The Steemit dev team is hard at work wrapping up several of the remaining 2017 roadmap items. We still have some major releases that we are planning to deliver before the end of the year, including a highly secure mobile wallet app for Apple and Android, and an updated notifications system for steemit.com!
Early 2018
We also have some important developments on the horizon for 2018, including an improved account signup process along with hardfork 20 (“Velocity”), as well as Smart Media Tokens (SMTs).
Roadmap: Community Input
We are in the process of putting together our 2018 roadmap, and plan to share our vision of 2018 with all of you once the roadmap is complete. As part of our 2018 roadmap, we would like to get input from all of you. In the comments below, or with posts using the #roadmap2018 tag, we would like you to answer the question:
What would you like Steemit to make a priority for 2018?
We promise to review and consider all of the input from the community regarding the roadmap, but please understand that we will not be able to implement all of the requests. The team has limited resources, and it is important that we focus on the items that will add the most value to the platform.
Even though all of the requests may not make it into the 2018 roadmap, that doesn’t mean we won’t bear them in mind and implement them eventually. In addition, these suggestions could prove a valuable resource for 3rd party developers and entrepreneurs looking to build businesses on Steem.
We hope that the #roadmap2018 discussion will spark a lot of great ideas about where the future development of our platform, and community will lead!
Steem on,
Team Steemit
It's as good as time as any to list what I thing Steem needs ASAP:
comment_optionsoperation and support between 0/100 and 100/0 ratios. Each Steem powered website could either set this ratio at the platform level or surface the choice to the end user via the interface. Different types of content deserve different types of rewards and by allowing this option to be configurable, it opens Steem up to different opportunities.postingandactive. A dynamic key system where I could create a key pair and grant it permission to specific operations would be ideal. I want to be able to create a specific key for my price feed and failover, which doesn't have access to transfer my funds out. I'd like to be able to assign a specific key on the powerbot accounts specifically for delegation operations. The more fine control we have over this system, the better types of apps can be built upon Steem. SteemConnect could do amazing things with a key system like this.I'm sure I could list more - but I'll stop here :)
I am strongly in favor of this idea.
One concern that I have though would be that this could create a 'starvation' problem, where curators start only going after the posts with a higher and higher curation percentage, and ignoring posts with lower percentages (even if the quality of the content is high). Authors will be forced to increase their curation percentage in order to get noticed/considered, until it reaches a point where 80-90% curation percentage is needed if you want to get votes. Do you see this becoming a problem?
I think a type of free market would evolve around the different percentages, but I don't think it would go to that far of an extreme throughout the entire community. Some bots may focus on higher % ratios and that's fine, but I imagine real people are going to reward content they appreciate regardless of the ratio.
Curation focused users would be encouraged to vote on high % curation reward posts (that they believe will be successful), but those posts would likely only be in situations where the author cared more about visibility than rewards.
After thinking about this for the last couple months - I'm leaning towards not just letting the basic user set this ratio while posting. Someone could of course make a utility to set the ratio to whatever they want - but the platforms themselves should be the ones determining these percents to simplify the process, and that's what most users will end up using.
Steemit.com for example could present it as an option while writing a post:
This could be a slider or whatever, potentially not even revealing the % ratio (to reduce cognitive load). Maybe they don't even give the user an option, but they change steemit.com so that comments are at 0/100% and posts at 50/50%, because that's what's best for steemit. I'm not sure what the exact numbers would be, just brainstorming.
Overall I don't think we'd end up in a situation where all posts required 80-90% curation rewards to get visibility. The way the websites are built would follow the market, and since most people use these websites, there's a bit of a safety net.
Also - once content has been silo'd (either through communities or chainBB forums) - the overall visibility from monetary gains is a lot less important.
I think it would be better to have a slider like SP voting slider from 1% to 100%.
The wider the spectrum the better imo. Someone who wants to keep say 95% of the rewards for himself should be able to do so as well.
The market for curation will become a lot more interesting with a wide spectrum. ( 1 to 100)
I think it'd be up to the frontend (whether steemit, busy, chainbb, etc) to decide if they want to give the users a choice. There's definitely benefit for some users - but it'd probably confuse others.
A good first step is even making it possible :D
Your idea in combination with mine... would be an interesting solution.
I don't think that would happen, universally, but I also think there are cases where 80-90% curation makes perfect sense as a way to encourage risky voting on less-known or less-mainstream content.
Really excellent posts (high potential earnings) would get votes even with a low percentage. If you can vote on a post with 10% curation rewards but likely to reach $100 or a post with 100% curation that probably won't exceed $2, which do you choose?
I think we'd see different types of content and different authors offering different percentages, in a sort of curation-market way (more obscure content and authors would have to offer more, but at least they have the option to offer more and get noticed).
I do see some issues with UI but only pro curators and bots need pay attention to most of it anyway (like most of the low-level curation rules). Both can build their own tools or a market can develop for better tools than the baseline (steemit.com) platform (as is the case now for features like beneficiaries).
Thank you very much for this mindset. I hope your clout resonates with the development team to enact some of this logic.
I agree. But it could also turn around the other side, Tim... Giving more curation could also attract bots and false curation.
So in my view, the system has to have some kind of credibility (reputation) before you can jump on such high differentials. For example, low reputation should star at High Author percentage and accounts should be more affected by bandwidth when posting (and less when commenting). Then the more you go up in reputation, the more you can set the bar to allow only curators to receive rewards.
I agree with this. Bots will find a way to find all the posts with higher curation rewards and start upvoting them. I think these guys are overthinking it. The curation rewards are fine the way it is but I'm open to hear other ideas about this.
Exactlyyyy!!
It will be more inclined towards curators in terms of revenue generation.
But yes!!. The platform should provide author with more options to decide.
That's right... so, why not incentive everyone to behave and provide good input and value to the platform, right? By allowing only good reputation to strive, we give public opinion the power to decide. And that's what counts on steemit!
You'd have to stop Steem Power being buyable though (otherwise Steem becomes a buy your way to becoming rich issue)...
I disagree with your statement, I think it would do the opposite. Vote buying is the result of a decrease in curation rewards. ( when steem forked from 50/50 to 75/25.) At this point it became more profitable to sell your vote to a bot than curate.
So increasing curation rewards should not attract bots? Will not the sell vote to bots apply here?
Can you clarify your view. I still can't see how you are seeing it.
Thanks
New users will be able to promote their posts by giving higher curation rewards and whales like myself would earn good curation rewards by voting most posts, there will be no need for services like randowhale,etc...these services are just taking advantage of a weakeness in steem.
OK. Point taken.
Only one more question...
Are we then saying that we agree with money being the monopolization factor? Being that... the more you invest in STEEM the more you will win?
I can only agree to the above if, both high reputation and weight can play together a somehow equivalent play. Meaning that there should be another valuable attribute that balances the fact someone could put 1 Million on STEEM, make lots of random curations and then come out without any consequence. For me, this is not acceptable. Money should not be the only way to decide the future of the platform.
My view. And thanks for yours.
Steemit will replace facebook
Yeah, I think this sort of thing will induce a 'race to the bottom', where no author really wins. I like the idea of them being adjustable within reasonably small bounds (say 50/50 -> 75/25), though. But I'm not a believer in the 'free market', as we have too many irrational psychological foibles that sabotage us (both individually and as a group dynamic).
The free market works fine in a society where everyone makes decisions rationally. Unfortunately, people are irrational beings
I agree.
Well said
Even if people were to only upvote content with 80-90% curation I still think it wouldn't be a problem because it will make curation so profitable that many people will invest in SP thus increasing the price of steem (authors payout )
Also according to this rule https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1%25_rule_(Internet_culture) only 1% of internet users actively create content while the other 99% consume it, so to me it makes perfect sense that authors gets 10% and curators(consumers) 90%.
Interesting view.
It seems to lean in favor of consumers to the detriment of creators. There's a reason content creators earn good money, it's hard work. Hitting an upvote button is not especially for a bot.
While the rule you mentioned is true, giving 90% to the consumers will disincentivize content creators.
Why would they do all that work when all they have to do is read and upvote?
Curators need steem power to earn rewards whereas authors can keep earning while cashing out every dime they earn.
Giving 90% to consumers is important to bring the system closer to a natural state. On steemit there is almost no readers and people are earning hundreds of dollars per posts, I mean are authors on steemit interested only about the money or do they care about the size of their audience?
A system like this is not sustainable, we need to incentivize people to buy steem power , its because people power up that authors earn anything at all.
This does make a lot of sense actually.
Good economics in this case in point.
I spend a lot of time writing lengthy blog posts, and though I attract some upvotes from dolphins and small whales from time to time, it's not nearly as much as I'd like (because it's not incentivized for them to do so)
In most cases, it's more rewarding for me to re-invest my payouts into bid bots
But I find this ridiculous... I put in a lot of work (half a day's work per post minimum), and it's content people do enjoy reading when they get around to it, but at the same time, I would much rather have a genuine audience of readers, say an audience ten fold, and earn 90% less on post-payouts.
Because that would eliminate the incentive for me to pay for my upvotes, and my content would reach a larger audience, which is exactly what I want.
I think my content is currently rewarded fairly for what it's worth, given that I've only just started. However, the economic environment in which I am contributing my content, is not conducive to me growing my audience.
So your point hits home very hard.
I would gladly lower my author rewards to 20% if it meant I'd have a 500% increase in my visibility (through upvotes and resteems)
Does that make sense? It certainly does to me
Umm Not Sure . This may work for Posts which are written or photographs taken by people on their phones and DSLRs .
But what if Steemit platforms actually end up growing to the point where it competes with youtube and people who make professional videos by investing money come on board. Content like documentaries , Short Films etc are Expensive to produce.
Would the growth be so massive with the above mentioned model that 10-20% reward will compensate the costs ? I am not sure .....And in case the costs don't add up steemit will become the dumping ground of global content while Quality content moves to other more profitable platforms ....
This was my first thought upon seeing the idea as well. I'm afraid that this would lead to more problems that we already experience (people reciprocating votes with the intent of profit, bots, poor content, etc.). Being able to control the ratio would be cool though. Not exactly sure what the best call is here
Other than free account creation, these are some solid ideas. I’ll have to think on the free accounts and bandwidth, but it just doesn’t sound like it would work out well, given the lure of “easy money” around here.
To be continued...
As the reward pool will never be large enough to make fb level amount of users happy, steemit is not destined to have that many users.
At some point users will need to pay some price to get in, imo.
This would both cut spammers and encourage only serious content creators imo.
I pretty much agree with that. Most users will likely never achieve any significant level of "popularity" or even have any of their posts go "viral." That's just the nature of social media. And unless an interface is created where users aren't primarily interested in rewards and are instead using it because it's genuinely a fun interface to interact, hoping for and comparing rewards will always be the main attraction and activity.
I actually prefer the idea of something that isn't necessarily "mass-adopted" over trying to onboard as many people as possible at no cost or minimal cost. When making money is involved and when it's advertised as being possible with minimal effort, you'll end up with a lot of people trying to milk the system with minimal effort...as we have actually witnessed ourselves. It spawns endless attempts at spamming, scamming, and the creation of mostly "low-quality" content just to make some quick cash.
There's nothing necessarily wrong with having a niche market or niche content. If that's what needs to happen to keep the system credible/workable, then that's perfectly OK. But if that's the goal, then the proper protocols need to be adopted. If that's not the goal...well, then...I'm not sure that there's any way to make both the money-earning aspect and the quality aspect workable without some serious reconsideration given to the entire system that has been created in the first place.
There seems to be a lot of conflicting expectations and protocols. Do we want mass adoption and everything that comes with it, or do we want exclusivity and a more managed/quality user experience? I don't think the blockchain protocols can properly facilitate both.
Right, my content is unlikely to be popular, too much cognitive dissonance, but if you want a well rounded content bundle you can't have it without what I bring to the conversation, imo.
The only way I see me getting any votes at all is through networking on the platform.
If this is to be the case, then new users shouldn't be encouraged through random upvotes, but rather the users we already have need to be given a chance to be known.
For instance, folks with less than 100 posts haven't really put in the effort, if you ask me.
I support folks whose content I do not agree with, but I do agree with their being allowed to say it.
Nsfw, specifically.
I have no love for it, but if that is their thing, I won't downvote it either.
Poo humor, too.
I completely agree with that. I've been saying this for a long, long time. The problem that I see a lot of on this platform is the same problem that I see with "failed" bloggers elsewhere - they either don't create interesting content or they don't bother with or know how to network. That's all social media is. If you can't or are unwilling to do those two things, then there shouldn't be much expectation of "making money online."
The random and/or widespread upvotes for new users and "minnows," just for the sake of "giving them something," isn't exactly the best approach for growing value from a content and user/viewer interest perspective. I've never understood the idea of trying to support all new users rather than trying to support users who produce good/popular content or even just users that you like.
Social media is about finding good information for you or entertaining content for you. Vote on the things that you enjoy and want to see more of, not what you think will "help minnows get more power" or "help spread the rewards around." That's the wrong approach on multiple levels, in my opinion.
But what do I know?
Lol, thanks for being here, David.
I don't know much, either, just an old, retired, hobo.
Agreed, that's a hard one. Free accounts would require some radical changes to go along side it, I don't think it would just work if we simply allowed it. A potential solution could be some sort of free/temporary account (where everything's "temporary" and not permanent on-chain somehow). The user could use this account to only post (100% SP) with it to "earn" themselves an account. Only once they've "earned" the account would their history actually be recorded on-chain and unlocked of all features.
It's a tall order, and I'm sure there's better solutions, but we need something different than what we have now.
@jesta, now a temporary account that was mentioned only puts us at a disadvantage in the sense that "forcefully" making an author accept only full power up, what if the person requires fund as per an emergency? The truth is that the living conditions of people differ and there are those who know how data consuming steemit site is, especially to those in certain countries. How does compulsory full power up help such a person when the 50/50 option will be beneficial?
That is like creating a matrix system where you have to get to a certain level to get certain rewards. P.S. what is the assurance that spammers are new members? A new person cannot operate such complex reward farms as effortlessly like that, they are mostly pre-existing members who we'll never suspect that are the masterminds, so at the end of the day, people who are already aware of of service like anon steem won't be deterred by the temporary new accounts. Rather, new members who genuinely want to blog and earn will suffer more.
It would be 100% SP because each account requires a minimum amount of SP to be created. If they're a new "temporary" account - they wouldn't be able to depend on those funds for an emergency. It's a limitation people would have to live with.
And it absolutely is a system where you have to achieve a certain level to get rewards. The bar is low though - the cost of creating an account. They could always pay to have an account created and bypass this entire system.
"Temporary", until it expires and then you create another free account (or 100 of them) and keep on spamming. I don't think this is workable at all.
I understand where you are coming from in terms of wanting free accounts (i.e. most other web sites) but I really think this is a situation where the nature of a public blockchain and limited resources is an irreducible difference from most other web sites and makes it unworkable. Someone has to pay for the resources, whether with an actual fee or some sort of stake-limiting.
I meant that the posts themselves would be temporary as well, which means if they created 100 accounts and spammed, when all 100 accounts expired, all those spam posts would go away with the accounts.
There's a lot of hurdles to make that happen though - which is why I said it'd be a radical change.
You can't just delete the whole history from the blockchain. There was some discussion about an idea to have offchain "free" accounts (sort of like a "Guest account"), which would be a way to do something like this, but as you say there are a lot of hurdles to it, including that it represents a big change from the current "everything on the blockchain and the front end is just a UI view of that" architecture.
I feel like we're getting in the weeds here on implementation details, but that's fun sometimes :)
I understand you can't delete things from the blockchain and I never said you'd have to. I imagine that these temporary posts/accounts would exist in a mempool like state (to borrow a term from bitcoin) - where they exist as pending transactions. This mempool would persist and propagate between witnesses just like blocks do using the p2p network. There would be a maximum lifespan of these transactions and a set of criteria that the account must meet before any of the transactions are actually included in a block.
None of this remotely exists AFAIK within Steem - so it would be a huge undertaking.
On the other hand, you're right - this whole system could exist off-chain and be integrated invisibly within the frontends.
The only problem there is now that system is responsible for paying for the account to be created upon completion of the steps. It'd be way easier than building it on-chain, that's for sure.
See...that sounds like a reasonable option. Kind of adds to the “gamification” aspect as well. Not sure how it could be implemented though. Could it be done via a side- or sub-chain? As each user then reaches the required targets, the information would be extracted and essentially added to Steem in their own version of a user “genesis” block that contains all of their previous data.
As a new user, they probably wouldn’t have a ton of content, so I imagine the block numbers and sizes would be relatively small. And, of course, if your other suggestion can be resolved (content storage), it wouldn’t matter too much anyway.
LOL.
Steemit and Steemit RED!
Nice idea, I'm fresh to blockchain but played enough shity RPG's and media outlet's over time to see idea this work, (as a model in general, I'm new to Steem so can't comment on it really) kind of like where in a game you are restricted to level 5(intro/#steemitlyf so can read everything but have restricted input) then graduate to Steemit.
From my basic software understanding with cryptoing, blockneting and interneting I can't see why this concept would not work as a general platform level in the near future IMHO.
nice comment
(Almost) free account creation is a must.
Please consider this use case scenario:
I have a mature, well prospered forum / site with 100k users. I want SMTs. I want my users to get accounts on steem. Given current min reg fee 0.2 STEEM that's around $20,000 (if you can afford $3,000,000 in SP delegation, freezing those funds for 30days + 13weeks) or just $600,000 for account creation without delegation.
Freemium would be the key. As long as we would be able to keep bandwidth limits at the level preventing million of 0SP accounts from spamming the network.
A suggestion on the free account creation thing, maybe there should be kind of a replenishable quota of free accounts an already existing "parent" account could create. Going beyond the quota would then cost that parent account.
You can do that now with delegation.
Yes.. Your right
THANK YOU FOR THIS. It's funny, I was wondering when Steem would stop holding itself back by allowing potential users to wait weeks in order to be accepted/verified. What a turn off. Only took me about two weeks to be accepted (eye roll).....So glad these issues will be resolved. Hoping for some great steps forward in 2018! Cheers, mate!
Yess!!..
I strongly believe that the Sign up process taking too much time is actually losing a lot of users and also from its platform-scaling point of view in terms of users count.
If it really wants to compete with Facebook, Twitter, etc. Steemit do need to make users feel that they are on a equally competent platform with awesome front-end UI.
This is that one thing lacking in existing #Blockchain-based Dapps.
Please prioritize this.
I HAVE WAITED MONTHS to see this problem fixed and it is still a problem....
And the value of STEEM will not go up until its fixed.
@jesta I agree with you on the need of easness to the signup process. I recently wrote a post about the need of an invite a friend button, and my idea on the backend of it is related to make it easier and faster, as well as showing the users the advantages of steemit, and how great the platform is to learn too. I also wrote a post on the creation of a Mentions tab function. That will also help steemians communicate faster, and increase the speed of task completion. @gold84
I am happy with all my heart that there is like you in this great site
Who are doing development work and a road map to develop this great site
thank you all
Thank @jesta
Thank @timcliff
My greetings to all of you in this future map
Thanks for all and my greetings to you
@walidsalah
Well you got 33$ on this comment in 14 hours. claps
great information and easy to understand
Mmmmmmm who is this @jesta, lemme check him out. Full of knowledge.
Look forward to emulating your steps.
You are very correct
informative comment...
I’ve created a word cloud for the comments section of this post that I hope you will find of value and will want to share. While the creation of the actual word cloud is relatively easy and straightforward, the creation of a relevant word list that will produce a meaningful word cloud is quite another matter, as I’m sure you know, and takes considerable time and effort. Unfortunately, as of now, the post has only had 41 views. It needs a little love. Perhaps a resteem might be of help, if you think it is worthwhile, and, of course, it would be much appreciated too. TIA
https://steemit.com/steemit/@cryptographic/word-cloud-for-steemit-roadmap-2018-community-input
Could you give some examples of what possibilities this would open up?
apart from all this which is really cool but dont you think the world as to rock steemit, hacking our way into existing social media, and bring more users to steemit, have been on facebook over the years with thousand of likes and shares not even a penny i recieved, nobody hears about steemit and he/she is not HOT!(bigshaq), i believe steemit should work on publicity too, to promote the platform and reach more users, attatching some amount of steem to social sharing conditioned with algorithm like that of rewards could be looked into,
Thanks for all the great ideas put forth.
as far as content storage, an archive option similar to Instagram would be amazing... to quickly archive a post in order for it to be publicly hidden yet permanent. User may toggle posts to be visible or not and that could be done through a side chain if i'm not mistaken no ? I know some people live life with no regrets and all but boy do i regret one of my posts... like dam... very unprofessional post and i cant do anything about it.. no options other than living with an impulsive post made out of curiosity. In my opinion an archive would be key in rethinking content storage, or even allowing users to delete posts they no longer want to have
Why you stop. Nice writting
Perfect timing. Thanks for asking. Here's a list of things that come to mind presently:
At the moment, that's what comes to mind. I may edit this comment with other requests as they come forth. Thank you so much for asking!!!
I guess people don't like my curation suggestion. Lol. (Probably don't like the idea of their author payouts going down.) Right now Steemit is mostly content creators all hungry for a payout and few curators, so something really needs to be done about it, even if bloggers don't like it, they will get used to it and it will improve the platform.
I agree that curation needs to be looked at. It would be nice to make changes that encourage whales to upvote/curate from varying authors so more authors get a nice payout occasionally.
Definitely. Not just whales though. Right now someone can just set a bot to upvote popular user's posts, and they'll get almost guaranteed curation rewards.
Perhaps an algorythm based on a user's average post payout rewarding more curation rewards for upvotes on lesser known users. This way it encourages everyone to go out there and find the diamonds in the rough.
Everytime a 'whale' votes EVERYBODY ELSE'S vote loses value.
If one person votes, their vote gets the entire reward pool.
If one minnow, and one whale votes, the minnow gets next to nothing and the whale takes the rest.
Whale voting is making it impossible for the newbs to get votes and exposure.
I like # 4 by d-pend, where the community decides on issues of realavence that will affect us all. One question at a time. If you notice, this type of questionnaire tends to attract the same people repeatedly. If stats are correct their are a whole lot of steemians that are not seeing this right now. Thanks for your suggestions.
Like your list and think it's pretty dead on. #3 will cause more adoption naturally and increase retention. Currently this feels like being on Myspace having to be at my computer to post. 99% of my facebook time is on my cell, very rare I use my computer for it.
And #1 is Top of my list. My feed gets cluttered with resteems and has caused me to unfollow a few people that resteem everything under the sun vs quality, but I like their posts. Being able to toggle that on and off would be a huge help to make sure I don't miss content from those I want to read in my limited time. If there is more time then seeing content from others is of interest and then it makes sense to turn on the resteems...but I should be in control of this.
I created a front end called steemfeed.social that allows you to filter out resteems (among a host of other things). It's still pretty beta at the moment, but it's there if you want to see only the original content of the people you follow.
I am with you on this @thedarkhorse and have never seen anyone mention it. I too quit following some folks that like to resteem so many posts.
I like their posts but would prefer not to get so many in my feed they resteem.
The problem, in part, is that it isn't actually 25%, it is much less than 25% after factoring in the reverse auction (early voting penalty). The last estimate I saw was 12%. Even bringing it back up to actually 25% (or closer to 25%) would be a step in the right direction.
I too like @jesta's idea to make it customization on a per-post or per-community basis.
Maybe partner with esteem or other existing apps to promote them better, or even acquire them outright. That's a much faster path to getting this done.
Yeah, thanks for pointing that out, you're exactly right. I agree that assimilating existing app development would be a solid choice if it works out.
I’ve created a word cloud for the comments section of this post that I hope you will find of value and will want to share. While the creation of the actual word cloud is relatively easy and straightforward, the creation of a relevant word list that will produce a meaningful word cloud is quite another matter, as I’m sure you know, and takes considerable time and effort. Unfortunately, as of now, the post has only had 41 views. It needs a little love. Perhaps a resteem might be of help, if you think it is worthwhile, and, of course, it would be much appreciated too. TIA
https://steemit.com/steemit/@cryptographic/word-cloud-for-steemit-roadmap-2018-community-input
I agree with him
Great suggestions, @d-pend - especially 1 & 4!
1, 3, 4, & 5 are all right on the money.
I could see reading posts on my phone, or maybe a tablet, but there is no way I would want to write a blog post on my phone.
I think an app would mainly help users that are already here stay in touch, and respond to comments on their posts. That's highly important though. It will mean more activity on the site.
Well said bro
Number 1 is a must
For some users it's no problem to have lots of Resteems, but for others, I think having tons of other people's posts clouding our own blog is not the ideal visual setup we're striving for!
Great idea. It's been something preventing me from hitting more resteems on articles I like just because I think to myself "do I really want this to be there in 2 months time"
Informative Comment..
Communities, communities, communities.
100%. Communities were an objective of the 2017 roadmap, with an aim to deliver in Q3. It would be great to see these happen in 2018.
Agree. Agree. Agree.
I'm sure there are other things worth doing, but do that first and then reassess. It is such a huge change that it could change many current assumptions about how the platform works and what it needs.
Straight to the point!
Exactly @donkeyong, communities are being overlooked and they are the building block of the platform. Do we want growth on the platrform? Yes! but then imagine reviewing the curation formula to 50/50, that is basically taking away more from an author who already earns less simply because you enjoyed his content enough to even vote.
This is like building a house from the roof first when there is need for the foundation (communities) to be built first.
I admit the roadmap shows steemit has progress in mind but the communities should be a priority like you said.
Right Sir ,,,
My primary suggestions mostly have to do with blockchain protocols.
Change the voting algorithm from full linear to anything but full linear. This has been an abject failure in practice and ought to be rolled back. Then we can discuss a better alternative that is neither n2 nor n.
Restore the 40-vote target.
Remove the STEEM Power delegation function. It not only reduces user demand for STEEM on the open markets, but it has also created another avenue for widespread mismanagement and abuse/exploitation of the collective and limited reward pool.
Reintroduce stronger bandwidth limitations. The amount of spam on the network via posts, comments, and wallet transfers/memos from new accounts is very high and is greatly inflating the daily "transaction" numbers for the blockchain. This is "bloat" that can be easily managed. Those who wish to spam can spend money on STEEM, if they so choose.
Consider reintroducing the four-post reward limits. This has no impact on the number of posts that one may publish in a given day. It only affects the total number of rewards that one user can receive from the limited collective reward pool.
Other than those suggestions, I'd still like to see some basic features/functions implemented on the Steemit.com website. Here are some additional suggestions:
A separate "Resteem" tab on your individual profile page that sorts your posts from those that you have shared. This has been a feature request for over a year.
Restoring the pop-out window for viewing of posts that could be neatly closed without having to push the 'back' button, which often brings you back to the wrong place on the page that you were previously on.
Serious consideration of revenue models that can be partially shared with investors in Steem and users of Steemit.com and affiliated apps/websites that Steemit, Inc. owns.
Additional "gamification" of the platform, particularly related to holding STEEM Power - if the other protocol changes are made.
What about groups like steemstem that partially (or even fully) depend on delegation?
When one minnow votes s/he gets the entire reward pool for that vote.
When one minnow and one whale vote the whale gets most of the pool and the minnow gets next to nothing.
Enlarging the numbers do not change the ratios.
Whales delegating sp that previously was not getting voted is what made my vote go from a dollar just after the hf to a dime today.
The only out I see is if folks with more than 35mvests don't vote, then all the little votes grow in influence and the little voters have a reason to be here.
Otherwise it will devolve into only the 'whales' circle jerking each other and the price will tank.
#m2c
Why are they so dependent on delegation? And if I recall correctly, SteemStem was operating fairly successfully long before delegation began.
so that votes of the main account are more powerful. This helps us gain curation rewards that can be used for projects.
and I would say overall its doing better than it ever has before
Excellent suggestions.
There seems to be widespread consensus here, quite perplexed as to why this hasn't already been implemented.
This brings to mind the truth that "nature builds in curves, not straight lines." In my opinion, it also relates to my suggestion to change the 25/75 curation rewards, which is an 'unnatural' rigid number that does not work well.
A radical suggestion for a radical and widespread problem. Not sure if it's the answer, but it is evident that the current state of affairs is quite imbalanced.
This was listed in the whitepaper for 2017 yet I have seen nothing implemented along these lines thus far (perhaps @steemitboard, but that doesn't really count if you ask me as it is not embedded into the actual site.) The effects of gamification can't be overstated, as it makes the whole experience much more vivid for the average user.
In regards to delegation. I was thinking about this the other day. Delegation could exist via a model similar to crowdfunding, and evidently, the same way that earlier investors here get reward for.. becoming early investors.
As an example, a new user joins. No one knows if they bring quality (if an identity already has a successful online identity then it's a no-brainer). They introduce themselves and outline their road map. They state: "I bring this, will be this active, and I intend to stay". If it's a blogger then a proof post might aid their cause. If it's a project, well then it's based on much more that just words.
So if a backer decides "I believe in you.. I'll delegate x amount of my SP to your cause". From there an agreement on return can be outlined. Maybe as a 'smart contract' but not mandatory. It's not like people can just cash out anyway. So as an early investor, you have a larger stake in their potential earnings. Along the way new investors have less and less. Or depending on the amount of delegation.
New members, can then utilize that delegated SP to grow their blog/project. Not to pay themselves. Early followers could also receive a small fraction of the reward. Not automatic. Engagement would always be necessary. The delegated SP would go towards rewarding comments that are engaging. (Essentially by a system of attraction. Rather then the way that exist now. Which is, work your ass off for a year or pay the damn fee to get noticed).
This would drive thoughtful comments. As any one that sees that a thoughtful comment received say $5.00 reward, as opposed to ZERO for parasite comments that clearly don't even read the content. It would create buzz around quality bloggers. Hence = rewards for engagement = rewards for those that delegate SP. It would also never allow a blogger, who reaches heights to simply post.. and not engage their followers. Something evident in the current system.
It time, quality bloggers/projects could even exist as tradeable asset. Where say one investor has backed X amount which is doing fantastic. They have long received their return and are in surplus. Someone new comes along, invests in first STEEM. Wants to back something, as he/she has money but not so much the time or maybe talent to post and grow their investment. So they can now buy the stake that someone else has in an active member. Placing them in 'the game' from the get go as they work to find their own worthy candidates to invest in.
So essentially whales, who are cashed up grow a portfolio of valuable steemians. Grow their wallet but at the same time the platform and the community. In turn, the price of STEEM. So it pays to support quality. It also hurts to support members who don't live up to their claims. So @freedom throwing money at shitpost accounts for instance. Would and should suffer.
From the outside looking in, it also improves the platform image and would truly have that quality feel. This would drive external buzz and I believe would sell itself as the true alternative to the standard players in social media. That old line "build it and they will jizz" (or something like that) would reign supreme. Because one thing is undeniable. Steemit has a very bad reputation outside of the minds of loyalists. You can't pretend it's not the reason why it hasn't grown and become more mainstream.
This is my idea of a platform that attracts and retains quality without corruption.
Maybe not 4 but definitely a limit. Right now it is easy for relatively new accounts to post 200+ posts a day with only a url for content. Either that or a bandwidth penalty for short content.
Please!
There is bandwidth limit.
But short content has value, so who are you to limit it? What if people tweet over Steem?
The content isn't limited. The rewards are. And the rewards don't stop after the posting threshold is reached - the maximum allocated to each post is just reduced after that threshold.
If the maximum allocation threshold for parent posts is five posts, but you're posting 10 times per day, then instead of receiving the full $100 allocated to each of the ten posts ($1000), you may only receive $70 or $80 per post ($700 - $800) and the rest goes back into the daily pool.
There are various trade-offs between quality and quantity by doing this, but the point to remember is that it is a limited daily reward pool. On a future interface, it may be possible for a few celebrities "tweeting" 10 times per day to capture a massive percentage of that pool compared to the other millions of users. I think it would be good to have some sort of protocols in place to mitigate that type of reward allocation.
Some people will argue that it can easily be circumvented by creating sock puppets, but managing multiple accounts on a daily basis at least requires extra steps and would be enough to deter a good number of users. It might even be preferable to simply take the relatively small loss in rewards rather than manage multiple accounts. And those who decide to manage the multiple accounts will likely be discovered eventually, as they'll probably do their best to coordinate votes and interactions and have similar/identical content and behavior.
Overall, I think the goal continues to be token/rewards "distribution" as widely as possible. At least that's the argument that I keep hearing. This could certainly help, even with today's tiny user base.
Yeah it used to be like that last year and when it was, people like me were getting $500-1000 per post. They changed the rules because the rewards were concentrated on fewer posts, but it seem now people want to go back to the old rules. What difference does it make?
Under the old rules I could post long detailed posts and under the new rules I must post frequent but shorter posts. The truth is people don't really read the longer posts so it likely will just encourage the use of bots.
How the rewards don't stop after the posting threshold i s reached?
Who have time for 200+ posts per day?
I envy the persons who manage 4 a day as for me the max was 2 in a day!
Spammers are inventive.
Maybe an hour to queue up several hundred posts. Especially if the post title can be taken from the file name.
200 posts in a day is physically impossible. The most I could do in a day was 16. But it also impossible to manually vote 90 votes in a day for the same reasons. So people don't vote and use bots.
https://steemit.com/@cryptomonitor
This guy is quite prolific!
247 top level posts yesterday, currently worth around $20($15 to him).
And people complained about me for posting 16 posts in one day (which is humanly achievable). 247 posts, only possible if there is either a team of humans, or if a human saved their posts in doc files to post on Steemit, but even then you would notice the frequency will taper off after a few days.
If it is a sustained frequency of hundreds of posts per day without any rest periods then you have to suspect a bot. That said it is $20 a day? It's not like he is getting rich.
That is crazy!
I manage 38 blogs and 1048 posts and this in almost 5 months and this spammers are adding hundreds in one hour!!!
The worst thing is they dont add value to the platform...
200 posts a day is not humanly possible but anyone can post more than 4 a day. It doesn't actually matter how long or how short the posts or how many posts a day. What matters is growing the reward pool and increasing the size of the user base.
See my ideas for referral marketing programs for SMTs, and also like with anything people who have more time than money can post more than people who have more money than time. Increase the wealth of the network with SMTs to avoid the scarcity mind set.
200 posts a day 'is' (collectively) humanly possible... with a sufficiently big team of content creators or shadow-writers (discounting plagiarism). Just saying. :c)
maybe at least limit for resteeming? Right now there are many "I will resteem your post to 9876 followers for $9.99" bots
Markets are a good thing, they increase the value of the network. Less limits, grow the user base and connections between users. Limiting what people can do will not attract more people.
I'm reading your brilliance all down this page. Following.
Too many of those scams going around right now. A limit might just have them creating more accounts... That leads to more follow/unfollow bots working to gain followers for those accounts.
Not sure what a solution would be.
Make it known they advertise a false service!
https://steemit.com/bisteemit/@abh12345/resteem-com-is-this-re-steeming-service-worth-it-bisteemit-investigates
Old post.
I said the same thing.
I would add:
I think this has a lot more legal barriers to consider. And it also makes the purchasing of STEEM possible off of existing exchanges, which could complicate price discovery, especially when the holder of that STEEM in question gained it at the outset of the blockchain's creation - when there was no price at all.
In other words, it would be messy all around. But I'm pretty sure it doesn't happen because of the legal aspects. I could be wrong though.
Definitely.
I would have already bought steem to power up if there was a way to buy it on the site.
As it is, I instead searched for over an hour if there was any site that sold steem directly. The one that said it did had poor reviews, and listed $0 in steem for $50 USD. Then I spent another hour trying to decide what crypto currency to buy to exchange for it, because of the horrible transfer fees on bitcoin recently, and ended up going to bed. Then the next day I saw a bot censor someone, and decided to think more on it first.
Agreed. A definite negative for the cryptos at present. Especially Bitcoin - too slow and too expensive fees. Etherium is also problematic used - Chrome extension (Metamask) UI is terrible.
You took the words right out of my head,..
The only thing I see missing is the comment link not taking us to the comment if the comment is over the limit and hidden behind another link.
Yes, the recent changes on the site have made it worse. When I click on my comments, I don’t necessarily want to be taken to the full page, especially if it doesn’t even drop me off on that comment when I get there...which happens quite often.
Looks to me like it would increase server load by creating more calls for data, too?
Targeting directly to a reply/comment works in night mode for me (on windows). If I then switch to normal mode after the first visit to said reply in night mode, i will be successfully directed to the target comment.
Normal mode doesn't take me to the target reply/comment. So i assume 'night mode' has ballsed this up.
I actually forgot to mention that in my comment on the UI.
Seriously, very good suggestions.
However, I'm not sure how projects like @utopian-io and other open-source projects would function without delegation being there... though delegation removal would fix some problems, I personally think it would create many others and isn't the right solution.
They would function just like other projects that have functioned on Steem/Steemit without delegation for the past year and a half. They can provide updates with posts, receive donations from those who want to support them, have other accounts trail their votes, buy STEEM to power up...there are many options.
I know that delegation can be good, but it unfortunately creates far too much "bad" in an environment that does not include enough people willing to counter the "bad." So if the community as a whole proves to be inadequate in mitigating the "bad," then revert to prior protocols that didn't allow the avenue for abuse/exploitation/whatever you want to call it, then find a new/better solution...if there truly is a problem that needs to be resolved in the first place.
For every bit of good that delegation may do when given to good curators, we get two or more situations like this - and the latter seems to be increasing.
https://steemit.com/steem/@transisto/whales-witnesses-we-have-to-talk
I see, it makes sense that a delegation market would pressure the price of STEEM downwards :(
Pretty sad because delegation really helped lots of users earn a 'voice' and especially helped projects function much better, but if we have to reorganize for the better of STEEM in the future (long-term), so be it.
If the delegators would research into the project they are delegating to then this would be a start.
Upvotes/Downvotes on a delegations list each week? Auto cancelled if community sides that way?
Why not expand the reward pool?
This is a response to what? And by "expanding the reward pool," do you mean "inflate the currency at a higher rate?"
Everything that was said by @ats-david !!!
Very valuable advice, it shows your commitment to this platform. I am a big fan of stronger bandwidth limitations to cut down on spam.
great suggestions.
Absolute good comments. I loved the old system of steemit.
all of what @ats-david wrote specially #3
I do agree it's the main cause of price drop and it'll get worse if it continues
Delegating/leasing Steem power is one of the best/efficient ways for us minnows to accumulate SP in order to become dolphins and dolphins to be orcas/mini-whales. Sadly, you are proposing to take that right away from us those with low Steem power.
Blaming that for the low Steem price is diverting the issue that one particular big whale seems to be now powering down/cashing out exiting Steem in batches without absolutely crashing the price according to @chitty in his post recently: https://steemit.com/steem/@chitty/steem-price-will-remain-low-i-am-sorry.
Actually, if you're leasing it, the chances are that you're barely breaking even, if you're breaking even at all. The best way to increase your SP would be to create content that is in demand and that you can create at a high-quality level. And in addition to that, you'd need to be able to consistently engage on the platform and network with your peers and followers to expand your audience.
The next best way would be to simply buy STEEM. Leasing it just takes you down a longer path to the same destination.
There is no "right" to lease STEEM Power. And can it really be said to be a "right" anyway, when just a few months ago, the function didn't even exist? Changing blockchain protocols has nothing to do with rights or entitlements. If something isn't working out or needs to be improved, it can be changed via the consensus protocols, which has happened 19 times already.
I am not blaming delegation for the low STEEM price. I simply stated that delegation reduces user demand for STEEM on the markets. It is only one of many factors.
Thank you for the reply but I am breaking even for 2 months now or else I would have stopped the practice. It all depends on how well you manually curate always (upvote hot posts that are exactly 28 to 30 minutes old) and not depend on steemvoter doing the voting for me.
You forgot to read the next sentence.
Also - this was written in response to "needing" delegation. Context matters.
And just so we're clear - I'm not a fan of the amount of paid voting bots that are operating. But if we really look at the paid voting, the returns are about as good as leasing delegation...which is to say that they're not very good. If you want the most bang for your buck when it comes to SP, it's still better to just earn it by posting/engaging and networking or by purchasing the STEEM outright and powering it up.
I’ve created a word cloud for the comments section of this post that I hope you will find of value and will want to share. While the creation of the actual word cloud is relatively easy and straightforward, the creation of a relevant word list that will produce a meaningful word cloud is quite another matter, as I’m sure you know, and takes considerable time and effort. Unfortunately, as of now, the post has only had 41 views. It needs a little love. Perhaps a resteem might be of help, if you think it is worthwhile, and, of course, it would be much appreciated too. TIA
https://steemit.com/steemit/@cryptographic/word-cloud-for-steemit-roadmap-2018-community-input
Excellent comment as well as nice tips
Communities
For several reasons, I am still in full agreement with this excellent statement from the 2017 roadmap:
In summary, we need communities as a driver of user growth, a better way to digest content, and a place to play with parameters and SMTs.
Priority no 1: Faster Account Creation
Priority no 2:
ReImplement "Promoted" feature, and make it efficient and attractive to users which now prefer to use voting bots.
Facts
Solution?
Here are some additional ideas for the promoted section. https://steemit.com/steemit/@littlejoeward/fixing-steemit-s-post-promotion-killing-the-voting-bots I would love your thoughts on them
you are reading my mind! :)
And it looks like this problems bothers a lot of people. You have written your posts yesterday, posts with simmilar ideas written by @raised2b was written 2 days ago:
https://steemit.com/steemit/@raised2b/if-we-want-to-slow-the-use-of-voting-bots-we-need-to-meet-a-market-need-here-s-a-possible-solution
BTW, why not instead of burning those SBD, just convert then to STEEM and move to SteemPower of all SteemPower holders?
That would be additional incentive to Power Up, very easy to marketing: All revenue from promotion goes to long term investors! :)
"BTW, why not instead of burning those SBD, just convert then to STEEM and move to SteemPower of all SteemPower holders?"
Actually I think a better thought vs burning the SBD is to use those SBD to then pay developers to implement items faster and allow Steemit to actually evolve to a powerhouse. There is plenty of work that needs to be done and lots of talent on Steemit to get these items accomplished.
I think burning them and then using something like utopia.io to pay developers makes more sense. That way, we can decrease the supply of steem (increasing the value) and then separately, support the developers by voting for the best contributions. Promotion and development are separate things so I think they shouldn't be connected.
IMO the Supply isn't an issue, exposure is. You can have almost any amount steem out there if enough people want to own it the price will still rise. Using SBD that otherwise would have been burned means zero costs for improvements which can have an exponential effect on the value of Steem vs a minor effect in terms of reduced supply.
Yeah, this is a great idea too. Obvisouly there's a lot of us seeing the problem as it stands currently and there are definite solutions out there that would benefit our community as a whole.
I have seen 4 or 5 posts that all say about the same things written about the same time! Sounds like consensus to me! haha
I think that burning them would be about the same as your suggestion, but I like how burning them creates upward pressure on the value of steem benefiting all steem holders. Though I think your idea would work... it is just a more complicated way to do it. I'll have to think about it more...
I'm not sure if no one checks the Promoted tab, but I know I don't. I rarely find anything good there, so I tend to ignore it. The idea of incorporating it into Promoted is probably the way to go.
I was thinking on the side or top, where ads usually are, auto-scrolling slowly.
The point is to give people more incentive to use the official method of promotion, rather than bots.
I like this idea, reminds me a bit of Reddits ad system except that this way the whole community and stakeholders would benefit through the burning of sbd.
Hey there @noisy, I have actually posted an 2 in-depth posts about your priority number 2 with very similar thoughts and points. In 1, I diagnose the issue and in the other, as a proposal on utopian.io I determine the solution, which is in essence, what you have stated here.
You can find them here :
Growing Unhappiness with Upvote Bots on Steemit
Proposal for New 'Promoted' Function
I am working towards bringing as much attention towards the proposal as I sincerely feel it will bring positive impact upon steemit, the same thought which you have. I'd appreciate if you would have a look at it.
Thank you!
Oh, this is going to be major! The two main problems now are account creation and voting bots.
Yep, exacly what he wrote.
Nicely Described ..
Learn A lot
As a medium-importance priority item for Steemit in 2018, I'd like to see the ability to categorize posts within each of our blogs.
Currently, it's a nightmare to scroll through the abyss of some users' blogs (mine included)... and we're only a year-and-a-half in. The ability to categorize our posts would allow users to quickly find their favorite blogger's articles based on topic (and possibly, publish date). It would also make each blog look cleaner and more organized.
An improved Steemit search experience would be another item I would add.
Thanks for your consideration, Steemit Inc.
As well as tools to help us better organize so that readers can more easily access the content they're looking for, I have two other wish list candidates:
● An optional "registered Steemit users only" setting for posts that would allow content creators to voluntarily participate in an active effort to drive user registration (and for those who choose to seek a wider audience the right to do so as well, hence the individual post by post optional ability - we'd all probably end up using a mix, depending on the individual post).
● A @steemit stake decentralization proportional airdrop to all accounts created after April 17, 2016, AND also having a reputation above 25. This would "spread the wealth" of that early "easy mine" in the most equitable way to real users who bought into STEEM with hard cash, sweat and tears while excluding all pre-exchange, early miner whale accounts. This type of second-stage early adopter "award" would not only fairly and appropriately redistribute that STEEM, it would also highly motivate and serve as invaluable community support PR.
Good job all, and thanks for asking!
Great ideas and upvoted....
The second idea really takes care of a point of contention among many on here. Developing a second pool that gives preference to the non-whales makes a lot of sense. This way, those who dont have the SP will start to acquire some and add to their accounts which makes their votes even more valuable.
It also gives newer people the incentive to work that much harder.
Upsteemed, especially for the second suggestion. With the account mining capability coming forth in the next hardfork, I think the pressure on the Steem stake would lower and they may put it to better work.
Once that war-chest is gone, it's gone.
I agree with you. It would be nice if we could have our own tags for our own pages. Keeping our posts in a specific place for referral back to when needed.
I don't know how many times someone has asked me about a link, or I am working on a new post and need one of my links from four days ago. I have to scroll through about 2-3 dozen (if not more) posts and resteems on my page.
I would also like to see a place for our favorite people that we follow. Not necessarily a 'friends' list but more of a favorites. I like to see certain people's posts on a daily basis and I have to search for them sometimes. Just a tab that says "here's my favorites".
and thank you for considering all our input and for your endless work and time into steemit.
And, of course... thank you to the entire team for all of your hard work. It's incredibly appreciated and the number of positives vastly outweighs the negatives.
1- Improve the signup process
Not only by accelerating the signups volume, but by making it easier. Most users are newbies, they don't have a sense of the complexity of Steem. Many lose their passwords minutes after getting approved. More information needs to be pushed to guide them on what to do. Simply mentioning to read the FAQ doesn't help, rarely do they read the FAQ. They need to be schooled in a quick and informative way (welcome video, tutorial page), before they start blogging.
2- Improve the UI layout
Steemit's UI is very basic and lacks an attractive punch. Every major website has a signature look that can be spotted from a mile away. Steemit.com doesn't. It's a header with a white background, not very appealing. Condenser must look good, sexy and attractive. Colors play a major psychological role that must be harnessed. It's one thing to push for advertising, but if the site looks bland, it's a turn-off. Image is everything.
3 - Optimize the header sections
The trending page is the worst of all. Always the same people are featured there with the same subjects. There's no diversity. Either remove the trending page or find a way to give more focus to other quality non-repetitive posts. Honestly I don't care about @sweetsssj's pretty face, where she travels, or what she eats. We need to see content with REAL value trending.
4 - Optimize the steemd resource requirements
This is already being worked on, as announced in HF20 months ago, i.e. multi-threading. Would be nice to have it implemented soon, as well as reduce the RAM usage.
The promoted Tab should include all whale and dolphin bot-enabled posts, while the Trending Tab should be actual organic views with lots of human activity.
You haven't switched to night-mode yet? You are missing out ;)
Oh I did try night mode, there' nothing innovative about reversing colors 😉. I think the website needs a signature design that people can remember and appreciate.
Great points, you said it better. Up vote!
Yeah, I think number 4 is pretty important. The blockchain API access has too much lag and too many errors. This is particularly important for app developers on top of the blockchain. There's a couple of well known services that I've used in my app development that have unacceptably high levels of failure and errors. I'd put it down to those services themselves, but I've seen similar error rates from my own programming interfacing directly with the steem API. It makes app development (and debugging) very hard.
Very true sir
Try to say something meaningful before upvoting yourself! You're spamming this post with useless lines.
Okay, this seems like a good time to sound off on this. Account Creation needs to be at or near the top of the list.
One of the things I would LOVE to be able to do, since I live in a college town, is get a classroom environment where I could have everyone open their notebooks and we all start Steem accounts together. Onboarding college students is the path to millions. Those are your bread and butter, as other social media sites have demonstrated.
If you can't create an account and be in and posting in minutes, then doing any sort of onboarding classes is next to impossible. This can't be the way things were meant to be! I want to be out there teaching and bringing people to the platform. But I need a quick account creation in order to provide a usable experience for these kids who can be tomorrow's Steemians.
Thanks for giving us the opportunity to sound off here. This is something I have been wrestling with in my head for a bit now, and I am glad that it is on the list, I just hope it makes the priority list!
Don't worry, it already is :)
Good to hear, @vandeberg!
Yes.. You r right
Account creaton and first post should cost new user 2 minutes. No more.
An excellent KPI.
You should be able to do that with SteemInvite: https://steemit.com/steem/@hilladigahackles/steem-invite
Yes, you will need then cover the cost of those accounts upfront, but if you will post some kind of proof (class photo?), I am pretty sure that community will compensate you! I will for sure vote for you with 100% vote - and I will try to convince others to do the same - please notify me then about steemit.chat if I would miss such post! :)
Would be nice with a bulk option so it wouldn't take as long for his example.
This is exactly right. We should be able to go in to a classroom type setting with 30-50 people, none of who have an account, and within 20 minutes every one of them have an account and be posting! This is how we grow. Waiting not just hours, but days for account approval will not work for mass onboarding.
Well said
Nice reply it is
It's not so hard to creat account here. On golos.io you need to send sms with code. But you know? THEY have better content on main page. Really better.
Maybe hard registration makes selection better.
actually, mike, I'm pretty sure this is coming with the next hardfork..... or something a lot closer to that. also, if you dont' mind giving up a bit of sp, it's easy enough to create accounts for your friends via vessel, by giving them 6sp, or just delegating it to them so you can take it back when they've earned a bit.
You're right, vessel lets you create new STEEM accounts, but last I heard the 'fees' were:
though correct me if I'm wrong :)
nah... it's basically free. at the moment a new account requires a minimum of 6 steem... so... for @newsteem and @newsteam it only cost me 12sp... but the sp is still mine... so it was free :D and instant :D
lol... here's what vessel tells me right now (can you check too?):
How'd it cost you 12 SP for two accounts o_O lol
More of this!
That may sound trite, but that's at the top of my list. Steemit, the company, is currently the primary contributor to the STEEM blockchain and Condensor (Steemit.com). As such, our investment in this ecosystem is (currently) tightly coupled to Steemit the company. By communicating like you are here and valuing our input and feedback, you're continuing to build trust with those who are have to trust you based on your Steem Power holdings and your active development. That's why communications like this mean so much to me and is so valuable.
Once thing I'd like to see more of in the future is clarity for the community about the role of Steemit.com (the website) and the STEEM blockchain platform with its Smart Media Token functionality. As the reward pool is spread between different communities using different tokens and different applications on the STEEM blockchain, it would be great to know where the priorities are so we can all set healthy expectations going forward. Some want Steemit.com to be a Facebook or Reddit killer but if the company vision is much bigger and involves tokenizing the entire web, then some expectations we have about Steemit as a website may be out of alignment with the direction you all are heading.
In essence, clarifying the nuanced difference between developing the STEEM platform and the specific Steemit-developed interface steemit.com could go a long way in aligning our expectations and goals as a community who wants to see this all succeed.
Amen!!
Some excellent comments already here. I'll just add a bit of my own thoughts (and seconding some great suggestions from others).
I’ve created a word cloud for the comments section of this post that I hope you will find of value and will want to share. While the creation of the actual word cloud is relatively easy and straightforward, the creation of a relevant word list that will produce a meaningful word cloud is quite another matter, as I’m sure you know, and takes considerable time and effort. Unfortunately, as of now, the post has only had 41 views. It needs a little love. Perhaps a resteem might be of help, if you think it is worthwhile, and, of course, it would be much appreciated too. TIA
https://steemit.com/steemit/@cryptographic/word-cloud-for-steemit-roadmap-2018-community-input
I'm going to go out of the box, way out of the box, and suggest an orthogonal technology:
We really need some sort of "web of trust" system which will give individual users more control over what they view and what they interact with on Steemit.
As an example:
I find someone that is a very good curator. I follow them. I get their content in the content that they think is good, and everything is aces.
I find someone who consistently produces absolute garbage. Maybe they're a bot. Maybe they're completely insane. Maybe our tastes are simply deeply divergent. I want to see less of them – but I don't have any way to tell the system that as far as I'm concerned they should be less often in a stream that I'm exposed to.
In a web of trust system I would invest some "trust" into the first person which would automatically distribute some amount of trust into the people that they trust, with the assumption that I consider their judgment good. I would invest some "distrust" or negative trust into the second person, and from my perspective that person and all of their trusted people would become less prevalent in my stream; they would evaluate as "less valuable."
And for the people who both of my targets share in common? They would be adjusted by the relative strength of trust/distrust moving through the network out away from me.
This would result in an orthogonal sorting mechanism, informed by chronology (because many people may have very similar trust levels from my perspective), but with content that I am most likely to want to see at the top and content that I am very unlikely to want to see at the bottom.
If I find a bot who keeps getting into my stream? Distrust it. It and all of the content that it touches becomes less valuable. I see less of it, naturally. People who trust me, because of the quality of my posts, or comments, or just good curation, likewise see less of it – because I distrusted it.
A good web of trust system would go hand-in-hand with the 2017 roadmap's increased focus on subset community building, because I don't necessarily trust everyone equally on every subject. That, however, is something that can be put in place after the basic handling of trust comes into being.
Maybe this is best handled as some other form of token currency which doesn't touch Steem, I leave that to others who have more experience with the block chain that myself. (I'm an old-school symbolic AI and computation guy, myself.)
This would solve a lot of problems that we are seeing with bots, spam, and pollution of the streams in general. It certainly something worth taking a look at.
web of trust is basically recomentation system. It could be done on frontend-side.
I'm not sure it's accurate to say that it's a recommendation system. It can function as a recommendation system in part but it's more accurate to say that it's exactly what it says on the tin: "a system which manages quanta of trust."
Trust can mean a lot of things. Trust can mean that a user is considered "a good part of the community." Trust can mean that a source provides content which is in line with with expectation. Trust can mean exactly what it does in common parlance, that you extend a level of predictive expectation to another entity.
It's certainly possible to get into various types of trust which all function simultaneously, but at this point Steemit really needs some sort of lensing system, some way to slice through the piles of content which get dumped on it every day in ways that are meaningful to individual users.
I'm not one of those people that sees a blockchain and thinks I have a hammer and every problem is a nail. I'm actually pretty sure that any sort of web of trust system would have to be built on another type of data store, and that could certainly be built into an entirely different platform front end.
But that wouldn't improve Steemit. And that would be a shame.
Well, i see.
As an analyst once I created a content-rating on a classified selling site. it was a hell of a task, I spend 9 months to did that. At it was a simple target function - a score of selling an item and getting revenue to a company. With tons of information in hands.
I'm not sure if we need to put that many resources there.
But someone could experiment with steemit sidechain attaching a content score to each content and each author.
That's a lot more complicated problem then we even need to think about in this context.
Essentially a web of trust is a sparse relationship matrix. You don't adjust trust to all entities, just those you want to. The results provide an ordering of the content but don't change the content. If there's any innovation required for the process, and given that we were doing this 10 years ago with a lot less resources at hand, it's in resolving the matrix for an individual view.
The big hook is that we need to stop trying to think of things from a global perspective because all that does is encourage trying to "game the system" from the top down. Effectively. That's why we see the undesirable whale and bot behavior that we do. It's incentivized because there is a global view.
My feeling is that a blockchain of any sort is the wrong technology to bring to bear on this. If I'm honest, I have to admit that I'm not really sold on a cryptocoin being a really effective way to reward creators and curators, but since that's the underlying premise that we except when we deliberately engage with Steemit – there you go.
I will say this: somebody needs to put the resources into doing this well and doing it soon, if not Steemit then Busy or someone else who really wants to be a successful social media platform first so that they can reward creators and curators secondly, because if there is no successful social media platform integrated, there's no rewards to hand out. If no one uses the system, nobody gets paid.
This is at least one reasonable approach.
This is high on my list, actually. Communities are the “gateway drug” infrastructure to the grand plan of letting anyone moderate the whole site, and letting anyone subscribe to anyone else’s moderation feeds.
I feel like Communities are actually even bigger than the "gateway drug" infrastructure; they are the one thing that lets discovery happen organically and naturally as long as they're coupled with a decent search engine. They channelize discussion, keeping like things associated, making it easier to find things that are interested in and ultimately keep users engaged with the community much longer than any of the other alternatives.
It's one of the things that Google+ has done better than anyone else and one of the reasons that Facebook Pages are one of the only things that Facebook has got right.
"Moderation" might not be the right mindset to bring to driving social network engagement. Moderation implies a deliberate squelching of other people's content – legitimately so. But we know that people feel better about engaging with a system that promotes things that they like more than they enjoy engaging with a system that demotes things that they're not interested in at that moment.
In that sense, one of the strongest words and ideas associated with Steemit right now is "curation." Curation implies that you are helping other people find good stuff. People want to help other people. Let people help each other by working alongside the system to classify things for better discovery and you'll get better, longer term user engagement.
(Anyone that hasn't poked around it Google+ long enough to get past the media narrative that it is a "failed social network" needs to invest that time. Seriously, the Community interface and management system is top-notch. It's the best part about the entire system. Users can create their own Communities, manage and moderate those Communities, and take personal responsibility for the results. Google gets the vast benefit of channelize and content that is inherently self similar. Total win.)
I think returning to 50/50 payout needs to be discussed. It would take away some of the incentive for whales to sell their votes and increase incentive for everyone to vote and interact more. Currently steemit is only attractive to content creators, very few people are here just to consume content. I think for steemit to be a long term success we need to encourage more of these users, but they get bored when their vote is worth nothing and they get minuscule curation rewards. Returning to 50/50 rewards would make the platform more exciting for content consumers, not just content creators. Anything we can do to encourage more inderaction would be beneficial. A lot of newbs just think this site is for bots interacting with each other. Some things can be improved with a hardfork, but others things just depend on the actions of the whales. Those with a lot of SP have a lot of influence on the way the public perceives steemit. They could make or break the platform. I just hope they can see that.
Another thing that's always bugged me is that when you re steem a post it stays on your blog. I would resteem a lot more if it didn't clog up my feed and push my post farther down where they are less likely to get upvoted if someone visits my page.
I'm happy to hear the registration process is being looked at. Thanks for the update, looking forward to 2018!
Thank you for asking us!
I would like to have the option to only show posts in my feed in languages that I understand.
I would like to be able to share my payouts directly with others, especially with charities here on Steemit. I would like this option to work also on the comments, not only on the articles.
I would like posts to earn forever, even though payouts could be done every 7 days.
I would like to be able to message people privately directly on the site (without Steemit.chat)
I would like to be able to run a report of my earnings, withdrawals etc and export it to excel
I would like to be able to just type away like in Word or Wordpress, because most of my time in Steemit is spent on formatting (and I'd love to be able to put an empty line after a headline :))
I would like to be able to see who resteemed my posts so I can say thank you.
I would like a wordpress plugin that will look and feel like it's part of my own blog, so I can stop double posting and simply integrate my Steemit blog in my website. And I want to be able to select which posts should appear there and which not.
Thank you 😊
Anja
UI improvements.
Or possibly the ability to skin the site. Although that is a much bigger project, and UI improvements are likely needed before something like that could likely be done.
As a new user, I've noticed a lot of little annoying things about the site UI. For one, the upvote button is way too small. Perhaps that was an attempt to limit the number of people pushing it? I have to move my mouse very carefully to hover over it, and then press it.
The resteem button is also pretty small, but I use that far less.
I also haven't figured out how to reverse a resteem yet. Sometimes after resteeming something you decide it wasn't worth it, as it clutters up your feed.
I also think certain pages should have their own dedicated button on the top, like your feed and replies. You shouldn't have to click into the drop down menu to access these.
On a side note, as a new user, I had no problem with the sign up. It was quick and easy. Edit: Well, the approval process was slow, but I assumed that was due to manual approval. If not, and that's what you meant, then I understand.
I'll chuck into the mix my idea that I call "reverse curation". The impetus for the idea is the frankly bizarre concept that a post only has value for 7 days after it is posted. The reverse curation idea would offer a way for posts that remain popular after 7 days to still receive some rewards. It would particularly benefit the case where a post by a minnow earns nothing and is viewed by no one in its first 7 days, but then goes viral say 3 months later. In these cases the original post essentially 'curated' all that value being earned in the comments section.
How it would work:
After the 7 day reward window has closed on top-level posts, 25% (or whatever was appropriate) of author rewards on comments facilitated by the original post goes to the original author. Without doing the maths, I'd assume the 'reverse curation' system would have to be limited to top-level posts, as applying it all the way down the comment chain would quickly see more nested comments earning zero rewards for their authors.
And just to add to other voices here... something needs to be done about the vote-rings and comment spamming, and possibly SP delegation. If the latter was tackled, it would require some loose guilds of whales to step into the gap and directly fund worthwhile projects on the blockchain by directly upvoting their output.
Hi, follows few inputs (there are 2 posts from the last month) :
I have a minor issue with moderators because it can create yet another lordship, but if anyone can create groups and share them it is not an issue.
I'm a plebe in the Steemit community, just signed up last week. From my reading of posts, guess that makes me a Steemian.
Here's my two cents; or should that be Steem, or Steem Power (still learning).
Laser focus on what I think should be the critical path of the roadmap is the release of the mobile app. This will allow for increased utilization and posting. Video blogs should increase; watch out youtube.
Interesting points!
https://steemit.com/superpower-upvote/@fyrstikken/2roxwb-would-it-be-cool-to-vote-with-28-000-superpowers-on-steem-or-golos-powered-front-end-from-time-to-time-with-me
One simple change that would make the life of a lot of developers on Steem a lot easier:
Add an app property to every post and make it part of the API
It is really hard for apps on Steem to separate the posts from other apps. Some apps maybe don't won't to display posts from other apps or they don't want that they show up on Steemit.
Tags alone are not enough. Every user can set that tag on Steemit. There has to be another property for apps. Every app already sets an app property in the metadata of every post. Make it part of the post, make it mandatory and make it part of the API.
Another important thing in my opinion is:
Focus your API for Steem apps and not only for Steemit
Almost all API calls are for features on Steemit. The API has to be more general. There are a lot of queries that are important for other apps on Steem that aren't possible at the moment.
And the most important thing:
Document your API
I wouldn't call that documentation what you are showing on https://developers.steem.io/. That are just all possible function calls, nothing else. There is no parameter description at all. There is no documentation how to calculate voting power, Steem Power and a lot of other things that Steem app developers need.
It is really hard to get started as a developer, because of the lack in documentation.
The only real documentation is the source code or user guides.
Appbase has many API improvements. One of them is a new database_api that is de-coupled from Condenser (steemit.com). It allows for paginated query of all database objects by all orderings the blockchain uses.
It may not be all of the information you need, but it is substantially more than what is currently available.
I would see :
My suggestion, implement the back end tools necessary for Bitconnect style referral programs for SMTs.
References
#roadmap2018
Yeees! +1 for the first recommandation.
The mobile app is a great idea! Steemit would become addictive
i agree!
+1
Replying to 3. (Fuck) no it doesn’t make sense. I’ll make some videos showing how pointless that tech would be next to Steem. Read the SMT Whitepaper on the technological drawbacks and dangerous pitfalls of open programmability - though there are
certainly more I haven’t described yet.
@ned thanks for the direct reply. I was thinking in terms of scalability and speed. I want Steemit to be able to handle as much traffic as Facebook and Reddit and EOS may be a way to achieve that (I get that there are other options to scale Steemit, so maybe I should have reworded #3 to explore areas to scale Steemit further). Still look forward to the videos for education purposes.
On SMTs, can you help us understand the timeframe for demo-ing an SMT ICO? I'd like to see it in action and how easy it will be to integrate into established websites.
Hi @ned, I have been trying my best to draw attention to the issue of "Upvote Services" and how they are upending the entire sorting algorithm here on Steemit.
It may not be too apparent to the larger players here on Steemit, but as a young Steemian, I felt the full effects of the issue.
I have written 2 in-depth posts, diagnosing the issue and another on utopian.io for a proposed solution to the issue. If you have the time, please give it a read as I am putting in a great effort to see something come of it, as it truly is affecting minnows massively and I sincerely believe the proposed solution is a massively positive impact upon Steemit. You can find them here:
Growing Unhappiness with Upvote Bots on Steemit
Proposal for New 'Promoted' Function
Thank you.
What about the permissions system? Ability to define custom permissions and give them to people seems fundamental. Right now we have all kinds of tools (G Suite, project management platforms like Trello and Slack, content platforms like Youtube, literally thousands of websites) and each has their own user system and their own permission levels that you assign to users. As I understand it, one of the promises of EOS is to be able to have one blockchain that all such websites can connect with. All users are on the blockchain. You just define your custom permissions (e.g. ability to post to a certain Slack channel, ability to upload videos, etc.) and assign them to users of your choosing.
This would not only simplify the burden of managing users and logins across many different websites, but it would allow for shared ownership of the data. It seems to me that it's a technological foundation that can help enable a different kind of society.
Do SMTs have anything like that?
The customizable permissions functionality was conceived and designed by Steem’s very own, Michael @Vandeberg, so you can expect it to be done best in Steem. Any other platform employing it is copying.
Sounds intriguing! Thanks for answering, and I'll definitely be more closely following the developments on that functionality.
If issues like what I am about to post are not fixed/taken care of then, all the raodmaps, all the dreams of SMT's are going to fall by the wayside. Please do something about this person who thinks they can dictate who and how much they are allowed to earn on steemit.If they can do this with steem they can do the same damn thing to people earning SMt's or using them. Here is the problem:
I hope you are able to read this @ned - - - Something seriously needs to be done. - - - Please read this post https://steemit.com/steemit/@michelle.gent/i-writer
Here was my comment to her "That totally sucks. I as you know, really appreciated being able to read your stories. It is what I enjoy doing, reading, then to have as ass wipe drive you away, I am more than slightly pissed off. And here is the problem child:
Can I as a new user do anything about this, other than to inform you of the problem, he has 495,379.986 STEEM (-130,561.023 STEEM), my downvote to him would not even be noticed.
subcommunities! #roadmap2018
Top of the list should definitely be:
Then on down the road, SMTs will be cool, I suppose...I guess I just don't see "the light" yet for SMTs.
And if we are being honest, I believe anonymity in at least our wallets would help in many areas - people want that, and need that in this day and age. (Need reference to how many people want it? Check out Monero and Dash)
edit: upvoting for visibility
I’ve created a word cloud for the comments section of this post that I hope you will find of value and will want to share. While the creation of the actual word cloud is relatively easy and straightforward, the creation of a relevant word list that will produce a meaningful word cloud is quite another matter, as I’m sure you know, and takes considerable time and effort. Unfortunately, as of now, the post has only had 41 views. It needs a little love. Perhaps a resteem might be of help, if you think it is worthwhile, and, of course, it would be much appreciated too. TIA
https://steemit.com/steemit/@cryptographic/word-cloud-for-steemit-roadmap-2018-community-input
Implement the referral system with rewards.
Sorry for that, but I will use all my power to flag any suggestion about referral links. This would only makes Steemit looks more scamy!
Whenever I see a referral link from someone to a platform which I do not know, I am asking myself: how you want to screw me??
And final reason why Steemit should not have a referal program is... because Steemit already have one, a better one, organic, smart and self-healing - "followers".
When you do a proper introduction of Steemit to someone, one thing is almost certain. It is trivial to convince this person to follow you. This person will always remember you, because you were the person which introduce him to this great Steem ecosystem. You will get almost always votes from this person, just because of this fact.... as long as you are providing a value to the platform
unless... you will suddenly become a bad actor.
If will will do something bad for the platform, this person will have a choice to stop rewarding you. This guarantee that you will be always properly motivated to do good things.
Another reason why automated referal link is far from perfect:
because It is easy to easy to onboard 1000 a day, when you can lie to them, because you do not need to care about the truth. You can say anything about Steemit, just to push as mamy people through a registration point. With suggested by you referal system, there would be a lot of people which would not care about proper onboarding of people. And proper onboarding always takes much more time.
[edit]: unflagged
100% agree. We would end up with mass referrals of people who sign up and don't stick around. The resources wasted on this will cause more performance issues.
Maybe unpopular viewpoint but I don't think sign up process or new accounts acquisition is the right metric to target. Steem's problem is retention, people are leaving for various reasons, but downvoting, censorship, concentrated steempower and money driven undesirable behavior (like spam, scam and bots) are common arguments for leaving the platform. These issues must be adressed and quality content must be rewarded in order for Steemit to become the place everyone wants to be and to stay active.
Repeating what we said in chat ... it already exist.
And there are ways to incentivize it without it being "scamy"[sic] .
Please remove your flag @noisy.
My flag was as gentle as possible (I used only a small porion of my voting power, not even enough to make it hidden by default). I do not want to punish you as a person, but this flag helps me express my opinion how terrible idea this is.
I am open to discussion. Why my reasoning do not resonates with you? Could you help me understand with which part of my explanation you do not agree?
Does uber or coinbase look scammy to you? Because they both use referal programs.
In case of Uber no one ask questions like "from where those money came from".
That's a perception issue not a referal one.
Honestly @noisy idgaf about your opinion or ideas. I simply expressed mine broflagger.
Tuck's suggestion is a legitimate one that should be discussed. Even if you disagree, you should not flag. Let the community decide.
You know... you are right. I wrote my explanation, why I think this is a bad idea. Open discussion will be better.
I should flag your .34c away for irony. ;)
There are always different ways of referral systems that can be discussed, I am also sceptic towards it in general as of scammy shit I saw enough - if it is a one off based on certain criteria, why not? I would like it when the referral system is 8 levels deep - you get paid 10% of all your downline rewards lifetime. Sounds promising :-)
I like the idea of a referral system ,then get a % of the the referrals rewards for a certain amount of time. This would help stop people from just signing up xxxx accounts just to get paid. The people would have to be real and active in order to get any rewards
Es una mala idea, solo trae spam y mal contenido!
Make a post about all your recent referrals, make money while making money.
I need to get my 65k fake twitter followers going first!
3 weeks late to this but I'll chime in anyway.
Communities Feature. - Long overdue. There is very little sense of community on Steemit, even within niche circles.
New post types, such as polls, playlists, galleries, Q+A, etc.
Address the issue of unnatural voting. I don't know how but it needs to be addressed.
Improve the homepage to be more fun, dynamic and give minnows a helping hand. Have featured posts, editors picks, wildcards, etc.
Make Steemitblog and other "official" entities less faceless and impersonal.
I can only think of a few quickly
Resteem tab
Make the website and app parallel with each other
Groups, or communities
Sometimes my payouts don’t go through and it says the payout was 48 years ago.
The search function needs tuning.
Profiles need an “interests” area so we can find like minded people
Do you have an example of this, and can you track down what is shown on https://steemd.com/@masscollective for the particular payout? (This should not be happening.)
I don’t know the protocol with the payouts but this comment was from 9 days ago
If you login to steemit.com, you should be able to claim your rewards from your wallet.
2FA may not be necessary. The keys are strong and secure, with each one allowing a different access. It's up to the users to use them in the proper manner.
You can send encrypted memo's now by using the "#" sign at beginning of memo
which BTW are encrypted by private memo key - most people think that private memo key do nothing. Lately private memo key can be also used on SteemConnect V2, to prove that you are an owner of particular account.
Great suggestions!
You can set any password to your Steem account: https://steemit.com/security/@noisy/how-to-set-an-own-password-which-is-not-generated-by-steemit
you can have as many types of keys as you like, for example
foo_barkey: https://steemit.com/security/@noisy/public-and-private-keys-how-to-generate-all-steem-user-s-keys-from-master-password-without-a-steemit-website-being-offlineInteresting enough!
I personally really appreciate the transparancy and openness of the blockchain, confidentiality in transactions has usage, yes absolutely, but it kinda goes against the basic principals of verifiability, I think.
That's understandable, but many people would prefer to have the option to make their transactions anonymous. The same way I don't want anyone to know how much cash I have on me at any given time, I would prefer the common person (and/or government official) to not be able to go through my crypto wallet and see where and when my money was sent. To each his own! :)
It isn’t fair to make the whole network store a message forever when it is only readable or relevant to two people for a short window of time. Global public ledgers are not well suited to messaging between two people or small groups.
We have had a lot of internal discussions about all of your remaining points, too. :)
The one thing I can't believe we still don't have is a way for people to buy Steem using a credit card.
We have missed out on a lot of revenue. If FuckToken already has this enabled, and they are not even listed on Bittrex yet, I cannot fathom why Steem is not available for purchase via a credit card. Surely, we can figure this out? Let's do this....anyone with payment experience reach out to FuckToken to figure it out: https://buy.fucktoken.io/
Agree. I understand that Steemit Inc doesn't want to get into all that regulated aspect, but this is more a question of business development and partnering (which is what most of these "buy X token with credit card" services are doing). Should be gateways to the major currencies both for buying and cashing out so the types of people steem/it is trying to recruit (non-crypto users) don't have to go through crypto exchanges.
competitors are having this out of the gate. It makes no sense not to have this. Anyone with payment experience should do this ASAP.
Great content in the comments so far.
In my humble rank of 57 opinion, #1 should be marketing. Of course marketing will bring in new users, but more importantly attract new investors. New users alone will continue to lower payouts and make retention even more difficult. Retail investors are huge fans of marketing. If marketing is being displayed, then it is perceived by your garden variety investor that the project is serious about growth.
I think the community input should be a priority for 2018. I am new to steemit but I am looking forward to new functionality.
My suggestions:
1. Scalability. Need to think about sharding. Content could be sharded by tag or topic. Imagine a withness who listens and displays only a few tags and maintain a list with who listens to others. Then we could achieve horisontal scalability without sacrificing decentralization.The currency distribution is harder to scale but we all need to think this out fast. Anyway, it would be wise to think how much load could generate 1 million active users and how nodes could handle it.
2. Simplified frontend Following latest block from russian communication agency we could understand that the time to our blocking from oppresive regimes is running short. The good news is that any steemit full node has all the information about our network, posts and votes. So, theoretically any node or witness could run his or her frontend of steem. We just need to provide a tool for it.
So, simplified open frontend that could easily be installed right next to a full node is a thing we should discuss.
3. Social efforts
We should start to work for audidience growth. I see a few points of growth here, e.g.:
4. Budget
One could not underestimate the ability to earn financial support for their steem-bound efforts and servises. We should have the ability to generate and fairly distribute budgets for them. You could see this post for all the details.
5. Encourage minnows
Steemit (and other whales) could delegate part of their steem power to valuable content creators. This could be done with help of curators guilds and cost almost no human resources from teemit and whales themselves. Now, minnow has no incentive to participate after a month when he or she realise that rewards here are not for them.
Hello Team!
I am a little bit late with my recommendation and not sure if you are going to see it and like it but I will give it a try :) How about all links inside of a post to be opened in a new tab? In my opinion, external links should definitely have that option as we don't want the users to click on it and go and spend time on other websites instead of spending it here. Internal links are also tricky as I do not want the people to leave my post before the buttons in the end. I still might want to promote my other posts in it.
P.S. I am aware that you can open the links in other tabs if you want, but I believe the easiest for the users it is - the better :)
Thank you in advance for your consideration!
Cheers,
Eva
Absolutely agree with you, it's not very good where users to click on external links.
More privacy as far as steempower that a user has would be nice. People should have the option to display it or to display a certain amount
First off, I love Steem and am super excited about it. My suggestion would be to try and figure out how to get rid of all the ways that people automate stuff, use spam, and game the system to make money.
As an aside, I would like to mention that I find the conflation in this post of the Steem blockchain, which is SUPPOSED to be decentralized, and Steemit, which is a private company, quite disturbing. I wish "Team Steemit" would speak to this in some way. Ultimately, the Steem block chain is supposed to be decentralized, right? Then why does "Team Steemit" simply declare what is going to happen with it (SMTs are Coming!!)? Shouldn't the delegated witnesses and the stake holders have a say? Isn't that how a DPOS blockchain is supposed to work? Maybe I just don't understand these things. Is it just because the founders have a majority (or close) or all the Steem? I don't mean to push anoyone's buttons or make trouble, but it is a very strange elephant in the room.
Anyone (including Steemit) is able to develop changes to the Steem blockchain code. Once it is developed, it is up to the witnesses to decide whether it is adopted. Right now Steemit is largely defining the development path for the blockchain, as their developers are doing a vast majority of the development. It would be great to see more changes from community developers being proposed, developed, and accepted by the witness.
As far as SMTs, there has been a lot of conversation about them with the top level witnesses, and although there hasn’t been any official decisions made as far as whether to accept or reject the proposal, the general consensus seems to be that the idea is supported.
Thank you!!!
SMTs we, steemit, are going to bring to production candidate status, meaning we are going to develop the technology regardless of whether it's implemented in Steem, and the changes (SMTs) will either be adopted or rejected - all through Steem's governance processes.
Thanks for the clarification ned!! I really do appreciate it
Wow. The upcoming changes sound pretty dramatic and exciting! Looking forward to them.
As to prioritization, I think Steemit is really going to have to find some way to deal with the 'bot situation' here on Steemit. Doing so will deal with a lot of the other problems.
I'm not incredibly sure how to implement this, but it's clear that it's something that's going to need to happen at some point. That's my number one thing if I could just wave a magic wand, but I do understand that a solution would be complicated.
Power distribution is also pretty screwed on the platform right now, leading to a low retention rate for new users. Second thing on the list, although there's a possibility that this will naturally sort itself out with time.
A filter option to prevent things you post on other Steem dApps (dMania, Zappl, DTube) from posting onto your Steemit blog would be a life saver. Perhaps out of everything I've asked this would be the easiest to implement.
Thanks for hearing us out, and keep up the great work! I can't believe how far the Steem blockchain and Steemit have come in just a little over a year!
While this may seem/feel like a problem, it is, imo, not something that is ever going to be resolved fully. I mean, look at Facebook, they recently revealed that Messenger has well over 100k chatbots as of this year. If Zuckerburg can't change that, Steemit can't change that. lol
Socialism at it's finest - This will not solve anything, IMO. Work hard, create great content that people want/like and form communities. Taking power from certain people and then redistributing to some other people will do nothing but cause more imbalance in a different way - AKA "Same shit, different diaper."
YES! So. Much. Yes. People have been screaming for this, along with a resteem tab, for the past 18 months or more. Instead, now there is some kind of useless tab that changes how your blog posts are displayed on your page... ¯_(ツ)_/¯
did you just call that socialism? Socialism is collective ownership of the means of production.
Don't fucking insult us with your welfare capitalism
#triggered ;)
no u
The point about Facebook is thinking by analogy - i.e. Facebook couldn't do it so we can't... But Steemit has already accomplished things that Facebook couldn't in a million years dream of. However, I acknowledge that there may not be a simple solution. However, it needs to be voiced as a problem. Also, while 'hard' solutions are unlikely, you can't tell me there aren't various changes to be made that would discourage bots.
Lol. Wut? Saying that there's a clear power problem automatically makes me a socialist? Ridiculous. There's a power differential, and it's effecting user retention. These are facts. Telling new users to 'suck it up and work hard' ain't gonna fly, bro. They'll shrug their shoulders and go back to Facebook laughing. Then the few people that have Steem can trade amongst each other, because that'll be it's only use, lol. You have to make the platform appealing to new users, not tell them to adjust and put in the year of effort... Don't know what's difficult to understand there...
I know, RIGHT? This is one thing we can all agree on. They need to get right on this! Handling the resteems could be tricky. After all, what's the point of resteeming if folks are just gonna block it out? It'd be nice to have the option, but I also sort of like that folks have to think long and hard before they resteem, or risk losing followers.
It's been an arguing factor since mid 2016. The bot or no bot war has been ongoing for a while. If someone can come up with a way to fix it, great. But imo, no matter what is set in play, there will always be a way around it, and people will always find "that way". So I guess, in my eyes, it's just wasted breath to keep on about it until someone with enough computer knowledge and with a belief that it is , in fact, a large enough problem comes along and fixes it.
No, no, no. Wanting to take power from the ones who have been here the longest and redistribute it so that we all have a minimal amount of power is what makes that a socialistic outlook. haha If money weren't involved, this wouldn't be an issue....I mean, people don't stop signing up for Twitter when they see that Taylor Swift has 85.6M followers and start feeling like that can't obtain that kind of popularity - yet, if I change that to 85.6M STEEM or USD or EUROS, all hell breaks loose. None of the other big name social media sites are currently giving out money, but people keep signing up and using them...for free....Without calling for power redistribution. Maybe that only makes sense in my head. lol!
Absolutely! I uhgree!
I think having the option would be the important thing, for sure!
Btw, not attacking you - I hope you know that! The beauty in this world is that we are all allowed to have our own opinions! :D
Mm. I guess I don't have more to say on the first point. You're right about this being a discussion since time immemorial on Steemit (a whole year and a half). Ultimately, there will certainly always be some way around. I'm just saying that I think the community as a whole is going to have to eventually draw some sort of line - though you're correct in that I have no idea how that line would be drawn.
Lol. I'll admit, this was pretty funny. That being said, you'll notice that I didn't call for any redistribution.
Me: Hunh. That's funny, things are looking pretty uneven...
You: Don't you dare redistribute my shit!
I'm not saying anything should be necessarily be taken from those with a lot of Steem holdings (definitely nothing they've already earned). Just that there may need to be some tweaking of the system towards new users and minnows, again. Hell, there are probably even solutions that wouldn't require that much. Currently, new accounts start off with a small amount of delegated Steem. A community initiative/sponsor system to do this to a larger degree for new users who create excellent content would be a great solution.
On point 3 we have defintely reached agreement, haha! And yeah, man, I know you're not attacking me. We're just a couple of Steemians shootin' the shit on how to make the platform better.
Yeah, that's kinda where I am too. I can't fix it, nor do I see a way to fix it....soo...yeah. lol!
Yeah, I guess you're right, but when I read:
I heard a call for redistribution...That's typically where that convo ends up next. Haha I admit, I jumped the gun a bit. I believe that by the time Steemit is out of beta, reward distribution will be quite a bit more fair....Maybe. lol We'll see.
Yessir! Bingo. Wish more people could shout about stuff and still be friends in the end! haha
NICE
True! People also should be able to choose which feeds they want to follow, when they click follow. All, of just blogposts or everything with zappl tweets, dmania entries, etc...
That'd be really cool, too. Maybe even separate feeds for each one, though, while convenient, that might end up hurting the other platforms...
From a new user based on good (hopefully) content creation:
It would be great to be able to classify our content. For example I will post about running, finance, personal development, nutrition and more. That would be awesome if I could classify my posts for the followers but also to not get lost on my blog.
*make text editing easier.
I just started but I find it difficult to edit text policies, colors...
A lot of these suggestions have already been made, but I want to reiterate some of them:
Scammers slightly butchering the spelling of recognised steemians over in steemit.chat would be really inconvenienced by this.
(Can you imagine how bad the man-in-the-middle attacks would be if we did the same thing for transactions as we do for pm's?)
Good work for this year :)
Change the voting algorithm from full linear to anything but full linear and possibly n2.
Non linear voting algorithm incentives people not to split their vote and thus concentrate the votes on the most valuable content and people. Each of us are seeking the very most valuable information, not second best.
It also changes a lot of other dynamics which I think are beneficial to everyone. I just wanted to make sure it was still on your radars. I might expend on this subject in a future post.
This change should only be seek if it benefit the whole platform obviously.
I wrote a bit more on the subject here.
The definition of super linear is that for a given function
f(x), it is super linear if for allk, there exists a anNsuch thatf(x) > kxfor allx > N. Essentially, given any linear curve, the function surpasses it at some point.Back in HF 17, we proposed a curve that did not adhere to this definition. It was superlinear, to a point, and linear after a certain amount of time (this was done smoothly, not piece-wise). There were heated discussions over certain breakpoints of linearity. At how much SP does a vote behave on a certain part of the curve? Things of that nature. Many argued towards an overwhelming linearity to the curve. To the point where linear rewards made more sense. Yet others argued for breakpoints that caused the curve to look close to
nlog(n). Even though it was better thann^2, it wasn't fair enough. The problem we run into is that no matter what super linear curve we propose, many will argue for more fairness. The limit as fairness approaches infinity is linear.This is incredibly one-sided, including as a retrospective of HF17. Some will argue for more fairness, yes (and did), but some also argue for more resistance to abuse (and did). There are valid points on both sides, but to simply take the fairness argument, extrapolate to infinity, and implement it, is to completely disregard the arguments on the other side. On what basis?
Okay, fair enough, the platform can decide that "maximum fairness" is the right goal, but there's nothing that is a given about it, as some sort of mathematical extrapolation of agreed principles.
I agree things have changed. I was in favor of trying a linear curve reward. I tend to think any super linear would be better, up to a certain point obviously.
This is so for other people too who have been supporting trying the linear curve but now have changed their mind. I know @pfunk mentioned this in comment a couple days ago.
I've stated my perspective and reasoning pretty clearly in this comment.
I know that without the support of Steemit Inc such a change have a very low chance of happening if any at all. Making my reasoning to be known is the best I can do.
https://steemit.com/roadmap2018/@steemitblog/steemit-roadmap-2018-community-input-requested#@teamsteem/re-ned-re-teamsteem-re-steemitblog-steemit-roadmap-2018-community-input-requested-20171117t011341724z
So we sacrifice a coherent overall system and the actual social aspects of “social media” because some people complain about “unfairness?”
I hate to be the bearer of bad news then, but people who don’t earn as much as they’d like will always complain about “unfairness.” Since this platform has the money element included, those complaints are inescapable. The idea is to make the system actually work and work for the most people by a coherent set of rules/protocols, not to cater to those with absurd/mismanaged expectations and misguided “feelings.”
The largest problem with any of the previous rules was the result of the initial distribution - and I have yet to see anyone willing to address that. If this place was flawed from the beginning, as Ned suggested in another comment (below), then why pretend that any amount of code tinkering can make things “more fair?” All that happens is that a different set of problems emerge...but the origin has always been the same.
Overtime many of the root problems caused by initial over-engineering and other evils/flaws I won’t go into detail about have been mitigated, cleansed or eliminated - this place is a lot better than it was before our 19 hardforks but still it’s not perfect! It never will be and I love that. Though we will get to see lots and lots of imperfect solutions balance themselves out for the most possibly perfect combined solution through SMTs
I largely agree with @ned's points here, including that while it isn't perfect it is indeed a lot better. There's still some early over- (and especially overly-eager) engineering like the 30-minute reverse auction and lousy reputation system.
I really appreciate those precisions.
I just shared some further thoughts on the subject as a reply to Ned's comment.
I support the re-institution of a superlinear reward and I agree N2 might be unnecessarily too much with negative effects outweighing the positive ones.
I understand that it would take a majority vote by top witnesses and that it has been voted on in the past and that the sentiment might not have changed enough for this changed to be vote in at this point.
My comment was more about showing my support toward such a change.
By the way, I really enjoyed watching your presentation at SteemFest and I really enjoyed watching all the other Steeemit devs too. I already knew you guys were all very passionate about Steem and definitely hardworking but those presentation and the panel discussion and the thing I've read here and there about the team made it all the more succinct.
N2 yields a deep feeling of unfairness as well as the potential for exacerbated "problems" related to delegations and vote buying. Further on that point, N2 would, unless it kills the platform, benefit people like yourself who are frequently subject to votes that would receive greatly disproportionate rewards under N2. I'd love to hear the arguments you may have against N2 to understand there's a complete picture being presented in making the case.
Personally, like the terribly evil hyperinflation, awfully implemented trickle up rewards and other crap engineering from the onset of Steem, I hope we never see N2 again.
Is it a feeling of unfairness or is it unfair?
You haven't stated the problems explicitely so they can't be argued for or against.
Your statement doesn't prove N2 to be superior or inferior to linear.
Quadratic rewards distribution by voting competitions is an important concept — but in reality quadratic voting is much more important in systems that incorporate individuality because quadratic voting fails to be socially valuable without this individuality and other, augmentative components. This is a much larger discussion than just for STEEM — it a a discussion of the future of tokens, for general and niche communities, for identifying interesting content on the internet.
https://steemit.com/steem/@nairadaddy/good-person-token-something-big-is-coming-from-steemit-inc
I think so too. Thank you for sharing this post. It's very interesting.
If you only consider the line you quoted, then you’d be missing the critical context. Quadratic as it was in STEEM has no social value relative to linear. It will have social value with other augmentative components, such as individuality.
I understood that is wasn't the whole thing and that I don't know the solution you guys might have come up with.
Thank you @ned for the information
I want to make it clear to everyone that I have everything to lose from people seeing Steem as unfair or Steem being unfair because that would obviously undermine Steem and all of our investments.
I'm definitely in favor of a none linear reward as you seemed opened to but I entertain some level of doubt about N2.
One of my biggest argument against N2 or other none linear reward curve would be just this, maybe it's making Steem unfair.
My second biggest argument against N2 or other none linear would be that it will be perceived as unfair. This is a sure thing for a portion of Steemians and I can easily understand.
The decision to implement such a change can only be taken by the majority stakeholders and this would be large investors for the most part or those who this rule seems to favor.
If this change favors some, then it is unfair which would result in a collapsing market and the biggest losers being the biggest investors which is obviously not something anyone wants. (I tend to think it favors the platform as a whole.)
None linear rewards favor people not to split their stake and not to split their votes. (In most cases) It also create a strong incentive for people not to sell their Steem.
All of this incentivize people to empower one another more directly with votes, creating meaningful relations overtime as opposed to the current situation where people are incentivized to lease their SP as much as possible.
I support the re-institution of a superlinear reward and I agree N2 might be unnecessarily too much with negative effect outweighing the positive one.
Dan has shared very valuable insights on the subject in his post "Evil Whales", more precisely under the title "The value of Consensus" and "Curation Reward".
So this is all based off some incorrect blog posts. Got it.
First of all, I want to say I'm grateful that you took the time to reply that first and second time.
In my reply I stated my case with facts. The fundamentals of what I stated doesn't come from the post I mentioned but from what I consider facts and logic.
I'm open to being proven wrong.
In your previous comment you didn't specifically mentioned that you were against all super linear reward curve simply that you hope N2 not to be reinstated.
I don't know if you are against all super linear reward curve.
At this point, I tend to think any super linear reward curve would be better than the linear one we have and that N2 might be too much.
N^2 in STEEM is evil. Any vision of only subsets of evil inside of it, like evil whales, is a selfish, narcissistic projection.
STEEM is not linear today given the minimum payout threshold of $.02.
Superlinear less than N^2 - if it could be designed you’d see it in the SMT Whitepaper. Maybe one day you will.
Good luck
Fuck you and your “evil whales” bullshit. Your delegation has been abused almost as much as @freedom at this point.
The current system of content creators getting locked into steem power while whales dump their liquid rewards from selling upvotes and leasing delegations with no need to power down is EVIL @ned. It's a SCAM.
The 0.02 minimum threshold could be improved with essentially the identical degree of non-linearity if it were a deduction rather than a threshold (i.e. votes that add up to 0.03 pay out 0.01, not 0.03). While a small change, this would tend to discourage spam and dust voting which cause harms of their own, apart from the fairness of the reward curve.
I’ve created a word cloud for the comments section of this post that I hope you will find of value and will want to share. While the creation of the actual word cloud is relatively easy and straightforward, the creation of a relevant word list that will produce a meaningful word cloud is quite another matter, as I’m sure you know, and takes considerable time and effort. Unfortunately, as of now, the post has only had 41 views. It needs a little love. Perhaps a resteem might be of help, if you think it is worthwhile, and, of course, it would be much appreciated too. TIA
https://steemit.com/steemit/@cryptographic/word-cloud-for-steemit-roadmap-2018-community-input
I was confronted with the "Transaction Broadcast Error" when posting a comment on this thread... It made me post multiple times thinking the post had failed to publish... I was just in time to remove nearly all duplicates. Two had passed the 6 hour limit (after that, the delete button disappears). The one above, I left as is, this one, I edited into this new comment...
This "Transaction Broadcast Error", I do not know how common it is with other users, but if it is common, it should be set as a priority: I ran quite into some trouble with it, just when I started. At that time, I did remember asking myself should I continue.
I am glad I did!
There is a GitHub issue for this, and the dev team is working on it. Hopefully this should be fixed long before 2018 :)
Hi everyone. Loving, loving, loving steemit and all you do. I am about to start sharing your white paper with friends in order to demonstrate the future of what a social media platform needs to be. We are the future!
I personally would like to see a solution to down- voting. I recently down voted a post (because it simply sucked and I later provided honest and hopefully helpful feedback) but they took it personally because they appeared to be afraid it was going to affect their steemit wallet.
Maybe that is their issue and they aren't a good fit for the platform, but the issue I honestly see is being able to provide feedback without totally impacting somebody's account value.
Maybe a middle path, or other besides a simply up or down vote?
Mahalo and Aloha!
@rsbosse you don't have to vote on a post to get someone's attention. You can reply to the post to provide feedback and specifically say that is the reason you are not voting for the post and others shouldn't as well.
I understand. For sure. Thank you. I guess it leaves me asking the question though if you see folks coming on the platform and purposely trying to infiltrate it with political content or controversial politics? For example, if someone comes on here with white nationalist content, or even blatant KKK stuff, am I supposed to simply comment or is it wiser to down vote?
acting like youtube and putting posts that are similar on the side could help smaller authors, make it easier to read posts for long periods of time in one subject area, and to actually make promotion useful.
I'd like to see more robust markup tools (picture and text boxes) . Maybe throw in a few different fonts.
How about a few more options on the upvote slider (like a few standard buttons 10,25,50,75, 100% in addition to the slider).