If you are commenting on a post expecting an upvote that is the wrong attitude to have. Good comments are normally rewarded by the post author if it is related to the post showing the commenter has read the post. If you read the majority of comments don't qualify for an upvote as 90% of the time they have not read the post and are trying their luck. I get frustrated reading comments knowing full well the person has not read the article and they will not be rewarded.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
Would you say the same about creating long-form content? 95% of the posts here are not read (and are written not for altruistic reasons but to earn) which makes for a poor user experience. So if we can use incentives (it might not even be upvote) to prompt people to not only engage but create engaging content people in this demographic will read and enjoy, I honestly do not see anything wrong with first.
First, hive doesn't have the user based to be strict on things like this. There are barely a thousand active users who hardly engage, and that's mainly due to the poor content quality and discovery. Engagement can be a value to improve content quality on hive.
My argument isn't about what people should or shouldn't do because they are barely doing it anyway and this is no moral class. People are greedy and are only after their interests. The only way to move forward is by aligning the interests of the platforms, stakeholders, creators and users. Hence my post.
Also when I speak about hive I am referring mostly to dapps like ecency and leofinance. They need to step up and look beyond the hive reward pool (which is not much of a huge incentive anymore as most web2 platforms are bringing down the barriers for monetisation). They need to get their users active and monetize their activities so they can function independently.
The problem with what you are saying is Hive holds the value and most of the tribes have been plundered by milkers. the stakeholders are the ones who are adding value to Hive through holding their stake. I have a following and people I follow and I do read posts and so do they as that is the enjoyable part of Hive. the problem with monetizing the communities through incentives what value will be held by the users if they are selling what they earn weekly? I know I support users who stake and will continue to do so accordingly. The problem is when users have no stake as the ability to grow is now diminished and why stake is the most important factor here. If Hive had a user base of 1 million next year engagement levels would be up but the earning ability would be down due to the rarity of earning Hive as the reward pool is constant. Stake is the most important factor on Hive as this supports every user whether they comment or post.
Statements like this are the reasons many of the best creators have left over time because they are been addressed as Milkers when in fact (based on the stats) the larger stakeholders are the biggest milkers.
The problem with the reward system as I have mentioned is that it is giving more than it receives. There is no social app set up this way. You paying 5-50 dollars to a post that has less than 5 views and 2 comments, who does that? Do you think people will see such opportunities and not capitalise on them? Anyways, most people are fine with it, what do I know.
Why are we then giving out tokens to creators? What's the point? We can simply turn Hive into a defi platform and scrap content creation.
I say none. Value should come from outside in form of ads, api fees to network, subscription, resource create purchase etc and not on creators holding tokens. I dare say if this blockchain was ran well you wouldn't want people staking hive because it reduces your share/power in the ecosystem which would come with a lot of benefits.
I do get your point. The issue is if this really worked hive would be on a whole different trajectory now but that's not the case. Hive needs to be profitable. It cannot rely on people's altruistic nature.