voting structure with Steemit resembles American elections - Money talks. Votes' effectiveness should move from bottom up. That is votes that are upvoted should count.
@smooth I think it would be helpful if there were a feature to "opt out" of the reward pool. still show the "value" for trending but some way of saying that you are giving the reward back, and have that be built into the system.