Good idea, please go ahead and let us know what the url of that service is ;-)
If you can also deal with signup abuse, I could help with claiming accounts.
I actually propose that we split accounts into two kinds: 1. On-chain accounts, 2. Off-chain accounts.
This works for Minds.com, which I believe is kicking our asses right now. At least, they are getting Youtube idols like Tim Pool...
Some things are just changes to condenser rather than the blockchain. Follows, resteems don't really need to cost RCs, and we could have off-chain comments that can't experience financial rewards.
This would allow the wider traffic to engage but still not be fully involved. Its like window shopping, and many people might jump on board eventually that would have been scared away by financial investment requirements.
It is kind of like how Medium does things. There is public Medium content and then the content that requires you to be a paying member to access. After seeing others get $0.08 all the time for just saying "your content is awesome!" maybe others will be willing to cough up some dough for a little STEEM.
Sign-up via FB, yahoo, google...
Abuse is checked by a simple parameter - when those accounts were created. @irelandscape / @stemq made such log-in last year
Don't worry about the abuse, there are no people willing to join :D
They also have no reason to abuse the system with multiple accounts, because economically it gives them no advantage.
Indeed it's simple:
those who want to comment once, @guest_Something_Something, public posting key, let them interact with the platform for free (no fee, no rewards, just a normal, boring internet)
those who want to sign-up can do it with the existing accounts, just like on every other serious platform
Let them join. Once they are hooked, think about the details.
2FA, private keys, how it works, they will learn in a month.
It's wrong to scare them off even before they join
Good idea, please go ahead and let us know what the url of that service is ;-)
If you can also deal with signup abuse, I could help with claiming accounts.
Spoiler alert: it's not that easy
(how would you handle resource consumption?)
I actually propose that we split accounts into two kinds: 1. On-chain accounts, 2. Off-chain accounts.
This works for Minds.com, which I believe is kicking our asses right now. At least, they are getting Youtube idols like Tim Pool...
Some things are just changes to condenser rather than the blockchain. Follows, resteems don't really need to cost RCs, and we could have off-chain comments that can't experience financial rewards.
This would allow the wider traffic to engage but still not be fully involved. Its like window shopping, and many people might jump on board eventually that would have been scared away by financial investment requirements.
It is kind of like how Medium does things. There is public Medium content and then the content that requires you to be a paying member to access. After seeing others get $0.08 all the time for just saying "your content is awesome!" maybe others will be willing to cough up some dough for a little STEEM.
Sign-up via FB, yahoo, google...
Abuse is checked by a simple parameter - when those accounts were created. @irelandscape / @stemq made such log-in last year
Don't worry about the abuse, there are no people willing to join :D
They also have no reason to abuse the system with multiple accounts, because economically it gives them no advantage.
Indeed it's simple:
Let them join. Once they are hooked, think about the details.
2FA, private keys, how it works, they will learn in a month.
It's wrong to scare them off even before they join
its called https://steeminvite.com and @ned using @steem and @steemit RC mana he can create 5 million accounts a year but you must not have known that?