We are not against Gambling, Businesses, Crowdfunding etc...
But quite frankly, these voting-games, and third party voting-projects where people send in their active or posting-keys corrupts quickly, and defile the purpose of what the reward-pool should be used for.
Risk your own money and Win or Lose is the only right thing to do
So to facilitate Gambling on Steemit, I propose we put a ban on voting-games by forcing them to decline payout and force people who want to gamble with Steem or SteemDollars do so with money from their own wallet instead of draining large portions of the reward-pool every day which truly does nothing good for the majority of steemians or the platform itself. It only make the account-owner fatter as he is raking in 50% of the author-rewards every day - many times per day.
Steemit Long Term is more important then vote-games in Short Term
During the Presidential election, someone on Steemit facilitated a successful game like that - Bet on Hillary or Trump - send money to this account and put hillary or trump in the memo and may the winners win and the losers lose, and the winners won, and the losers lost - and it was over. And it worked.
With Great SteemPower comes great Responsibility
So this is my proposal:
- We create a smart-contract for betting purposes,that facilitate payouts and rake for the game host opening up for everyone to host bets without technical knowledge on how to set up an accurate payout bot by having the system do it for you.
- We create a gambling section which cannot go on any trending pages but will be its own "gambling" section where everything is settled correctly after the games are over and the winners get paid by the losers minus the rake set by the game-host (should be 2% to 10%)
- This will create more competition and a guarantee for the gamblers that the "house" is playing by fair transparent rules.
- A complete ban on using VOTES as a method of payment for gambling.
There will be a lot more MONEY in it for gamblers and hosts, and FAIR, as I don´t have to pay for it as an investor.
I'm happy to say that @steemsports is going to introduce 'Paid Plays' model shortly. Under this model, players cannot win by voting - but only by paying SBD/STEEM into the pool. The preview of our app is available at https://steemsports.com
Coool stuff.
@furion wow, that is GREAT news.
Continued Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year!
Very happy to hear that @furion. Does that mean that the rewards for the bets will only come from the amount put forward for the bet, and the payouts from the posts will go towards the authors and editors and company? I think this will be great for everyone.
Correct.
If all goes right, the first PayPlay game goes live this Friday. We believe this is a scalable model for the future.
oh good.
Excellent
It's about time. Finally.
There seems to be something wrong here.
You say one thing and @steemsports says another... Can you explain why what you proposed isn't being changed?
We are initiating a transition towards PayPlay games, which is a scalable model for the future.
We would like to transition to purely paid model, however this change is gradual, so don't expect it over-night. There is quite a lot of demand and support for voting based games, and we will be phasing them out slowly as the PayPlay games gain momentum.
amazing job guys!
My 2 cents:
From that perspective Steemsports is no different than other blogs with the added benefit to those that participate get paid part of the author rewards.
This not much different from what happens when popular bloggers that are backed up by whales get a ton of votes.
Steemsports would not do as well if it did not have whale backing.
I must admit that I am biased (my SP has grown about 10x because of Steemsports and as a result my vote can earn me curation rewards).
Now..we have to admit that there is no "free" market in Steemit if a handful of actors can determine what goes on the trending page...wasn't that something that steemsports was trying to address?
If whales were not backing up Steemsports with votes would we be having this discussion?
Well...that was more than 2 cents :)
As of right now, that was 41 cents! Good job!
This is a gambling bet, unlike the voting games. In the vote games you are not required to gamble. Your bet is free and you are rewarded whether you were the first to bet or the last. Even if you lose the bet you still get curation reward. There is no gamble.
The difference with curation is you have a limited number of votes before your curation becomes diluted. This means you are gambling when you bet on whether a post will do well or not. Only the people who were the first to upvote (taking 30 minute donation period into account) win the bet.
A game that allows you to pile on and win at any time undermines the system built for us to create a decentralised social media platform.
Have they addressed that? No! They just put themselves on the trending page. They have done nothing to diversify authors who are trending at all.
No, we would instead be discussing whatever positive things they chose to supports or probably the next problem in line. If it weren't for the whale support this would not be a problem.
Congrats on your 43c. Notice that one comment made more than a steemsports payout ever gave you!
In a strict sense if you are not risking your own money I would not define it as gambling.
Actually the most I have made from a single post was 9.5 Steem. Normally I make about 100x or more than the amount I get from curation. Curation gives me about 0.001 to 0.007 steem per post. I haven't done the exact math but it's around that.
You can say it's pennies but it adds up overtime.
I completely disagree
Steem Sports and other games like this bring in a demographic on its own that adds to the diversity of steemit. . There have been some scams but they get weeded out quickly. Transparency is a good thing but why do you all have to decide where I use my Steem Power? I get peeved when I see people trying to keep Steem to some narrow demographic. Diversity is what will grow value. I know of 3 people personally who would not be here if it were not for Steem Sports they are not taking value away they are adding value. Now that they are here they will read and curate other things too and who know maybe even start blogging .
Where are these 3 friends of yours? Why is it I keep hearing from people who have been here saying "this is bringing new users" but I have not had an argument from a new user who came not to write but to vote for steemsports.
(Queue fake users to back up this comment)
And if they are here why are they not writing? Can they not see they would make more steem for adding a valuable contribution to the platform? Just a comment such as yours makes more than the steemsports payout!
This is your mistake. You (and others) keep insisting that only "bloggers" make any meaningful contributions to the platform. As I pointed out in my post that you said you had read (Content Crusaders), not everyone is a blogger or wants to be one. Some people come here to read, vote, and occasionally comment. They participate in the system - and yes, they also want to earn rewards for their activity (shocking, I know). Are such users not allowed to vote for games that earn them a small pittance for their efforts? Are you of the opinion that, if someone isn't contributing "meaningful" blog posts, they should just stop using the platform (as another crusader had suggested)?
I know everyone likes to pretend that their preferred content is what ought to make the most money and earn them the best rewards, but they really need to get over this and start understanding that 1) this place is not only for writers, 2) it is designed entirely around the concept of economic incentives, and 3) if you don't like what the larger stakeholders are supporting, you'll have to convince them to change or you'll have to compete with them by raising your own stake. Endless complaints won't work well. Trust me on that.
Not everyone is a blogger ?!? If you want to keep this space for your narrow little click it will stay just that why so fucking hostile !
You're right. Not everyone is a blogger. Such as myself. I'm not a writer nor a blogger. I came here with an open mind and got lucky. The more I commented and interacted with people the more followers I gained. And still many of my posts make less than a dollar and I am pleased despite that.
You don't have to be a blogger! Your comments are being voted for by people who value your input. This is a platform built and designed for people to be rewarded for 2 things
By finding things that contribute value you are contributing value.
By placing a free bet with the funds from the reward pool you are not contributing value. You are just paying the bookie to get a penny back.
This bookie and the whales seem to want the minnows to get used to being minnows. Instead of doing the work of seeking out new authors and rewarding them to make them feel welcome, they are supporting this game so that you can get a penny instead. Instead of getting used to being a minnow and powering up one account to become a new whale, you could be helping us fill this place with dolphins.
I saw your previous post on this matter and I've been mulling it over since.
It's scary.
The fact that steemsports has threatened @dantheman with a press release speaks volumes of their intentions and I for one have unfollowed them.
I think there will be a lot of people behind you on this, but daren't do anything singularly for fear of getting noticed and flagged. steemsports has become a big hitter where rep is concerned and I suppose the only thing to be thankful for, where powering down is concerned, is that if they had kept it all, they would be well on their way to becoming even more powerful.
I've upvoted and will resteem this post.
Added by edit:
This seems to be a bone of contention. If I can clarify that it's MY perception that a threat was hinted at - veiled or otherwise - that I'm commenting on here.
I interpreted the announcement of a press release as a threat.
Wow, this is really concerning! Do you have a link to where this happened?
nuts!
Here is the comment from @dantheman
I would like to see the actual 'press release' that was mentioned. Does anyone have a link to it? I can't find it anywhere on our official @steemsports, @steemsportsfund blogs.
I'd also like to see whatever Dan was talking about before jumping to any conclusions.
where ? 😕
Thanks for that.
He didn't say they 'threatened' him or anyone, you misquoted him. He said they 'made' a press release. I haven't seen it though.
Yes, I admit no one said 'threatened', I read that into the text for myself.
At this level, the only reason someone with a lot to lose would inform a company that they are about to make a press release which will paint a bleak picture of the company is to gain leverage and 'persuade' them to re-think their strategy.
I'm sometimes a little too 'say it as I see it' and the way I saw that was as a threat - Either you allow us to continue as we are, or else I'll make this press release...
I read it on this thread... wait a sec, I'll find it for you
"The fact that steemsports has threatened @dantheman with a press release speaks volumes of their intentions and I for one have unfollowed them."
This is insane. I am looking into that right now.
I don't see why it is bad, gambling with steem power. It is just an up vote and all up votes cost steem from the total pool. If a big part of the people like to use it for gambling Steemit is delivering that service and thats good for Steemit. Maybe this free gambling will attract more people to Steemit and let them invest in SP because there is a minimum to take part.
I really don't see the difference between using SP to promote content that you like or a game (gambling is a game), an up vote will cost exactly the same and in both cases it brings satisfactory to the user. Please let the market decide if gambling belongs on the platform. If the users want it it is good for Steemit.
However, I can understand that Steemsports is polluting the trending posts, but isn't it better to separate content and games and exclude games form the trending content. Same counts for porn, if there is a big market for it let Steemit do it, but separate it from the other content. Enforcement on a blockchain platform is a big sin in my opinion.
This is exactly the problem. You don't take the money from your pocket and gamble it. You take the money from a pool that belongs to all of us. And the more that is taken to go towards this game, the less there is for other authors. In other words, it is not your money to play with, it is up to all of us to distribute. But if we first put this money through a filter that does its own redistribution then 50% of what goes through there gets stuck as SP.
Free gambling does not exist. What you mean is a free bet, and a free bet is a very hard sell. People don't buy it.
The upvote doesn't cost you anything. In fact, you gain a curation reward back even if you lose the bet. The upvotes accumulated by many people upvoting the post costs everybody else. When you have 100 posts all making $5 rewards and you have one post making $100 payout, each time somebody adds their vote to that $100 post, rewards are taken from the other 100 posts we voted for. We voted less on them, but only because they did not attempt to buy votes.
I agree with this. But gamble with your liquid steem or SBD, not the money that we are all responsible for redistributing. That is not the purpose of your vote.
I agree with this. The general voting-pool should not be used for gaming purposes, and a inbuilt official system to help prevent fraud would be very much appreciated. Since the lottery was invented in the sixteenth century it has been regulated, but in Steemit-Klondike paying yourself should be sufficient.
I'm not into gambling myself but what you propose seems better for everyone.
However, consider this. Those who are new to Steemit that are into the gambling scene and don't have much if any funds to gamble with will be barred from participation without an investment of some type, whether that be through posts, curation or transfers of crypto from external sources. For that reason don't be surprised if you get some pushback for this idea from those in that camp.
I see nothing wrong with that. So what if that complaint is lodged. It only shows those that don't have the community in mind are acting selfishly. There is no free lunch (besides the opportunity to join Steemit) and if you want to gamble then ante up, one way or another!
We need to create incentives for finding and rewarding new authors. This penny for your vote game is not going to do that. One way the developers could help new users would be to create an automated first post tag. So that every user who writes their first post can easily be found on one page.
Other ways would be to increase curation rewards for accounts with less followers. That idea is not fully thought through, just throwing it out there.
I'm really trying to rethink a start-up betting game to go along with these guidelines I'm thinking though a game that includes chance and skill combined may be best getting people to take risk and putting up some liquid is hard in this current setup where they can upvote opposing bets just using vote power where there is absolutely nothing for them to lose. I do agree giving a whale a steak so you can eat crumbs is not fair to the community seeing those it cuts into the meals of all bloggers but as it comes to light more and people start to understand i think the community will make the right choice in the end. At least I hope.
I am sure about it @spbesner, we are still in BETA, and we are the BETA-TESTERS :) - and we have to facilitate this platform for the next million people that will join us.
It will be GLORIOUS!
I think education would prove more effective than prohibition. Educate people about the risks involved and the consequences.
I agree, education is key. This has been a learning experience for us all. We could not know the damage vote-buying posts could do until we experienced it. The larger stake-holders used to take responsibility for this for us and we were very grateful when they explained how vote buying would manipulate the market and make the experience for other bloggers less worth their time. But then this became a bear market and they had a "change of heart". Unfortunately it is now up to the smaller stakeholders - you and I - and those of us who really want steem(it) to succeed, not just for the next 3 months, but to become the next generation social media platform and cryptocurrency.
I see a bright future for STEEM as a gaming currency. That will not be possible as long as votes become the currency.
There is a lot of "education" material on steemit about vote-games and those things - a Prohobition is important in this case because it affects such a large portion of the daily reward-pool and only really benefit a few account-holders that are getting fatter and fatter every day.
We got to be smart about our reward-pool so there actually is rewards to give to authors of blogs.
Great post ! I'm in full agreement , even though I currently do bet on the" sports "by Upvoted only . And there are many per day that do take in alot of money ! Steem on ! 👍✌😉
good to hear @karenmckersie :) you too, steem on!
The betting games I have been involved with claimed to be redistribution schemes, as such, I think they should be required to distribute their sp on a per vote basis to everybody that voted.
I support your separate page idea, taking from the reward pool that is to go to authors in order to reward gamblers does seem unseemly, and making it automatic and available to anybody that wants to set up a bet should attract a lot of attention.
Stellar Idea.
Upped and Resteemed.
I get where you are coming from with this idea however forcing your hand here by "forcing them to decline payout" sounds like Flag them to me, this is a very slippery slope and could set into motion a flag war that will tear the fabric of this community asunder. I urge you to move forward very carefully.
We want to avoid having to use flagging - by moving the gamblers to a safe gambling-section where they can gamble as much as they want without affecting the author-payouts for all those other people who use this platform for blogging-purposes.
Not naming anyone, not shaming anyone.
I agree creating the alternative option then educate the account holders why it's a good idea not to support upvote betting. Ultimately it will be the support or lack of support (upvotes) that dictates which option will be successful.
Yes, fyrstikken
The way you phrase it, it sounds like the gamblers do not move of their own volition but are pushed to the new "safe gambling section" in some way. This means there is some kind of enforcement involved, especially as you mention "A complete ban on using VOTES as a method of payment for gambling.".
Thank you for this post, I haven't seen this explained well yet but I think I understand it better now. Still not sure how I feel, has the betting communities or people running games defended their position on gambling and it not devaluing Steemit itself?
They deflected the issue instead.
https://steemit.com/voting-games/@fyrstikken/should-i-use-my-vote-as-payment-for-gambling-or-my-own-money#@thecryptodrive/re-fyrstikken-should-i-use-my-vote-as-payment-for-gambling-or-my-own-money-20161226t110212291z
They would prefer to blame others.
How do you propose this ban be enforced?
Edit: I do not believe that allocating some funds from the Steem reward pool to go to games of chance/prediction to be inherently abusive. However, I do think that it is taking too much right now. I think we can work out a way forward where such games (along with some funds from the reward pool) still exist but no longer dominate. The downvote exists for a reason, and if stakeholders don't want to pay so much for gambling funds, they are entitled to use it to that effect.
Upvote for visibility, only partial endorsement.
once the Gambling-section is established with the smart-contract to go along with it, there wont be a market for vote-games anymore. And those that try will be flagged for not posting it in the right section.
I did a little rough math on another post, to determine just how much @steemsports is taking from the reward pool, and my conclusion was about 8%. Looking at it that way, worrying about this may be much ado about nothing.
That amount is growing and it is for the other betting games too. That will mean there will be no competition for those who are funding their content from steem and since the games are what the whales are increasingly supporting we are creating a small handful of large stake holders instead of lots and lots of dolphins.
I think this is a step in the right direction :)
Thank you @shieha, I believe so.
I agree !💪😉👍
good point and good solution.
thank you - it is a result of a week of heavy discussions on @steemspeak radio. Come and join us at http://steemspeak.com - we talk steem 24/7 all year :)
that seems a nice challenge. I'll look into it
Good [email protected] you.best regards
Thank you, and happy new year (soon)
I dunno how I feel about it but every time you make one of these post they send out a bunch of payouts...
Keep it up!
Lets hope you feel better once your posts gets more rewards. And if you want to set up a bet, you can do that - and people will spend their money on it, and you can rake in some % as a bookie if you wish. :)
LOL,
I think you make some good points Sir, but if the community decides where the reward pool is distributed, and you "ban" something; isn't that kinda like "Centralized Gubment" ???
I mean, would you rather see someone who gives back 50% to the community get the rewards or someone who simply powers down every week and never even reads anyone else's post ??
I don't have anything invested in Steemit so I don't feel I have much of a say to be honest, I am perfectly willing to go along with the flow...
Thanks for the post...
We as a community have to ban it. That is decentralised. The reward pool comes from the blockchain. Going through steemsports first means losing 50% of that. Everybody who plays steemsports wins a penny. But everyone who authors a post in competition with steemsports loses their silver. With each vote piled on them, they suck rewards from those rewarded less than them. This would be OK if their votes weren't bought with the promise of a penny to those who play the game.
You win a penny if you succumb to them. You lose much more than a penny by not playing the game.
On top of that, we are powering up an account holder who threatens people, tries to turn us against the steemit developers and is blackmailing the steemit community.
We cannot afford to power up an account holder who does not have the best interests of steem at heart. This person clearly does not wish for the success of our blockchain. They are a danger to the nourishment of our community growth.
Read comment here bad-mouthing steemit developers in attempt to break us
There is a reason stakeholders used to protect us from vote-buyers.
Now we know why.
Well, being I am an anonymous foot; I don't expect to be taken too seriously.. BUT..
I can't believe the trending page is the issue here. It seems more likely the major issue is the so called draining of the reward pool.
The reward pool is going to be drained every day any way, and if the Steemit population were to double over night.... Or perhaps half of the registered accounts actually made a post...
What ya gonna do then, ban new accounts ?
It reminds me back in the days of torrenting we use to have server races. We would compete on how much our servers could upload in 24 hours... Then someone discovered uploading porn would get a lot of attention lol..
Same thing is going to happen here very soon. As interesting as what you had for breakfast or how cute your poodle is, it isn't going to get many votes compared to the latest porn upload....
I hope an answer can be found because I do enjoy Steemit, but I honestly haven't taken it very serious for these reasons...
Happy Day!!
The last time we had a boom in new users the price boomed. For some time people were raking in thousands of dollars from posting. New users is what we want to help improve the price of steem as this increases demand for steem. Steemsports discourages that by discouraging competition.
I have no problem with porn doing well as long as people are not upvoting it in order to get a penny back from the post. That incentivises people to upvote it for the wrong reasons. But if they are voting for it because they want to reward somebody for putting it on the platform and encourage others to do the same, that is fine. That will encourage growth. We can still compete with that.
I would like to see the actual 'press release' that was mentioned. Does anyone have a link to it? I can't find it anywhere on our official @steemsports, @steemsportsfund blogs.
You would have to ask Dan or Ned.
I'm still opposed to naked vote buying which does not add value. If someone makes a shitpost that says little more than "half the reward on this post will be paid to voters" and adds no more value to the platform, then it is worthy of downvoting.
Steemsports is not that. It is participatory content that has a small element of vote-buying (implemented in a manner as to be focused primarily on stake redistribution), but also with significant effort/work toward: developing the brand and concept, bringing sports writing and coverage to the platform, and finally driving a significant effort/work in building a business and various marketing and promotional plans that bring additional value to the ecosystem.
I'm also not sure where you get the idea of steemsports or its supporters discouraging competition. I've also supported the bacchist's fantasy hockey league and ats-david's sports contest posts. Those are direct competition which also get my votes. I don't see any issue with competition.
When you used to flag these games @smooth they were very often interactive and engaging. There were lotto games and competitions that you down voted because the rewards would be used to "manipulate voting"incentives. Now maybe your subjective opinion was that those games were "shitposts". But suddenly when YOU LIKE the content you chose not to ask for the removal of the vote buying aspect. (Despite the fact that you often flag a post just to have one sentence removed before you will up vote it)
Your SP is for manipulating the reward pool. It is abuse to manipulate the users to use their votes in favour of YOUR SUBJECTIVE VIEW. Can you seriously not see how incredibly selfish and hypocritical it is to go from down voting these games one minute and then turn around and up vote the ones that YOU like, to manipulate the votes yourself?
By supporting those vote games YOU are buying the votes of the minnows. As if you don't have enough SP to vote with. By doing this you are making the system less decentralised because you are using more than your own SP to distribute the rewards.
Imagine if the co founders were to do this! It would certainly then be seen as taking more power from those of us with the least power.
If you want to use my SP to vote for the things YOU LIKE you can buy my SP and power it up but I will not be selling cheap!
And the way that it discourages competition is because only the games YOU SUPPORT will be played by the minnows because the rewards for the others are low. So again it discourages competition because even more power than the SP you hold is being used to manipulate the reward pool!
[I'm replying to your later post]
We will have to agree to disagree that the early vote buying posts were anything like Steemsports. However:
First of all, my SP is not "manipulating" the reward pool, it is expressing my opinion on how the reward pool is to be allocated (in this case to sport-related content and a game/initiative that distributes a small amount of reward and stake to users who decide to participate, which I find to be a use of reward funds that brings more value to the platform as a whole than rigidly demanding that all rewarded posts conform to a narrow view of blogging or content). Is my opinion any less legitimate than yours or anyone else's? I certainly would not make that statement about your SP and your votes.
Second of all, even if there were no differences between the posts, and I think there is, no I do not think it is hypocritical to change one's view on something. Are you claiming you never change your views?
But again, I don't think any of those earlier posts were as substantive nor well-developed a concept as Steemsports, which came to the platform from the very start having done a significant amount of development of the concept, idea, branding and plans to promote and expand the platform (which are being carried out). I see a hell of lot of more effort having gone into Steemports and value being delivered by it. That's why I vote the way I do.
By manipulate I meant determining where the rewards are allocated. That was not intended to trigger you or to say you don't have the right to express where to allocate the rewards. If you are using your own SP you have every right.
But by voting for a vote buying post you are buying the votes of others who may not agree with your subjective valuing of the game as many people on the platform have expressed they used to play these games (didn't read the posts) before they realised it was having a band wagon effect.
This kind of interaction will not be attractive to future investors who can see that those who vote are not even paying any attention. Future investors want to know that we ARE paying attention, not just grabbing pennies where we can get it.
[replying to your nested comment]
Future investors will be interested in what is going on with their investment in the future. It may be that different types of content and interaction are more valuable in the future, but for now I firmly believe that the the greatest value-add to this community is expanding the user base by making the platform more accessible with more ways to interact, earn (even small amounts), and distribute stake.
One comment on something you said earlier:
This is true, to an extent, with Steemsports specifically, but if someone else were to compete, there is no reason they couldn't offer to power down and return 50% or more of the SP received to players (for example on season-long contests or special events). The question is whether this provides enough incentive for the person running the operation to put in their time and effort. Steemsports' business model is based on distributing most of the liquid rewards to players and writers and keeping the SP as gross margin for the rest of the business. Anyone is free to try something else and if it works for them, great. There is no hard and fast rule that says the poster needs to keep the SP.
As I said earlier, I've already upvoted other games and contests if I felt they were based on a significant and credible effort to bring value via an interesting and promising concept and not just empty paid voting that adds nothing more. So I'm happy to see people try other models besides the specific one that Steemsports uses.
I agree with every single word in this post! Thanks for sharing :)
Upvoted and followed.
But what should it be used for? I think in our case, we're quickly finding out what it should NOT be used for instead. So I think that may be a fair solution that you've proposed - thanks for voicing this @fyrstikken . Although I'm not sure why it's still going on. It doesn't interest me that much, but I thought it stayed because the top influencers might be thinking it's a good thing to do? I'm not entirely sure what's happening.
It seems to me that with the removing of long term incentives to keep the platform healthy for the entire community we are now going through a transitional period where some large stake holders are looking for short term gains. The long term success is no longer in their interest. Things will change as they power down and we have a fresh community of curators who want to be curators to be curators, not to make a lot of money.
Good point and I support the idea. I don't participate in gambling posts and think that your proposal is fair for both sides.
Resteemed. Good luck.
You are sooo smart!
As usual, you've got a great idea here that could really help the community and help bring more equality back to the rewards.
Agree with you on this one.
Good move fyrstikken.
Love the idea of a betting/gambling section. But I'm not too sure about the ban.
What is the purpose again?
I would also like an answer to this. We all have our ideas...and many of them conflict. Isn't this why we have stake-weighted voting?
Hi @fyrstikken
I agree with you
I understand your point and I can see why you view that as gambling. You forget something though, a lot of people put they time on Steemit, which I believe is more valuable than money. So in a sense they are gambling with their time. On another end I can give small trade off: accept games that promote participation on Steemit. I invented a simple game where people comment to bet. This promote Steemians interactions s which I think is very important. I mean I have had posts with a lot of loves but small views and even smaller comments. The cash is nice but that isn't why I am here.