Another scenario:
Since the post indicates it's insured (beneficiary), and if the goal was to alienate members with downvotes (not saying this service is behind the downvotes, talking about outside forces), those posts could be avoided, resulting in far more accounts impacted as those wishing to alienate members with upvotes that attract countervotes seek out other targets.
In general, several accounts must dish out a percentage of their post rewards well into the future while not being targeted, resulting in this service constantly collecting a post percentage from a large percentage of posts unnecessarily.
If they end the service, they could become a target, making the decision to remain insured permanent.
New accounts would be unaware and could become likely targets.
Everyone eventually becomes insured while majority pay continuously for no reason. At that point 1% coming in far exceeds potential loss prevented by this service.
The promise of paying out is irrelevant. When will it be shut down and why? There's no way of knowing in advance if the issue this system is attempting to counter will stop or start. Therefore one is likely to assume it remains running at all times.
The service is not selling the fear. The downvotes and potential loss sell the fear naturally. In other words, service sells peace of mind stemming from fear of the unknown.
The service naturally shifts from being an insurance policy to a tax collector. Majority of the community pays for the poor decisions of a few, even if they're not making poor decisions; poor decisions that could again start without notice.
Community is expected to trust account owner blindly though anything could happen to those funds including the owner experiencing issues beyond their control.
Community has effectively downvoted themselves 1% for something majority might not need, plus pays $35 per day, and loses access of up to and even more than 1000HP per account resulting in thousands of dollars worth of potential reward allocation locked up that can only be used in case of emergency and disaster relief. The most "generous" when combined are disabling a portion of their stake, leading to smaller votes and fewer post rewards across the board when used normally.
Added all up and tied together, potential incoming funds far exceed outgoing, especially when service is scaled up providing insurance to many.
Some buying insurance were never downvoted yet still attracted by what amounts to a sales pitch offering peace of mind. Some will feel like they need to pay in order to appear helpful in front of their peers, since those not paying were frowned upon in the message.
Noobs and those concerned about losing a couple bucks here and there, possibly those with low amounts of HP which make up the majority of people, pay the most, since they're the ones mainly being targeted by the service's message.
This service comes at a cost with a lot of hidden charges when factoring in everything and they all add up over time. If I'm not mistaken, this service came about after some accounts first received an upvote which was then countered with a margin of error of a few cents in most cases, which came at no real cost to the account.
Which parts am I wrong about and what could be looked at in order to avoid problems you might see. Consider this more as brainstorming or a thought experiment.
hey...I will.read later but gettimg ready for work....let.me.tag you in the comment I just left for acid and maybe it answers your initial questions.
I will be back in about 10 hours to try to catch up on comments and then I'll.try to reply more fully to you!!!
🙌😀
Hi!!! super long day. and another one on the horizon. but the most amazing, difficult, purpose-driven opportunity that I've had in about 4 years. (had another amazing one that ended then!) Special needs people are incredible.
this little guy I have... I hope the person who did this to him will rot - for a very long time.
my mind is depleted hehehe but I did go up and read your message and Acid's and I love that you both were so committed to trying to find ways to strengthen the idea. But, I'm really thinking that someone else would probably be much better to make an initiative like this happen. Because you both are saying things that just aren't making the connection in my head. The way that I think is just different, not better, not worse - different. And if I had was sitting in front of you both at a table - and trying to really make this work (and if i had the time LOL) I would sit there and brainstorm and learn, and adjust and rally and train and do it all. But I was hoping to help to implement this with 3 people that I trusted, train them on the concept and equip them - and then support them from the background as needed.
I completely hear what you both are saying - not enough trust, worry of scam, people not able to afford the 1HP/1%, and all the other things you listed - Instead of me revamping the entire thing, I think it probably just makes more sense for someone who is more in tune with the needs of Hive (as far as DHF, rewards, etc) to set forth the proposal. (And I think some people already have some pretty serious initiatives in mind)
But I'm happy to have at least hopefully added something to the mix. If at the very least - gotten people talking.
As I said to acid - thanks for your willingness to continue to be part of the conversation and add a lot of depth and thought to this... I hope that the "powers that be" have been scanning the comment sections and adding in your thoughts to their plans! hehehe
Have a good night (or day!! lol) heading to bed for another full day with one of the sweetest angels on the planet!!! :)
My brother is special, as they say. Good guy.
And I'm not worried about your project being a scam. Concerned this particular approach could open the door to competitors hijacking the trust something like this service builds within the community, and using that trust to take advantage of others by offering something similar then burning people, as they do.
There are a lot of moving parts on Hive.
You say 1 HP, but with a total of 7 accounts delegating stake there's already 1166 HP in the account. And that vote is only worth two cents, while one post shelling out 1% could bring in 10 cents, even a dollar. 1% doesn't sound like much but it adds up really fast.
So if I was in that room you speak of I would have suggested monthly payouts or something along those lines to give back the surplus rather than making it appear as if you're building a whale off the backs of the people and their work which might not be intention but that doesn't matter. One thing you don't want to do here is set yourself up to be on the receiving end of a community uproar two years down the line. You've seen those posts. Stacking a pile of money with the promise of payout means, eventually, people demand you shut it down because they want their money.
But I guess it doesn't matter now...
And if people really were scanning comments looking for ideas that actually solve issues, I'd go straight to the root of the problem and suggest a simple proposal system like what we already have that allows community members to report menaces abusing their downvotes. An appeals system. Community could have a look at the case, vote, and if it's decided someone is being a menace with abusive downvotes, the community's vote of approval would trigger the muting of that account's downvote function temporarily. What does one gain by being a menace with their downvote if the community can simply switch it off. Problem solved. And of course I left out all the finer details since I'm just talking to the clouds.
Anyway. LOL I could just keep going and going and going but I think I'll stop there.
I don't think you should give up entirely but that's not my call either.
Have a nice day.