You are viewing a single comment's thread from:

RE: Locking stake for 100% passive income, improving content, helping apps

in #steem6 years ago

"also put scarcity on the markets" I don't know if that is going to be true. The overall inflation will be the same regardless of who it goes to. I don't think it is valid to assume that passive investors won't cash out what they earn, which would put the same downward pressure on the market as if a content creator or curator did the same.

While they might not be getting rewarded in Steem, they can be rewarded in SMTs that are powered by that Steem.

If we are bringing SMTs into the picture, why not just eliminate STEEM rewards altogether? @clayop has brought up a proposal along these lines. It is an interesting idea.

Sort:  

same downward pressure on the market as if a content creator or curator did the same

I would tend to agree. Inflation is inflation with much the same effect unless it is actually and effectively directed to pay for activities which add value to Steem. Very little current author and curator rewards fall into this category (it would be nice to try to improve that, but unless we do I think you are right).

why not just eliminate STEEM rewards altogether?

That would be my preference. My proposal on this was to airdrop a STEEMIT (or some other name) SMT onto all STEEM/SP holders and the latter would take over the rewarding function. Everyone can then hold or buy/sell the token or combination of tokens that they desire: the native/core low-inflation bandwidth and governance token (STEEM) or the inflationary rewards token (STEEMIT).

I’m in favor of that proposal.