SteemWorld Support tomorrow ON or OFF?
Before I went to sleep, my SteemWorld Support Proposal was sitting well above the Return Proposal with over 2 million SP distance. Now I woke up and saw that I'm no longer being funded, because @clayop voted for the Return Proposal with ~ 3,6 million SP.
Again and again, I experience that the Proposal System puts way to much pressure on developers and has nothing to do with receiving stable payments. I already lost many days of rewards, mainly, because the Return Proposal is being pushed around without further investigating the consequences and without elaborating which projects/lives could be hit by a single click from a big stakeholder.
I tried many things in my life, worked for many different companies and I have gone through a lot of shit that I don't wish anybody to experience, but never was I hit by something like receiving no earnings for my work in my life.
Do I need to mention that I was able to power up more STEEM in the last few weeks than ever before and I now need to think about starting a Powerdown, because I don't know, if I will receive enough rewards to make it through the next month?
This feeling is what many big stakeholders just don't know, because they do always have some funds for months laying around. In my heart it feels like being dead from one moment to the other while working as usual on the same things as before.
As I stated earlier in a comment:
The main problem is that the Return Proposal was voted way to high, so that hardly anybody who is not working for 'the top' will ever reach/hold the required level.
I think that the level around 8-10 million SP should be enough for now to prevent really 'harmful' proposals from getting funded. What currently is mainly being prevented by the Return Proposal is the success of alternative projects on Steem.
Don't get me wrong, I do like the SPS and it would work perfectly for many of us. As the whole world of Steem lost 10% of their vote's value with the last HF to enable having a stable SPS fund, it should be relatively easy to grasp that smaller projects should also have a chance to get funded. There is enough in the SPS pot, so why not using as much as possible to get more things done at the same time?
To make it clear
If you have voted for @gtg's Return Proposal, you are currently preventing me from being able to continue my developments for Steem.
Should I take it from the Posting Rewards Pool or the SPS Fund or should I start a witness node? You decide.
Details about my recent developments will be published soon.
i think we need % votes for SPS.
Because Return Proposal is like a downvote for other project. But maybe you only want to vote 50% for return and 100% for a project.
This should be changed in the future. And solve the barrier for devs.
The system should be efficent in the future.
Imagine if 100 devs would build amazing Stuff. Without % Vote it will never happen.
I agree with % votes on SPS and I'm pretty sure the developers agree as it was mentioned at Steemfest as something they see the need for.
Keep going man. Sadly you wont be able to rely on the SPS, like every other proposal, and if you need to peruse (multiple) other methods to make ends meet I'm confident you'll get support.
I think becoming open source will help and perhaps making that a priority above new features is the best plan for now.
Have a good weekend.
You should either make Steemworld open-sourced or find your own sustainable business model for your project.
Then you will also have my votes on your posts and proposals.
Edit: Comment upvoted at 5 seconds for visibility, meaning all rewards are returned to the pool.
You can already download a local version. That is the full source. Download it, inspect it.
He is working on a github release which will be licensed 'open source', as stated in the proposal, that will be spring next year. I have no reason to not trust him.
No, the problem is that many of the proposals are not that compelling, for example, not open source. There are a number of stakeholders who believe that most work paid for by SPS should be open source to ensure that Steem receives full benefit from the expenditure.
It is not a hard and fast rule (nothing is; everything is up to voters) but it is the number one reason I've heard for why some proposals aren't supported, including yours.
My proposal received more votes than any other and in terms of voted SP it is still within the top positions. So it's not a problem related to lack of support. As I stated, the Return-Proposal was moved 3.6 M SP up (over night by one single voter, a top witness), so that mine does no longer receive funds.
That's the nature of voting. There is more stake in favor of not funding your proposal than funding it. The solution is to make your proposal more compelling.
It is absolutely intended that people may increase votes on return in order to de-fund undesired proposals, change votes to attempt to reorder proposals in terms of priority, etc. Or even just change one's mind about what is worth funding. The voting is dynamic.
If we would have more big stakeholders, I would fully agree, but as it is now, I would change that statement to 'That's the nature of top witnesses voting' :)
There is more than enough in the pot already to fund more proposals and it keeps growing quite well. If those SBD are not being used for projects, I'm asking myself why we don't build kind of an automated 'burn STEEM machine' to at least support the price a bit in the meantime.
I don't think that there will appear many more interesting/expensive proposals any time soon, so in my opinion, with the given funding barrier, the pot will just keep growing without any relevant benefits for us.
We do have a lot of big stakeholders. Out of 16 million SP votes on return, only the top 3 votes are over 1 million, and those total about 6 million. The majority of the votes are from a large number of smaller accounts.
Even more to the point, setting aside Steemit Inc, there is probably something like 150 million SP and another 100 million STEEM which could potentially power up. There is an enormous amount of additional stake which could vote, far, far more than return.
In other words, make your proposal more compelling.
There is no inherent benefit from solely from spending money. If stakeholders aren't convinced that the benefits are worth the costs, we are better off not spending it and avoiding even more Steem (whether in the form of STEEM or SBD) flooding the market and driving the price down.
If the proposals are compelling I have no reluctance to support them, but if they aren't, then I'd rather take the benefit in lower inflation.
I'm all in favor of that in fact that's why I run @burnpost and vote for it. That being said, keeping the funds in the SPS treasury has similar benefit (not being sold on any market), plus a bit more flexibility to fund compelling future proposals, should they be made. For example, at Steemfest a lot of people noted the lack of good proposals for marketing and other community building. I agree and I will look for these proposals to support. But I still won't support them if the proposal itself isn't strong.
Ok, thanks for your enlightening answers and for upvoting my hidden comments. I'm currently not sure, which way to choose now, but I will do my best to find one that works for me.
Even if there is not much new to discover in SteemWorld currently, I made good progress so far and I'm sure that, when I'm done with the things that are waiting in the pipeline, there will be more investors convinced about the value of my work.
Since I'm a purely creative coder, I'm having a hard time with presenting planned features. Most of the SteemWorld has been built intuitively in a creative flow without much planning and this is how I function best.
The way things are looking right now, I recommend you post for rewards.
I would also recommend to cooperate with a witness, rather than running a witness node, because that is just another can of worms.
But from what I understand, you do not consider this an option, and prefer to work all on your own.
If you want to stay away from chatrooms and meetups that is fine, but it could help with monetization/funding of your projects. Perhaps you need to team up for this too; You could have a far worse product, if you had better marketing/networking, you would make more from it, still.
And lastly: times are tough for steem right now. The price graph looks terrible. When we had funds to distribute, we gave them to all sorts of disloyal golddiggers and now that good projects form, we lack the funds to support those.
Personally, I would recommend you get a different job and to not rely on steem to pay your monthly bills. I wish it was different, but it would seem the most 'grounded' approach to me.
Komm doch mal in den Discord :(
I need to think about all this for some time. As they now even begin to flag developers like me on here, I'm currently not sure, if this is still the place where I want to be. I'm glad that a missing slice of the puzzle has revealed itself today though (I guess you know what I mean).
Forcing developers to open source everything in the way it happens here made me thinking. This has nothing to do with freedom and pushing creative energy. Many professional game developers would never make their games open source, because of security/manipulation reasons, so they also won't be able to use the SPS for funding. Always the same few mighty blockades at the top.
To me it looks like I'm selling years of work for 77 SBD a day to those people, only to get the proposal funded. Maybe I will stop the proposal and continue to work freely on SteemWorld again.
Need some rest now...
You are making this unnecessarily hard for your supporters.
'I am not sure ... flagging developer like me ... forcing open source ... '
That is how girls talk.
You want more money for your work and I support that, but please be more straightforward and do not go that passive aggressive route. If the proposal does not get approved, you will need to find other methods and being emotional will only alienate those who want to help you and will not serve you well.
That attitude is what made you a target for the bully in the first place.
I only supported the proposal, after I found the open source part in it, btw. Other than that, I am just here fighting for the underdog. Nothing personal. If you want to discuss the matter further, I still recommend Discord.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qkPGlVqqEP0
Yes, you are right. This shit is making me go crazy. I just want to continue to work on SteemWorld now and I definitely need more distance to all the drama. I lost at least one day through all this and slept very badly, so it's really time to come back to my real self now.
Yes back to your real self. Some haven’t slept in years. You did work on steemworld before now.
I have to agree with that, it's a good advice.
Nope, no one is forced to open source anything. The expectation of many stakeholders is that if you want US to pay you to develop it, we want to see open source.
If you want to fund your own development or raise capital from your own investors like any other startup, you can do whatever you want.
EDIT: upvoted parent for visibility
As far as I know not stake holders are paying here but rewards for the projects are taken from the rewards pool. It's true that stakeholders distribute the funds by their votes ...
Reward pools are funded by inflation, which is a tax on stakeholders. It doesn't just appear magically at no cost to anyone.
It is a tax on all users. Especially also now content creators 'pay' with lower post rewards - so they also 'fund' the SPS.
I don't say you are wrong, but inflation which hits everybody is not the same as if a view stakeholders would fund any project directly from their own money.
And: inflation impacts you anyway, if you vote for any proposal or not.
No it is not. If you have literally no STEEM or SP (which is possible, since zero SP accounts now get some RC allowance), neither the value of your stake nor your share of ownership of the total supply declines as a result of inflation.
For everyone else, the effect is proportional. Someone with 1000x more stake is paying 1000x more.
No, stakeholders pay all content rewards via inflation too. Content creators receive content rewards. There is a huge difference. What happened with the enacting of SPS was that a share of inflation that stakeholders pay to content rewards was shifted to SPS. Either way it is still stakeholders paying it.
Sure, but I'm absolutely going to vote in a manner that I believe spends (or does not immediately spend) those inflationary rewards in the manner that gets stakeholders the best value for the cost. If i lose the vote, fair enough, I can sell my stake or accept the disagreement and recognize that you win some and lose some.
Of course I mean everybody else. :)
But there are also 1000 x more small accounts than big ones, which all also pay the inflation - which is altogether quite a lot. Of course we can also call them 'stakeholders', too, but I guess you had big stakeholders in mind when you wrote that stakeholders pay the inflation.
And of course you have a higher risk the higher your stake is, but also a higher chance to make profit, if the STEEM price rises (that's why you originally invested money, I guess).
Yes, that's why I put 'pay' in quotation marks. Content creator don't literally pay, but also contribute to the SPS by passing on a part of their possible rewards.
As (at least in in my opinion) 'content' is the unique feature of STEEM compared to other crypto currencies/blockchains and thus may become an important factor of a future increasing value of STEEM, I value time and effort, content creators invest in the platform as much as the money stakeholders invest.
Actually, I am getting maybe somwhat off topic here, but sometimes my impression is that (big) stakeholders tend to underestimate the value of 'normal little' users for the platform and the success of the blockchain.
In your case I am absolutely convinced of that!
And even if my text above may lead to a different impression, I am very thankful that people like you invested lots of money!
However, did you read for example the comments of z8teyb289qav9z (we all know who he is) in this post: "You fucking suck."? No constructive criticism, no thoughtful weighting of words, just flags and insults. Unfortunately, not all big stakeholders act as responsible with their power as you do.
Entitled much?
It’s a good tool, like many others here on Steem, but you are not entitled for the community to pay for your closed source project. (Nor is anyone else, open or closed source).
Many tools and apps have been developed without community funds, not sure why you feel you are more entitled than them.
The SPS is designed in a way where payments are not guaranteed, and the changes in voting would make proposals funded one day and not the other. This is normal and most are taking this into consideration when making a proposal.
Are you saying that unless you are guaranteed (the very high amount you asked for), in whole, you will not continue the tool? As you have received funds.. no? This could be a good thing to clarify, as you have already collected funds and most likely will again.
Your lack of updates, clarity on what exactly you will do with funds, and posts that sounds more like guilt trips than proposals or updates aren’t the best way to go about it imo.
Maybe instead of trying to guilt people, you could actually show people why it’s something beneficial for all of Steem. And if the community decides its not, maybe you should charge those who seem to depend on it so much.. as I don’t really see it bringing people to Steem, more makes things easier for a few that are here, so perhaps you should pay for services that way if you are unhappy with the support you are receiving.
Just some friendly advice, as my goodness these posts are over the top.
Before the edit, the comment started with:
Yep and I have stated many times that is how it came across. I just now edited as I was informed in DM by Asher that apparently that one sentence made the rest of my comment invalid as it was “too harsh”.
I disagree with this actually, as reading the above feels very entitled, upset, and an attempt to guilt individuals, but hey.. maybe that’s just my interpretation.
So, that’s me being a dick? And is the reason your comment is saying I won’t grow one? I’m so confused by the responses here I don’t even know what to say anymore 😄
My advice - More focus on the project, and what it provides.. less focus on “woe is me” and stating personal issues as a reason that funding is entitled.. which is what my first comment stated. The rest of this is just noise.
So you can come at him all personal because he is not in your circle of buddies and now you invert the whole situation claiming to be the victim of what you did in the first place. Projection much ?
Oh goodness.. nope, I still think the post screams of entitlement and not the actual project itself and still stand by everything I said.
I have no circle of buddies .. and there is no projection, just honesty. Not calculated comments to try to make the other person look bad, which has nothing to do with the project, just my honest opinion.
I’ll edit the comment back to “entitled much” from the current “This feels very entitled”
I didn’t realize that change would cause such conspiracies and victim accusations.
I’ll put this here again -
You backed down, because Asher told you to.
edit: btw that is exactly what marly would have done, too.
No, I reworded my initial sentence due to feedback I received that it was harsh and uncalled for. Clearly your comments and others say the same.
I put it back to the original way, I think it gets my point across quite clearly. As it is a very butthurt and entitled post.
Feel free to pick out something else completely unrelated to the conversation to try to come at me with.
Edit: I guarantee you our conversation did not go the same way. I’m trying to be polite, but as I told him, I don’t feel the need to baby grown men who are butthurt. He seemed to agree with you.. and well, I don’t. So maybe you guys can chat it up.. as this most definitely wasn’t a “Marly” type situation. You clearly don’t know be very well
This conversation seems more personal than needed and your constant need to bring someone up that you apparently had an issue with confirms that. So I’ll end it here. Feel free to criticize me all you want.. but she’s not even here to weigh in at this point, so perhaps you should focus on the actual conversation at hand.
No. You backed down, because you did not get the backup you expected.
What else is there to it ? The chiller was sad that he lost the funding for his project. I do not think he should rely on it either, but you were just being a bully and I can not see what point you are trying to make exactly other than criticizing his tone.
I am enthusiastic about Steempeak, the more I was shocked by your comment.
You sure? That's not how I understood the words.
Steempeak asked for 10 times more
I can only say that nobody needs to explain me what benefits steempeak or steemworld have. I support both and find it very annoying to see that these two tools, that are the best for me on Steem, are not funded.
We can vote the Return Propostal even higher, so that nobody is supported anymore! That is nonsense, of course, and I would just like to call for a reasonable level. It is currently too high from my point of view.
My comment has nothing to do with steempeak, it was in response to the post. Not really sure why the two are being compared.
If you support both, awesome. (I used to as well).
This post, the one above, very much comes off as entitled and a guilt trip. If you don’t read it as such, that’s fine and you can leave a comment saying so.
I’m not sure what most of what is discussed in the post has to do with his proposal like not sure how he will be “making it through the next month” or anything else there, seems more to imply that he wants to work full time on Steem (and live off of it) and is frustrated that a loss in a few days of payments due to the return proposal being voted.
I guess I don’t think it’s the communities responsibility to pay his, or anyone else’s, bills. Especially in the bear market we are in and when the price of STEEM is something we all should be concerned with, not figuring out how to suck as much of the inflation as possible out in my opinion.
If there are developments or proposals that will improve or add value to STEEM, yes they should be considered for funding. But those funds aren’t just a free for all that individuals should feel they are entitled to or that “need to be spent” - which again.. is what this post felt like.
That's because I saw you were a member of Steempeak Team.
But you're right, it leads away from the actual question: Is the Return Propostal currently too high?
I agree! Thank you for your point of view.
Oh.. Yes, my “role” should probably come with a warning label.
My comments have nothing to do with steempeak or speak for them and I most definitely was not trying to compare the two, just like I was not comparing steemworld with any other proposals.
I’m just here, as a member of the community, pointing out issues I see in this specific situation.
Thanks for clarifying.
People like you are the ones who complain about closed source applications, when they are using Windows, Adobe, Office, etc. and their children also work with closed software.
Hypocrites, false, liars and opportunists
;D
Very well said, you saved me an answer! 👍🏼👌🏼
And not funded right? Silly to bring it up. Maybe both are asking for too much (or maybe there are other reasons for not being funded). Again, it doesn't matter.
what she said mostly. especially this part... maybe you should charge those who seem to depend on it so much
Don’t be so negative Micheal.. sheesh.
We all already paid, because we lost 10% of our voting value for posts to fund the SPS. Therefore I think the funds should be way better distributed.
My post is not just related to funding SteemWorld. I'm sure I will go my way. It's more about improving the system in general.
People like you are the ones who complain about closed source applications, when they are using Windows, Adobe, Office, etc. and their children also work with closed software.
Hypocrites, false, liars and opportunists
Upvoted for visibility.
It did not take long for you to turn into the next @surfermarly. I hope you do not last as long as her.
No clue what this means.
Did Marly point out some issues with your bud too and you all freaked out on her? That would make sense actually....
Yeah she was being a dick too. Did not make her grow one neither, though.
Yeah she was being
A dick too. Did not make her
Grow one neither, though.
- felixxx
I'm a bot. I detect haiku.
I always knew I was a poet.
Not sure how my comment was being a dick, but ok. Yes it’s come to my attention that criticism from women on this platform is not handled well. I don’t come to the same conclusion as you though.. actually it seems those most offended by criticism might be the ones missing one.
Hey look, you got a haiku though! 😍
You might not be aware, that there are no girls on the internet.
You are the one who brought up “she’s” and growing dicks, my dear.
I agree that the Return Proposal is too high. What's the point of the SPS if barely anything gets funded?
It's call saving money for the future and that's what stakeholders have decided to vote on.
But there's no reason to think that this trend won't continue, meaning the unused funds will just get bigger and bigger. That's funds taken from the reward pool at the last HF. Those funds need to be disbursed, so as to add value to the community commensurate with the value taken away at the last HF.
By the way, is there a way to see the amount of unused funds in the SPS?
There are currently 143,032.368 SBD in the pot. So there are now over 1430 SBD per day available, of which only 310 SBD are being used daily (and it keeps growing, because 10% of the rewards pool automatically goes into the fund).
You can also see this on https://steemworld.org/proposals
The balance is in the account @steem.dao but only a maximum of 1% can be paid out per day.
The budget is a maximum, not a guarantee. If stakeholders don't think that available proposals add more value than their costs, stakeholders are correct in not funding them. There is no guarantee there will always be more worthwhile proposals than budget. One option (which was discussed when SPS was created) is a burn proposal, but I don't think we are there yet; the funds accumulated are still reasonable and could be used for future worthy proposals, should they be made.
Good question. As all Steemians lost 10% of their voting value for posts in order to have a functioning SPS, I think it should be asked more often.
I would vote you for witness and many others as well. Your tool is a great boon to the STEEM community.
Post as much as you like you have paid your dues it isn't taking from the rewards pool man. That is EARNed STEEM. Keep with the SPS too. Freakin' do it all. I support you 100%. goes to vote for your Steem Proposal
Don't trip potato chip.
Thanks, never thought about that, but would really be an option :)
You are a good dude with hella skillz. I know you are good for it man. I mean most peeps that have major tools have witness nodes too. Your site is my favorite nav tool for txs on-chain. I trust you. I hope more people see that you give at least 2 fucks about all of us.
Hey, @steemchiller.
I really figured that this would be a slam dunk no brainer.
But then, I'm thinking about the every day STEEM user, the one who's interested in knowing what they're doing statistically, and maybe even others, and to do with it with ease of use.
I'm also thinking about those who appreciate all of the one stop shopping that has been packed into Steemworld without much compensation over the last several months, and certainly since the bear market began. I mean, there's so much that can be done now, and there's even more coming.
I was also thinking that once you were funded, you would stay funded. I didn't know that it was like being a witness where one big account could vote you in or out, or change where you were in line based on voting on something else.
I mean, I think the Return Proposal is a decent enough idea—kind of wonder why it's not just built in to the SPS in the first place, so that the Return Proposal doesn't need to be there doing whatever it is that it does sitting their approved.
So, maybe keep providing updates on top of the SPS? The whole witness thing seems like it could be more of drain on your funds than a help unless you get voted up high enough which seems to be an issue with your no-brainer Steemworld proposal on the SPS.
Why does everything have to be so dang difficult?
What's the point of doing any of this if you can't be constantly funded for the duration of the project?
I appreciate not wanting to fund unnecessary stuff, or things no one uses. Tons of us use steemworld.org, though, and everyone should.
Anyone who cares about posting, commenting or curating, and many other things STEEM-related, that is. :)
Judging how things are going, it looks like the SPS is only useful to fund the projects that the top whales support.
If that's that case, then I bet the majority of us would like to have our money back and see this SPS nonsense be thrown into the trashcan.
Hey, @trincowski.
I guess that means one always has to be in campaign mode in order to keep up with the votes that others may be getting. It also means that the bar is always being raised, and that uncertainty is the only sure thing. I'm not sure why anyone would want to do anything under those circumstances.
Taking a look at what is currently being funded, while the top three don't last more than four months, I'm not sure what they truly add to STEEM in the long run, other than some folks really want their stake liquid sooner, and others want to pay for documentation.
Number four is returning unused funds back to the SPS, which seems like the SPS should do that automatically, anyway.
I don't know. I thought I was for the SPS, but seeing it in action, it seems to be lacking something.
It's also interesting to notice that the Steemworld proposal has over 10x the votes of the top 3 proposals and yet, it's not going to be funded.
In this system, what 300 rich people want is more important than what 3000 people want... and, in my opinion, that's just dumb.
I understand that Steem is not a Democratic System but it also shouldn't be the Oligarchy it has become. 🤦♂️
Hey, @trincowski.
It probably needs to be a hybrid of the two—stake weight and one account one vote—but even then, who knows. I get the argument against one vote—those who have 100 alt accounts will vote 100 times. Whether or not there's enough of them to overcome 3,000 normal voters, I don't know. My recent looking at the diminishing numbers tells me that it could very well be the case. Stake weighting brings all of those accounts to bear once.
So, if we could handle some kind of know your customer without it intruding on rights, liberties, privacy, sensibilities, whatever—something encrypted, something that just the system can see—I don't know, I'm not a developer—we could solve a lot of this.
So, when the top three are no longer funded, unless people pull their votes, wouldn't Steemchiller move up by default? Wouldn't his proposal be within the bounds, unless something takes it's place? I mean, I know he doesn't want to be sitting around waiting 90-110 days, but at the very least, that's how this will work, right?
Who'd know... your scenario has just played out.
Let's see what happens because at the moment, no Proposal is being funded. 🤣
our money back? Did you make direct donations to @steem.dao ?Total inflation haven't changed, so you're not paying more for this than you were pre HF.
We're all taking a 10% cut to fund... just a couple of projects. It seems to me like the same could easily be achieved with a 1% cut instead.
That s the way it works, and it has been voted through DPoS.
More of the @steem.dao will be used when more projects satisfy the exigence of the stakeholders, it's how it's designed to work.
We're just building another Oligarchy in here, aren't we? 😂
I believe Steem has been working by DPOS since you've joined. What changed? What alternative would you propose?
I'm not a minnow but I m not a whale either, I would love my votes to matter more than they do, but on the other hand, we have to be realistic and realize that there s no other reasonable solution to decision making.
This is just a big experience but I had the thought that the main goal of the Blockchain Technology was to free us from the old, archaic Oligarchich Models that riddle the current economic system.
If we're simply copying them and transposing those Oligarchies to the Blockchain, how are we any better? And what's the point of it all?
It's like we're fighting fire with fire. I don't believe that will achieve anything good.
I want to vote you as a witness and I think you should do now
You have many with you and put a direct link for your witness on Steemworld.
I will also promote you if you become a witness when you are ready for it
Thank you!
👍🙂