Burn post for December 15. Rules and update
To provide additional support, vote for the @burnpost comment(s) below.
To view proof of burn, visit https://steemd.com/@burnpost
Steem experiment: Burn post #521
5 years ago in #steem by burnpost (82)
$61.75
- Past Payouts $61.75
- - Author $35.38
- - Curators & beneficiaries $26.37
- > null: $30.88
335 votes
- smooth: $10.23
- smartsteem: $7.48
- steemed-proxy: $5.17
- gtg: $4.70
- therealwolf: $4.46
- likwid: $4.00
- tombstone: $3.89
- superhardness: $2.64
- michealb: $2.28
- tufkat: $1.36
- twinner: $0.86
- nrg: $0.80
- sj-jeong: $0.80
- geoffrey: $0.80
- jarunik: $0.69
- jaydih: $0.67
- talkative-bk: $0.64
- demotruk: $0.63
- spectrumecons: $0.60
- bue: $0.54
- and 315 more
Rewards from this comment #4 will be added to the post rewards for burning
Rewards from this comment #1 will be added to the post rewards for burning
Rewards from this comment #3 will be added to the post rewards for burning
Rewards from this comment #2 will be added to the post rewards for burning
top 2 trending posts are burn posts. This is terrible for people to see if they are looking at STEEM to join or invest, All we need is a few more Mr. Potato Head posts in the next few trending slots and we'll really be in trouble.
Personally I would rather invest in something with lower inflation (i.e. rewards being burned). I see burnposts (and arguably potato posts) being popular, compared to how rewards have been distributed previously, as positive for Steem as an investment.
I agree it isn't great as an advertisement of content. We probably need a better, perhaps manually curated, landing page, with something like the Trending repurposed as a leaderboard-type page.
Alternately (and really the best possible outcome), posters could step up their game and create more highly-compelling, high value posts which draw more votes than burnpost/potato. We have a few of those but we really need a lot more if we want Steem to succeed on the basis of content.
Maybe some of the orcas who can guarantee to get big votes could burn more rewards. Making a little less on some posts would not really harm them. I am trying to get more powered up so I can do more good, but I don't make that much. I do agree with @epic-fail that all these posts on trending is not ideal, but given the lack of visibility Steem has it may not be the end of the world. Just need some quality posts above them. There's plenty of good stuff that makes peanuts.
mr. smooth , on the next hardfork why can't the burn be automatically be built into the rewards payout. What I mean is there is currently the choice to recieve 100% STEEMpower or 50% SBD / 50% STEEMpower. Why not change the options to receive 95% STEEMpower (or another percentage) and 5% automatically gets burned. This would apply to every post therefore reducing or eliminating the need for burn posts. I really have no idea how the SBD peg works or why it's broken but perhaps there could be a way to also distribute the SBD reward option to be Mr. Potatofied aka sent to the internal market and changed to STEEM etc. Can't these 2 activities be built right in and automated directly into every post payout? If anyone does not like the rewards burn they are not forced to post here and there are bills to pay. I'd rather that option than see burn posts and a bunch of Mr. potato heads on trending. These votes should all be going to new members , minnows and consistent quality content posters. These current actions are artificial and are just band aids on a much bigger problem. In addition the optics of these posts cluttering the trending page is not pretty. We need more organic interaction or this is all being done in vein.
Anyone can do this now using the beneficiaries feature.
For example, @steemitblog makes their posts with 50% going to burn (@null) and 50% going to SPS funding (@steem.dao). I'm sure they get more votes as a result (I know I vote for their posts and wouldn't otherwise).
There is no reason other people can't make better, more appealing burn posts than mine or potato. I'd even vote for them.
Some posters try to have their cake and eat it too by sending a tiny amount (say 3% or 5%) to @null while keeping most of the rewards, but that doesn't really work as it isn't enough.
yes, I see you can Manually set those rewards to the beneficiaries but my thoughts are to make that automatic by default. So every person posting will have an agreed upon % of rewards sent to "null". We are currently discussing creating more "compelling" burn posts. I appreciate you discussing this and I have a better understanding of the situation and reasoning behind these posts.I'm hoping for a recovery of the economics. Perhaps the SMT's and communities will arrive just in time to turn this around.
Sure, there is definitely a lot of richness missing from the user experience, including ability to have defaults on things like beneficiaries. Hopefully over time that can be improved.
It is pathetic.
Hey what are you doing? If you have so many then give it to me :( I need them
This isn't about what anyone has. It is about the distribution of new rewards being voted for one purpose (in this case burning) vs another (distributing, which increases inflation and selling pressure).
Hallo... please follow me
Congratulations @burnpost!
Your post was mentioned in the Steem Hit Parade in the following category:
Thanks for the post.