encouraging more of the behavior that we want, and discouraging the behavior we don't want
I guess this depends on the viewpoint a person has what Steem should be.
What's wrong with the behavior of building on Steem, growing your steempower and using your steempower to expand your blog/business?
It's a slow process but it is steady and that's how STEEM ends up in strong hands. That's how you get thousands of minnows and dolphins (2000+) that deeply value their account and the SP they have acquired. They won't just turn around and sell it. This is the strong middle class I talk about and they also have every reason to buy and hold STEEM.
My vision for Steem is that it will become the biggest social economic ecosystem in the world and this is the group that will get hurt the most by these changes. The absolute core of the Steemians.
Giving Steem rewards to new 'amazing' content creators will make sure STEEM ends up in weak hands. There is no reason for them to hold onto the given STEEM. What's the point for them to keep it? They will have no influence if they stake it making selling it for "real crypto" or Fiat straight away a very good proposition. We have seen this behavior in the past.
For STEEM to have value their must be a reason to have it. I don't see it under the new model. Why would anyone want to buy STEEM? to upvote others so they can sell it back to them? It makes no sense.
Linear is far from ideal but it is not bad. STEEM price has come down, but Steem went through the biggest crypto bubble the world has ever seen in its 3-year history. It took a long time to bottom. I think we have in Dec 2018. Since then the price has doubled in dollar value and we have been slowly going up.
No doubt there are better models out there but the proposed model is presented as 'we have no idea what will happen, we think it's better'.
It's very dangerous. So I will worry. Can't help it.
Yes. But from what you are writing we have very similar point of view, the only difference is that I see new model fixing many of those issues while you see it quite the opposite and I don't understand why.
Bigger curation rewards empowers those who have SP.
Guess what I'm trying to say is that I hope that this change won't make the middle class of Steem that has worked hard on their own account by investing/grinding/blogging feel less empowered because they won't be able to use their vote in the way they were used too (a stable vote wherever/whenever you vote on the blockchain).
It could potentially be demotivating losing that. I remember coming home from Steemfest 1 and I finally crossed 10k SP and my vote was worth 1 cent for the first time on steemit (this was under n^2). When it changed to linear it was worth a lot more and it was stable and that felt great.
Linear is what most Steemians know today. It's also easy to understand.
Under these new rules, I don't know what sort of impact this will have on current SP holders. I don't know how much a 10k vote will be worth on a post that has no votes for instance. I'm assuming it's a lot less than now and more on a post that already has a lot of votes.
I know these changes incentives users to vote for content that has the most votes or for posts they think will get a lot of votes for curation rewards but it also takes control from current Steemians doing their own thing. (and yes I understand this also involves abuse and self-voting and what not but Steemians also do a lot of good under current structure).
I hope when the announcement comes out that every Steemian at least knows how this will affect them and what the reasoning is behind the changes.
Anyway, I want to thank you for replying as a top 20 witness. That was cool.
Thanks, now I know what you are concerned about. Actually quite interesting aspect. More related to UI/UX which usually mostly sucks. What I didn't liked in n2 days was that there were no info on actual impact that you've made on a post.
That info can be precise only at the post payout, with more complex algorithm it could be more tricky to guess.
With upcoming changes it is worth making visible on how good your curation efforts was.
FYI: @steemchiller - new challenge for SteemWorld :-)
First of all, Steem's inflation should be removed for rewarding the content creators and rewarding should be delegated to front-end DApps. DApps can launch their own TOKEN and reward algorithm to discover contents. Current inflation is not keeping up with low demand. If Steem did not have relative high inflation, it would easily sit at top 30 in CMC.
EIP may help a content discovery frontend such as Steemit, but it will kill other business models. Steem should be neutral to any content discovery models and DApp/business friendly. It should help DApps to be built and make their own rewarding algos. Steem should be removed from such controversial or unpredictable outcomes. Let SMTs handle it according to DApps need.
Steem's Inflation should go to protocol developments, witness compensation and PoS interest (2-3% vs current 8.5%). Rewarding content creators (in Steemit) should be done with SMTs. STINC should launch their own SMT, share profit from ads with celebrity creators by SMTs and experiment with all kinds of EIPs.
Steem Investors will still earn TOKENs through RC/SP delegations. @steemhunt, @actifit, @dlike is already showing a good examples. Creators and DApps will figure out optimum synergy with a token to distribute. EIP will make Steemit relevant, but other DApp models to be inconvenient.
Bidbots are not evils. It is an alternative to the advertisements. They have their own business model. They can find their own front-end DApp with TOKEN where they can succeed or thrive. Competition within front-ends with SMTs will spur innovations.
All the front-end DApps can try their own SMTs with different distribution technique. Finding a sweet algorithms to rewarding the best content is more than rocket science. A former founder, @dan is bragging that he can fix it, I totally disagree. It needs lots of trials and errors and should be the realm of DApps.
DApps with SMTs can try different algos. @steemhunt, @actifit, @dlike and others are already experimenting. Steem's inflation and broken rewarding is helping its price.
Can we prevent this somehow?
I am invested in Steem for the same reasons you are @exyle and I like the way the system is now.
For me.. the better technique would be to use artificial intelligence like YouTube and Google does to show the best content as opposed to adjusting the rewards and payouts.
That's the UI/UX thing. AI has to have some input, curators give that but curators are those who use SP. Now people would rather sell their SP to bid bots instead of using it themselves for curation, because they obviously want to profit. We want people to profit from activities that are good for the platform.
It might be worth mentioning that I am planning to give 100% of the reward pool from Humanist.xyz to delegators of which I and my family will be delegators.
I am also plannning on possibly giving all earnings earned outside of the reward pool from all of my project to delegators.
If I do this.. and I am successful.. others will follow and SP holders will stop delegating to bidbots and start delegating to actual companies and projects that produce value instead - for a GREATER return.
That is the exact thing that @exyle is waiting for and I was planning to do it first with the help of @buildteam @thecryptodrive and their software Dapp @tokenbb.
P.S. I also own Crowdfunder.xyz @crowdfunder.
Why not launch a #Steemit SMT to fix this so we can have our cake and eat it too with our current Economic System AND a functional @steemit.
Remember.. Steemit is NOT Steem.. they are and SHOULD remain separate and it might not be good to corrupt the Steem ecosystem for the sake of a single Dapp:
TAG: @exyle
It's all about Steem, obviously, not Steemit.
SMTs won't help much if our base economic is broken.
@gtg,
I think this post by @timcliff helped me understand it more. Thank you guys 😀
https://steemit.com/hf21/@timcliff/hardfork-21-steem-proposal-system-sps-economic-improvement-proposal-eip
@gtg,
I just read another post that actually agreed with what I said earlier about SMT's and also with @exyle:
https://steemit.com/busy/@taskmaster4450/is-steem-heading-for-a-new-coke-moment
Do you own a bidbot service @gtg?
If you do it will start earning more after it's change in compensation.
I was hoping that @steemit would really move into thrive mode but this suggestion by witnesses might finally be the last nail in the coffin for #Steem.
@therealwolf and other bidbot operators are slowly killing @steem and @ned @andrarchy and @elipowell @steemitblog are helping.
No. Not only I don't own one, but I'm also not using any.
No. Not only I
Don't own one, but I'm also
Not using any.
- gtg
I'm a bot. I detect haiku.
Thank you @gtg 👍😀👏
Why not just create a separate pool for downvotes without reducing the share for authors?
Bid-bots won't make more money, due to the 25% downvote-pool.
The people like you who own bidbots or others can just start flag wars and automatically downvote anyone who downvotes their posts!!!!
I am still open minded @therealwolf but I am not sure if even people will downvote.
Thank you for replying to my comment 👍
Why not just create a separate pool for downvotes without reducing the share for authors?