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
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