It's controversial in how much is acceptable. If you put in a 50% tax like last time, then I expect just as much pushback. This time I think we will be giving options so I think it should go better. In fact, we need to let poeple understand two questions:
Why the burn rate is necessary? What burn rate is acceptable to the people in the community?
I think a burn rate is necessary due to the high amount of SPORTS being put out but I do think 50% might be overboard. Adding in a 50% tax on SPORTS is not going to onboard more users. A growing tribe needs user growth and adding in an extra tax could turn people away. For example, LEO has a 10% burn rate and people feel fine posting on other front-ends knowing about this. Stemgeeks has a 50% and it may of helped them get more people on the site but the user base has not changed much (not sure so I stand to be corrected if someone has the data). And you have to note that LEO has had around 900% user growth.
To be honest we actually need 50% on SPORTS because of the high inflation and high liquidity that SPORTS has + less usecases right now .
But it might scare people ( like it did last time ) , I personally think 10% is too low so I am okay with 25% actually to begin with.
I agree 100% with this :) But will see what will happen next time we gonna vote about this
I get what your saying, but you also have to think about what kinds of new users do we want? See how many it is now that just started to post stuff on STS because they heard the price went up. They don't use the front-end ergo we as a community don't really earn anything on them joining in. We want new users yes, but we want real users that actually care. That's what's happen on Leo is that they have built such a large core fanbase that it doesn't matter if some people try to abuse it. We don't have that yet. Therefor we need the tax and anti-abuse.
That's why I was happy to read patricks new idea of multiple options of taxation in the next proposal, because I think like 10% is going to be better than 0%, and I realize that all people don't agree with me
Yes there needs to be a tax to attract new users. But the amount to be taxed is left to be debated. I think 10% or 30% might be fine but I do think 50% might be a little overboard. This is why I think people need to understand why we want people to use the site (ad revenue and improve site ranking). This is why I think letting people know where the ad revenue goes to first gives them an idea of the goal of the taxes.