You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: PROOF That Cutting STEEM Authorship Rewards Is Not the Right Move - STATS - [eip][ hardfork21]
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?