PROOF That Cutting STEEM Authorship Rewards Is Not the Right Move - STATS - [eip][ hardfork21]
- STEEM Changes -
If that is the case it makes no sense to me, and it makes no sense to the Steem Blockchain at this moment based off Stats provided by @penguinpablo
This shows Content creation is currently in a Downtrend, and user Curation is on a MAJOR uptrend. This means that Curators are currently satisfied, if not highly satisfied being curators via up votes and Commenting. The data clearly shows that Commenting is on an uptrend, while Content Creators must not be too happy since some are doing less of it.
Numbers don't say anything, it is up to people to look at them to see what it is they are saying.
the Green Line Shows Posts (content creation) on a Major Downtrend in the First chart
Commenting average per Posts climbing
Conclusion:
Post authors not engaging - possibly not happy with current payout, Steem Price, and other possibilities.
Curator activity increasing - possibly happy with current payout, more passive engagement, ease of use, LESS CONTENT TO CURATE?? etc etc etc
Remember when Authors were receiving more support from Whales, Orcas and Dolphins?? Remember that it created a lot of hype for Steemit, Steem and the Steem Blockchain?
For Content Creators - commenting on others and up voting others is key to SUCCESS here on Steemit. You can't just create good content and expect to succeed without engaging your followers as well as the STEEM Community. ENGAGEMENT WITH OTHERS HERE IS IMPERATIVE!!!
My 2 Steem Cents,
+++ @streetstyle
Source for charts and stats = @penguinpablo
I agree, wholeheartedly. Its a lot more work to post than simply vote or comment.
If rewards for posting are less people will do less of it.
Less content means less engagement, less community = BAD!
I mean you can post a picture and add a few lines of text to make it easy, but when you do make a video or write say 300 words, then yes it is more work than just curating. I feel the same, but hope that it works if they do implement this idea.
Not necessarily. If you look at any online creator's space [ youtube, newgrounds, instagram, etc. ], great content emerged even when there was little to no profit opportunity.
On Steem, anyone can make a profit. That's good for some reasons, and terrible for others.
If people who post a picture of some soup with no words attached stop posting because it suddenly isn't "worth it", honestly I don't see that as a negative.
[ I'm really not trying do be elitist or anything like that, but I'd much rather have people on here creating content for the joy of creating over hoping to get rich. Money is nice, but content suffers when you prioritize it ]
Posted using Partiko Android
Motivation to create good content is multi-factorial. Making some money for your effort is part of it, but shouldn’t be all of it.
Posted using Partiko iOS
Good analysis. However, could the increase in comments due to bots? Will be great to have some statistics that disregard comments from known bots
Posted using Partiko Android
On my comments I think bots are down.... and i think in general with Resource Credits and Mana it cut down on the bots... but that is more of a guess than anything.
Bot voting seems to remain low and stable based on @penguinpablo 's report
Now whales will probably curate content that they know that will receive a lot of upvotes so they can get more Steem back for curating.
New users will suffer from this change.
I mean if I was in it only for the money and had tons of steem power, I would stick with 10-15 dude on steemauto, I would upvote their content automatically at the 15 minute mark with 100% and that's it, no need to dig new posts and support new users.
Bad idea bad idea bad idea.
A lot of content creators are putting huge amount of work to upload decent content.
Why should curation be at 50?
Anyway, that's a bad move in my eyes and will discourage a lot of people for sure.
Let's just hope it will encourage new whales joining to grab that curation rewards and old whales waking up and start curating.
One question though.
Is the 50/50 split for Steemit? Or the same will apply for Dtube?
Cause beneficiaries on Dtube are 90/10 I think.
Much love bro.
Not sure how it will affect dtube and if this does happen, the hope is that it creates more up votes which is supposed to lead to better rewards for the content creators. Personally, I don't like this idea or think it will work. I hope we don't have to find out.
A 60/40 model would be fair as you mentioned in your #no5050 post.
Both parts will benefit from it.
Let's just hope 50/50 isn't the final decision.
Not saying I agree with the following logic, however, to play devil's advocate, I've heard people mention how when whales start upvoting more, there be a sort of "race" where they try to upvote earlier & earlier than the next whale, and therefore cause their curation reward to go down.
In theory, there should be no 10-15 dudes, because curators will want to disperse & diverse their upvotes in order not to be competing with a large pool of other curators.
Basically, if I understand it correctly, in order to maximize your curation profits, you need to truly find new & undiscovered content in order to get in first & not have to share with 100's of other accounts.
Posted using Partiko Android
Yeahhh seems like it could end up being really shitty. Also seems like most people agree and they’re gonna push the HF through anyways. Unfortunate but it’s looking like we’ll all have to make the best of it. Maybe if less people post, the authors that do still post will end up earning more due to lack of other authors. We’ll have to wait and see.
I hope it works if they do implement it, but I rather not find out, especially when I see curator activity going up and authorship going down. I think we are going to find out one way or another but in the meantime, #No5050
Hi @streetstyle
Not sure about it so asking.
Is it implemented the 50-50 payout to author and curator?
I think this is not a good move and going demotivate authors. We spend hours to create content then we must get the higher share of payout. Curation does not take that much long. If it happens then new content posting will get reduced. This is my view about it and you can have different point of view.
What you say friend ?
Posted using Partiko Android
Right now it is 75/25 and they want to make it 50/50. I personally don't like it, but if they implement it I am hoping that it works. Hopefully we don't have to find out.
Hi! Were you around when the rewards distribution is 50/50?
May I know what was the curation culture during that time?
When it was changed to 75/25, what was the improvement after it?
When I joined steemit the distribution is already 75/25.
@funtraveller I have been from early on, not the beginning but a few months after. I honestly do not remember if the payout structure ever was 50/50. So I can’t give you any info on that.
Posted using Partiko iOS
Sorry about, I've read some discussions saying that it was 50/50 and was then changed 75/25.
Personally, I'm in favor of 50/50. Maybe because I do have the curator mindset and I failed to understand how would creators feel if it will be changed to 50/50.
About the chart, I think one of the reasons why there are more curator and less creator activities is because many of the them were inactive in posting/commenting while their account was set to auto sell votes through services like smartsteem/MB.
I must have missed that whole conversation about decreasing author awards. Why would they want to decrease the incentive for creating content?
To give up voters more payout. The thinking is that more people will curate or up vote and content creators will receive more up votes, and therefore more payout in the long run is the IDEA, hope, DREAMS and DESIRES of this change.
I think the current numbers say otherwise.
It won't change my behavior at all. 100%. Many of the votes I give are done automatically. I'll just get a bigger piece of that pie rather than the person I was trying to support.
The only way that authors will get more is if people who are giving fewer than 10 votes per day choose to start doing so. I think most people who have accounts already give their 10 votes per day. Therefore, the voters will get more, but the authors get less.
I don't see this shifting the advantage from the whales to the minnows. Not sure if that's what they're trying to accomplish, but it seems counter-intuitive. Platforms grow through increased exposure and more content. Decreasing the incentive to post content isn't going to help Steem grow.
Is this another one of Ned's ideas? It wouldn't surprise me.
Sadly I have agree @themanwithnoname that this is going to go badly... I hope there is time to reconsider this before it is implemented. Luckily it can be reversed later, but why even go through that?
Its true that current authors pay out is not satisfactory but this was set out by the platform of steemit, good luck and happy to be a steemian.
Posted using Partiko Android
Thank you so much for participating in the Partiko Delegation Plan Round 1! We really appreciate your support! As part of the delegation benefits, we just gave you a 3.00% upvote! Together, let’s change the world!
To listen to the audio version of this article click on the play image.
Brought to you by @tts. If you find it useful please consider upvoting this reply.