I'd say give this 6-12 months before making a comparison like that. On the surface it does appear to be a bit top-heavy but it's only the first payout. At this point I don't even know if anything qualified to receive "evergreen rewards." Oddly enough the pinned posts from the team stand a good chance...
Of course, it's not comparable, it's more like a metaphor, I've already replied to someone, but as far as I'm concerned it's ok, because the prize is a second-layer token, and they're supposedly going to make sure that the tokenomics comes out. But, at the end of the day, it just looks a bit more sophisticated to me than a voting bot to which you delegate something and get a reward in its token
I want to see it succeed but I'm confused. If 1000 content creators all get 199 views, that's 199000 views to the site, but not one content creator qualified for "evergreen rewards" so all that money goes to stakeholders instead.
Or maybe once again I'm missing something. I dunno...
I don't know what to say. I bought a Leo premium account on purpose, let's say I post something daily through their interface, but I get zero or very few views. Obviously, nobody is interested in my posts there. Therefore, I do not expect anything. I have delegated the staked Leo tokens on to somewhere else, at least there I get something in return. I will not use their front-end because it is not good for me. We'll see what happens, as you said, some time has to pass.
Content creator on Hive (Inleo is a part of Hive) is better off saving money by not paying for premium options available elsewhere for free, and lining up their own sponsorships. Eliminates all those middlemen. Could also sell the perks that come standard like curation reward (simply call it consumer reward instead) to your own audience and grow yourself a solid decentralized revenue stream as well, where you're not relying on large stakeholders or curation groups for support (plus you have an actual audience). Those options are sitting on the table, smiling at everyone here, yet going completely unnoticed.
That 80% share certainly looks good in writing. 20% pays better? Stakeholders are rewarded more if content creators get fewer views? Is that good for business or bad? I have more questions than anything. Maybe some answers will come along...
I'd say give this 6-12 months before making a comparison like that. On the surface it does appear to be a bit top-heavy but it's only the first payout. At this point I don't even know if anything qualified to receive "evergreen rewards." Oddly enough the pinned posts from the team stand a good chance...
Of course, it's not comparable, it's more like a metaphor, I've already replied to someone, but as far as I'm concerned it's ok, because the prize is a second-layer token, and they're supposedly going to make sure that the tokenomics comes out. But, at the end of the day, it just looks a bit more sophisticated to me than a voting bot to which you delegate something and get a reward in its token
I want to see it succeed but I'm confused. If 1000 content creators all get 199 views, that's 199000 views to the site, but not one content creator qualified for "evergreen rewards" so all that money goes to stakeholders instead.
Or maybe once again I'm missing something. I dunno...
I don't know what to say. I bought a Leo premium account on purpose, let's say I post something daily through their interface, but I get zero or very few views. Obviously, nobody is interested in my posts there. Therefore, I do not expect anything. I have delegated the staked Leo tokens on to somewhere else, at least there I get something in return. I will not use their front-end because it is not good for me. We'll see what happens, as you said, some time has to pass.
Content creator on Hive (Inleo is a part of Hive) is better off saving money by not paying for premium options available elsewhere for free, and lining up their own sponsorships. Eliminates all those middlemen. Could also sell the perks that come standard like curation reward (simply call it consumer reward instead) to your own audience and grow yourself a solid decentralized revenue stream as well, where you're not relying on large stakeholders or curation groups for support (plus you have an actual audience). Those options are sitting on the table, smiling at everyone here, yet going completely unnoticed.
That 80% share certainly looks good in writing. 20% pays better? Stakeholders are rewarded more if content creators get fewer views? Is that good for business or bad? I have more questions than anything. Maybe some answers will come along...
Probably best to stop thinking about it.