@smooth's initiative to do his burn post experiment got me thinking of changing the option to decline rewards.
Instead of redistributing rewards that are declined, the rewards should be automatically burned by sending them to the @null account.
I see a number of benefits to this.
If one chooses to burn the rewards he or she receives for a post, for any number of reasons, being able to burn them automatically would remove the annoying hassle of having to power down the equivalent amount of SP just to burn it.
Accounts that regularly do posts that decline rewards, such as @steemitblog, would benefit the entire economy simply by posting. They wouldn't have to change anything in the way they act, but their posting would be far more valuable for every stakeholder.
It's a consensus among the community that the Promoted feature, while well-intentioned, does not work properly, and could be improved upon. My suggestion is replacing the Promoted tab with a Burned tab, indicating posts that have chosen to burn rewards. This could work as a way for smaller users, or anyone who wants more visibility, to get eyeballs on their work, since large stakeholders could focus on voting for posts that get their rewards burned. It would have a similar effect of incentivizing burning, but would probably work better than the current Promoted feature. Have photography share, but lack the following to gain any noteworthy traction? Choose the Burn Rewards option, and perhaps a whale or two choose to upvote, gaining you a slot on the Trending Page as well as new followers.
The above could work as a way to freshen up the Trending Page as a whole. It's well documented that, barring a few, the whales on Steemit don't care about the content, the platform, or anything else other than their curation rewards. And there's very little that can be done to change that. Now, it goes without saying that the added value created by a portion of the daily rewards being burned is not the same as the curation rewards that are being made by masturbating the same trending authors who post the same terrible articles day in and day out, but @smooth's experiment seems to have shown that there are significant stakeholders willing to upvote posts by authors who have chosen to burn the rewards. The incentive would still be there, however, to reduce the money supply, which would, in turn, benefit the stakeholder since his or her existing stake would instantly be that much more valuable.
An automatic system would remove the issue with trust that currently exists when people promise to burn the rewards of a post.
I, therefore, argue that burning rewards is a much better way of declining payout than the existing system, which merely redistributes the rewards among other posts.
Choosing to burn the rewards could also work as a way to gain goodwill among the community since people burning their rewards should be considered the heroes of the Steemit community, benefitting the entire economy.
I would personally see myself using that option somewhat regularly. Currently, it's a hassle when you need to power down a certain amount of SP just to burn it, which is a problem, especially for us lazy people.
To lead by example, the rewards for this post will be burned. So upvote if you agree.
Disagree in the comments if you do.
I completely agree, but maybe "Burn reward" should just be an option next to Decline Reward, It's already like that on https://condenser.steemliberator.com/submit.html
The reason Smooth is currently not using @null as beneficiary is that SBD are much higher so the actual amount of reward burned is much less as beneficiaries only receive SP, no SBD.
This could be changed in a future hardfork and was apparently just designed that way for coding convenience.
I would see the burn tab as the best way to discuss serious Steem issues and Important information. Much less greed and corruption and more content that matters.
Kindly tell me which one is more suitable 50%/50% or full power.as i am new comer so i am confiused
https://steemit.com/steemit/@geekorner/why-you-should-pick-the-50-50-reward-split-50-50
Im still new to this platform but i never understood why would anyone decline anything just pay it forward to some other cause. You shouldnt decline payment here since not all people here are the same or have same vision for the platform so when you say benefit whole platform you know that includes all those cunts that just want to manipulate system and cash out right ? So for example when all that shit happened with logan paul, youtubers were united more than ever. I kinda liked poor guys misery because all those years and people didnt see him for who he really was, and 1 bad shit later and you are dead for life. But thats not my point, my point is i started looking at other videos and how they handled the situation and lots of people were talking about not monetizing on their content. Well that the thing most of those people were wrong (atleast in my opinion) you dont stop monetizing then. At that point you monetize more and try to draw people away from those kind of toxic persons take that monetized money and find a way to get more good out of it than the bad that it was created in the first place. They could donate money to some suicide line or something send it to some charity or whatever they think is right but dont monetize its your job. And there is nothing wrong with that its not like you are a warmonger, you are just other side of the spectrum.
To that point this isnt content based platform, its more like money war platform where you need to outbid people to be seen more, and there is no organic growth potential. You cant even get to the content here because you cant even see it most of content is some sort of internal politics its like they are already dividing all the money they plan to spend in next 100 years, but in reality the ship has many leaks and is sinking. If the real vision for this platform it to be content driven they could learn lots of things from other platforms dont even need to use their brains that much can just copy most of it. Thats why i keep saying that technology wise this kind of platform will be the future but i doubt steemit will be it.
The ugly thing about this platform is money, so if its about content then good authors should be respected most of all but even if you are good author you will have hard time being seen here. I think people on top have no vision, if they do they clearly have no experience in content based platforms or content creation.
Straight resteem! I supported @smooth when he declared his intentions and your suggested upgrade to the system makes so much sense...It makes SO MUCH SENSE that it instantly feels weird that this is not yet a part of the algortihm...
Thanks for the resteem! Let's hope this idea gets visibility, and at least consideration.
I like this idea and also suggest when we're using promotion methods like promotion bots, those votes should be detected and burned as well since we shouldn't be lured into voting for advertisements and paid programming. People can still promote by spending more to buy a higher slot and the abuse that seems to be tied in with these so called promotion bots would come to a grinding halt. Profits should not come from the promotion. The promotion is there to get eyes on the product(or blog in this case). This would make advertising beneficial to all members if the rewards were burned when a post is a promotion and not your typical blog post.
From my understanding, it would essentially do the same thing. When you burn steem, it will simply be re-printed in upcoming reward periods because the rate of inflation is already set. In other words, by the end of the year there will be the same amount of steem whether some is burned or not. Every time steem is burned, the amount of steem created per day goes up slightly to keep the inflation rate the same.
I don't know for sure but I think that declining rewards goes back immediately to today's reward pool to be split between everyone else while burning would just go be reprinted over time thereby giving the witnesses and stakeholders a percentage of the new steem.
Hopefully that makes sense. Upvoted for visability.
Actually, no. This is not the case. When you burn STEEM, it's gone.
I'm not too clear on how the system works, but redistributing declined payouts to other posts seems a much better use of resources than burning, which is essentially a redistribution to all account holders. Posters are creating the value that steemit has, not account holders. There are many inactive accounts on steemit. Why should they benefit from declined payouts?
One could argue that a completely inactive account is less harmful to the community than a blogger since the majority of bloggers simply dump their rewards, which hurts everyone.
I do like the burned tab idea. That sits better with me on a personal level than the promoted tab. But, I'm somewhat abnormal. I just find things like self-promotion gross.
oh, to be in a position to burn rewards !
..... I can dream....😂😂
right? lol
This actually makes a lot of sense! I really like the idea that by burning a post you can gain visibility and followers; Deny immediate reward but potentially gain more in the future from new followers. Works exactly for small authors who don't lose much anyway if all they got from a quality post is few cents. That would also be an option for upvoting bots. Although not seeing the burning mechanism replacing them (especially for wealthy Steemians) it would at least be an alternative, much more "organic" way of gaining visibility, if that makes sense.
Either way would work if you're trying to benefit the community. The ways in which they provide the benefit are different.
Burning the rewards decreases the supply of Steem in circulation, so it increases the value of each existing Steem token since there are now fewer in existence, so they are rarer.
Declining Payout doesn't accept any reward, it just distributes to other posts during that payout period. Therefore, it benefits those who are actively posting. It wouldn't provide a boost for those who have already been paid out, but would provide a greater relative reward to the posts still pending.
Again, if you're wanting to benefit the community, either option is great. They just do different things.
Thanks for the discussion!
I like it, but I will post in the comments anyway.
Interesting post and the content is good. Thanks.
You have a nice day .and good post.upvoted to you @schattenjaeger
Good idea or not, at the very least this type of discussion helps steemit as a whole ;)
I find it interesting that you are selling the idea of burning rewards - and your argument is so that a new user will gain the attention of a whale or two.. Or gain more followers...
So, burn rewards now, in the hopes of gaining more rewards at a later date..
Wouldn't it make more sense to keep building your SteemPower all along in order to have an account with more influence? The more SteemPower in your account, the easier it is to attract a following...
Why do you think SP attracts following? Imo good content does. If you have good content you need to get it somehow to the people - thus you need increased visibility. How does SP help with that? Unless you upvote yourself to the trending page, which would require a lot of SP.
I think it's pretty likely that both SP & Good Content attract a following. They both make a splash, and they're both hard to ignore. If someone creates / crafts / writes something really inspiring and gets a strong dialogue building -- they garner a lot of attention. The same can be said for someone with a lot of SP or some kind of 'celebrity' type status.
EDIT : now that I think about it for another minute, I had initially considered that what brought me to comment here was more related to Sp. However, I suppose it could be said that what actually brought me here, was that I noticed you had voted on a couple of my climbing related posts, so maybe that speaks more to your point than I thought.
Now I'm just confusing myself.
Look at how many followers the whale accounts have - even those accounts that do not post content have a large following.
It is human nature, people want to follow successful accounts. Rep score is one indicator of success, but SP is a far greater one.
Imo SP is not a good indicator of success, because only a few whales gained their SP through posting (I know just one, but I am not following whales very closely).
Did you earn the money I just allocated to you? Does it matter?
Who cares how someone gained their SP?
I understood successful accounts as successful steemian. In this sense it matters where and how you gained the SP.
If you meant successful in general, thank ok - people have different views on what success is. SP can be one of them.
Wow... I bet a lot of people want to become one of your friends... lol... You must be under so much pressure from people on Steemit... How do you handle the Pressure...??? Since you didn't comment, this is my way of thanking you for the up-vote you left me on my Latest Post...... I do like comments...
COIN MAN by @pocketechange A Penny may cost a Dollar...
Excelente, gracias por compartir esto, no era para mi pero me sirve de algo.
I use 100% upvotes on people's content, and I also will often do the same with the first few thoughtful comments on my content. People who receive a couple of $$ for a comment quite often follow you - and so do others in the comment thread - hoping to get that attention..
I think when you have a bigger vote, people are more interested in you... consciously or not. having more sp and "influence" gets you more attention... how it works is somewhat intangible, but I think it's real.
As a writer (without much SP) I would like to agree with you, @hr1, that good content is what attracts people (I've gained over 400 followers in over 2 months, here).
As with everything in life, some days are better than others, but I'd like to think that if one continues to put out quality work, over time, folks will notice and appreciate it.
Cheers, Yahia (Egyptian poet/thinker, and author of 7 books, to date)
good post and I'm glad to see your post. how are you there, please visit my post and do not forget to give upvote.
https://steemit.com/dlive/@dtubesteem/42682c00-fc61-11e7-b9d9-d5a448c39831
Might be better for long term value, I guess. It is hard to predict the effects. For mid to long term it would increase the incentive to HODL, as it moves effectively to Proof of Stake. This seems to be a trend in crypto. Interesting times ahead!
I agree it would be a great feature. Although, I would keep both - decline and burn.
This is actually pretty interesting.
I think that this recommendation is worthy of thought... though I'm not sure of where I stand about it. So I see merit, and I see it would help the price of steem as well.
Good idea you had there.
Cheers
How will we know after 7days the reward will be burn. Isn't it a trick to just get upvotes for your account?
Will you do a post showing us that you burn it or.. I am confused...
I will either make a post or show proof here in the comments.
Great success
@timcliff what is your upvote worth?
I would like to write a Blog about the most valuable Steemians !
Good post..
We is this also beneficial for young minnows like me ? How can we help process if our votes count for like 0.01 ?
I m new and ur work is so great
Wow... I read through and m just speechless. Wow
This is a great idea, solves multiple problems at once. But I also agree with @transisto about making it an option an not a complete replacement.
The post job is amazing, it's a great job, it's burning ... I like friends