I agree his approach makes sense and doesn't cause interference in any way.
As for paying people more for simply showing up and creating content. In most cases I tend to disagree with that being beneficial. I'd rather see capable and interesting content creators attracting paying supporters organically, on their own, much like you'd see in the Twitch example I provided. Majority earn very little and often nothing, yet Twitch doesn't fail. Content creators know and accept the fact they won't get paid just for showing up. They work to build an audience consisting of some paying supporters.
To me the thing that matters the most is the amount of traffic. Facebook, Twitter etc may not have a good number of content creators compared to average or low content creators but they still are popular because of the amount of traffic.
Just my thoughts. I might be wrong.
Traffic is important. Typically an audience generates the most traffic. You have one video or one content creator, and that video has 1 million views. A content creator only creates an opportunity to generate traffic. They don't generate traffic by default, just for showing up. More often than not on this platform the content creator wants rewards more than traffic. That's backwards. And without paying supporters (also traffic) entering the ecosystem to support them, their efforts amount to a net loss. Very little traffic and money only exiting.
Look at every other method of supporting a content creator directly then compare it to staking HP and voting.
These days more and more people are supporting content creators with their own money. That market is expected to grow.
Everywhere else it costs money to support a content creator and becomes quite expensive trying to support several. Consumers end up spending less on each individual resulting in creators earning less once the well dries up. Consumer becomes annoyed with being exposed to ads every few minutes while watching video and instead pays the platform rather than the content creator. Live video online can't be interrupted with ads. That only works on networks prepared to take breaks. And not everything can qualify for ad revenue. That model is dying.
Here it's incredibly affordable and the paying supporter is rewarded for being a paying supporter. Their level of support grows over time and they can add to it at any moment without it ever becoming an expense.
This platforms undercuts the competition yet ignores that market, insisting consumers want to become "stakeholders" and "curate."
They can be paying supporters and support. The only change is the wording.
Amazon share value rises because they own something like Twitch and Twitch creates opportunities for consumers to arrive with their money.
See how it all ties together?
We have posts in trending that are making $100+ with 40 views. Where in the world can you do that? 40 views is nothing. That's probably 1-2 people actually reading it.
The posts ain't looking SEO friendly in order to grab some audience through search engines.