My journey into the crypto scene started back in 2017 as a result of discovering the legacy chain Steemit. I am not overestimating the case but Steemit changed my whole life. I actually wasn't blogging for that long on Steemit but it was my gateway into crypto and I owe Steemit and Hive a lot.
Back in the days of Steemit whenever I published a post I would be rewarded 70/30 on post payout, so 70% of the payout went to me the author and content creator with the remaining 30% being paid to the curators. I actually thought this was a very fair reward system. For years this was the way and it seemed to work.
I know there was always a discussion about whether the reward ratio should be changed and of course as we know when the fork happened and Hive was created the post payout ratio changed to 50/50 and it has been that way ever since.
During various discussions about this issue some people even wanted the payout ratio to be 75/25 in the curators favour - utter madness!
However, personally I would like to see the reward structure revert back to 70/30. There are also many, many people I have spoken to since joining Hive who would also be very happy to see the payout structure back to 70/30, as it used to be the case back on the legacy chain.
I would like to just test the waters a little with this post and provoke a conversation if possible as to the viability of meeting this issue halfway and compromising with a 60/40 ratio payout. I would like to know if any of you guys would support this idea as a way of slightly increasing the authors payout given that they are the ones who create the content.
I am aware that all this would have to be put to the witnesses and a fork would needed to be implemented. But we are way off that at this stage. I just simply want to know who would support 60/40 payouts in the author's favour?
I would be grateful if you could let me know in the comments, thanks.
Peace!
The reason they made it 50/50 is because it was originally 50/50, then one day it was 75/25, and then the self voting was breaking proof of brain so they changed the reward curve to linear and the split back to 50/50.
Acidyo, arcange, and blocktrades are the most likely blogs to find each of the hardforks detailed.
My recall isn't the best, so check the chain for the facts.
https://hivesearcher.com/
That probably sounds about right but the self voting thing will always be an issue, and is kind of a separate argument in many ways. Surely if you don't value your own work why are you expecting others to?!!
Either way it doesn't change my core view that the content creator should get a little more for his/her efforts than the person voting on their post.
I agree the 75% split was more likely to attract bloggers, but the greedy coders broke it for all of us.
I would rather stay with the 50/50 split.
Thanks for sharing your opinion, can I ask why you want the 50/50 reward ratio to stay?
When the fork happened the only people I saw complaining had no stake. Mostly the kind of people that would take their liquid hive and never power it up and use it on bidbots.
Since I am not one of those people I could not understand their reasoning I guess.
I would rather see the curators getting an equal cut.
Yeah I can see how some people would be complaining for those reasons. We obviously don't want to encourage money grabbers who hit and run and don't care about the community. In relation to bid bots they are no longer an issue really anymore, I think most of them are now defunct.
But what about people who are investing a ton of effort, making a genuine contribution with decent content and ideas while simultaneously buying in and powering up to build a stake to get to a meaningful position who would like to see a small reward shift of 10% in favour of their work? Is that so unreasonable?
Putting aside the minnow position for a moment, can I ask you regardless of stake don't you think the content producer should be eligible for a slightly greater reward given that they are the ones making a lot more effort than someone simply voting on their work?
I think the curators take huge risks staking Hive. It's an altcoin, and being a crypto it's highly volatile. On the upside and downside.
So we should be rewarding those who are staking. As they do not need to hold Hive but they choose to. And because of that I think keeping it as it is now is how it should be.
It's great to have good content creators, but without the curators we have no upvotes.. and changing it to benefit authors more may cause curators to leave. Or discourage new ones from powering up.
If authors want higher payouts.. they need to wait for Hive to go up in value.. not changing how the reward system works.. imo
Well, most of the voters have low power so that 10% less is very little in term of payout.
Who's going to loose more are those big curation profiles. But if everything they do is just upvote and curate, that means that their activity exists because of creators posting their stuff. So I agree to a 60/40 split.
For a content creator who makes good quality content that generates good payouts, that increase is a big step imo
Yes, I agree I think curators would or perhaps should be okay with a 10% loss on curation. The bigger whales should be able to easily absorb that kind of loss. Of course they could make it up if they increase their blog output by just one extra post a week.
I'm pleased you agree with the suggestion of a 60/40 reward ratio in favour of the authors. I wonder if there is a majority consensus within the community who favour 60/40? I am trying to gauge it.
Interesting debate, but it is weird on times that people are discussing even removing the author rewards somehow, at least using our L1 Hive! So I am not sure how community will digest that!