Image by https://pixabay.com
I like analogies. It makes it easier for me to understand concepts or even explain it simply to people concepts they can't grasp. While it may not be always 100% accurate, comparing concepts using their similarities and differences to understand things better. Last week, I wrote about Steem being the mini-version of a capitalist society. Some may agree or disagree with my analogy but I looked at it that way since the main driving force that moves the Steem economy are STEEM (includes SBDs and SMTs) and Steem Power. And with HF21 just a day away to be implemented, I want to share how I view this upcoming change. (If you are not aware what HF21 is, you can have a read here)
Image by https://pixabay.com
For the purpose of this post, I am only talking the way I look at the change in author/curator rewards ratio. I won't delve into other significant updates in HF21 (i.e. Steem Proposal System, downvotes etc.) As many of know have already read about HF21, it will adjust the author/curator ratio from 75%/25% to 50%/50%. Even way back during the initial announcement of the hardfork, it was met with criticism with regard to the adjustment in the ratio. Those against it view it as a disincentive for the authors - who are actually the ones creating the content which curators read and learn from, and eventually earn from that.
I write posts myself, such as this one you're reading and I understand the frustration of having the author's share decreased because of the hardfork. I really like the idea of having a bigger chunk of the pie being the "source" of information, who doesn't? However, I can rationalize the idea of what the hardfork is going to do with giving equal shares to authors and curators. It's like having a website with great content but no one visits it. It's like writing a great book which no one buys and reads. As such, the concept of value can be seen in various perspective. That book has value for the author, being the one who shed sweat and tears in putting something significant together as a source of knowledge. But for a bookstore owner, if it doesn’t sell, it’s worth nothing, if not less. You can relate to this opposing perspective depending the purpose of your Steem existence.
One of the arguments opposing the change in ratio is that it will discourage authors to create more content. Looking at the curators’ perspective, I do not think it will happen. First, there are a number of active tribes, Steemleo and PALNet for instance, with a lot of active authors and these tribes are already implementing the 50%/50% ratio for authors and curators. I believe the hardfork, in terms of rewards ratio, won’t be an entirely new thing for these Steemians. Secondly, I think that it will actually encourage authors to write more since curators will be more active in upvoting worthy posts. I rather write two posts curated by many than spend time to write just one but hasn’t been upvoted or “noticed’ at all.
Initially, I am too skeptical with this change but seeing things from an economic perspective, I will give this change its chance to prove itself that it will be both beneficial to authors and curators. And if you may ask me what made me looked that way, it’s because using my analogy, the money-flow theory of economic system will take into effect with the implementation of HF21.
Money Flow Theory? That’s for another conversation.
Please provide your feedback by commenting below.
If you like my posts, I appreciate if you can follow my account.
