RE: Normie Talk - HF21 Explained (SPS + EIP) What it is and what happens next
The idea is that since that is the group receiving the largest cut, that redirecting 10% of that inflation to the SPS would be a good place to start.
what is forgot is that 65% is shared by 50.000 (i have no idea how many active people are here) and that 10% is shared by lets say 100 people (but mainly by first 20-30 on the list)
It is no secret that we need more content consumers on Steem. We have great content, we need people to read it and reward it though.
and that will be around maybe 200-300 people? because minnows and new people will have no influence on rewards, especially on rewarding people that are not discovered by those 200-300 people.
The goal is for those large stake holders to now be encouraged to go and downvote bid bot abuse as well as self voting spammers who are removing rewards from the shared pool while not returning value.
i can't wait to see this. (as someone who never used bid bots and have no idea who really holds them i kinda assume it is runned by people with a lot of steem. also the selfupvoting spam is really problem of big acc because someone that has 200SP and is selfupvoting is really not harming the distribution)
also i hope that i am completely wrong and as this is a blockchain you will be able to point fingers at me till the end of time as a man who did not believe and was really stupid.
just want this HF happening tomorrow so i can just not read about it and continue doing my stupid nonprofit things...
Great post and explaining
I’ll answer this in short version and then come back to give more detail in the morning if needed, as I don’t want good ole Nathan to think I’m avoiding it.
Yes the rewards pool is split among a larger group of individuals. Yes witnesses make about $30k a year at current prices, which is relatively low in terms of block producers over multi block chains. Witnesses also have expenses and are solely responsible for producing blocks, the essence of the chain, protecting said chain as well as many other things.
In comparison, what are we authors responsible for? We make some content that may or may not be anything good and we collect our rewards. Many don’t even invest or buy steem, just gain and cash out.
I believe content plays an important role in Steem and I believe the community adds a huge amount of value, but I do not think the issue is lack of rewards for authors, I think it’s rewarding crap authors too much and not rewarding the good ones. I believe we are not rewarding the behavior we want to see and not rewarding positive contributions to the ecosystem.
If I’m honest, in its current state I believe much of the inflation is wasted on garbage that is pulling the price of STEEM down.. and I would like to attempt to use that for something that potentially could benefit us all.
Yes I think it would be the most fair to use a percentage from multiple places to fund the SPS and I will continue to communicate that request to anyone I can.
As far as content consumers, we need all sizes of them. Small minnows should be able to make a return or profit on something other than posting 4x a day at an attempt to make a $1.. there should be incentive to do something else.
Also, there should be some sort of incentive for individuals to buy STEEM and stake it.. therefore more and more people do it. If it is profitable for an individual to invest, stake and curate.. more people will, and that is what we want.
Because at the end of the day, if no one is buying STEEM it becomes worthless.
I cannot say what these changes will bring or even if I fully support them, but I can say what we do have currently is not working so it makes sense to try something else.
If it goes through, I hope it improves things.. and if it’s a disaster I will be very loudly demanding a change 🙂
I like the idea of no more HF talk too.. I’m so tired 😜
I get the concerns and I share them. My goal is to help share information as well as voicing concerns from the community. Please continue to share these concerns as well as reach out to the top 20 witnesses, as ultimately this is their decision.
i think no one is accusing you of anything, you just did a good job explaining it and got an exposure on the post so people write where the talk is.
how do we know the system is broken? well, for fuck's sake few weeks ago i was in the top 200 curators for accounts that have less than 55 rep. Me, with 2500 SP. I should not be in the first 200 curators of anything and i am a lot of times in photography and music.
I just don't see that this will change anything for the better for minnows and new accounts. my vote will be worth less on those new accounts, supporting people that engage on my posts will be not possible, and my below average content will earn 30% less.
No one that is for this change and has the power to influence it did not answer, what will happen to "small" accounts after the HF. Only answer is it will be great for everyone...
sometimes i feel that a lot of big acc here are like:
I would go even further to say that content is Steem.
Rewarding no-effort authors is just a waste of time. Over the long-term so are posts meant merely to move self votes.
Mostly agree with you. Just think that the clearer picture the overall community can get, the better.
Speaking of clarity, I believe brevity and truth often hold hands. Centralized systems run red tape, and as such, even if I were an attorney on retainer, I would dislike working this post. Not that I disliked swimming these waters, but I am not a retired millionaire.
Does illustrate how much people need to vent. It is FB'sLIBRA week after all.
It is content that creates any value in Steem. dApps, blogs, games, all that content is the only reason people come here. Without it, some nerds might trade Steem amonst themselves, but Steem would not have any value on the market - because there'd be no market. Creators are that market. Chase them away, and the value of Steem vanishes.
Again you are twisting my words. I didn’t say content and it’s creators do not add value, I asked what responsibilities or risks they (we) have. The answer is none. You can make content and make possible rewards, no investment or risks needed. It’s sort of an important thing to consider when trying to state that somehow witnesses rewards should be removed as “content is everything on Steem” ... as without witnesses, there is no Steem.
I'm not twisting your words. The delivery of valuable content is the responsibility of content creators. They invest and risk hours of work, often for very little or no reward.
I am kind of surprise that after protesting I was twisting your words, you then proceed to mischaracterize my own. I have never made any comment - ever - to the effect that witnesses should not be rewarded.
This is silly. You can disagree with definitions from credible sources, but all you'll achieve by doing that is causing other people to not understand what you say, since you don't agree with the definitions of the words you and they are using. This entire conversation is nothing more than that, except you have falsely claimed I said that witness rewards should be removed, and then projected that I am twisting your words by stating some of the benefits of content when you asked what creators are responsible for. See tu quoque and ambiguity below.
Disinformation techniques prevent rational discussion.
The comment you quoted of mine was in response to just that and it’s why I mentioned it here.
I will agree that there are some content creators who do create wonderful content and do not get much rewards, it’s why I manually curate and co founded a manual curation guild (where we work as volunteers) as I feel good content adds value. But I will say that a very large majority of content on Steem is made with little effort so no, I do not think it is the most deserving of the inflation pool, as I don’t think it’s contributing value back in most cases. That’s all I meant.
If we want Steem to be adopted by the masses, we have to reward content the masses can create. That's facebook tier content. We don't have to reward it equally with 'Moby Dick', but there's a reason we need to reward it: it is the content that brings the masses.
I'm fine with not agreeing on how to reward content, because that a subjective evaluation, and it's not particularly relevant to the EIP. The rewards curve, downvote pool, doubling of curation and halving of author rewards aren't for specific low quality content. Those are for all content. I see that without many users to create a market for Steem there is little impetus to push up the price of Steem. We have a terrible retention rate now, and HF21 will make that much worse. Pick any reason someone would come here, open an account and leave, and HF21 makes that reason worse. Low rewards? Cut them in half after HF21. Probably more than half because the rewards curve is going to lower the value of votes from smaller stakeholders in addition to the direct halving of author rewards. Clearly new accounts aren't going to be making anything from curation. My curation rewards are around ~4% of my rewards, and I do a lot of curating with a little bit of stake. Newbs won't have that stake to curate with.
The fact of financial manipulation via stake weighting means that 90% of rewards, author and curation, go to whales. The rest of the platform splits the remaining ~10%, and newbs without an established network get the least. The median payout last I checked was .01 SBD. Given that the largest group of content creators receives that payout for their posts, I'm surprised any of them bother to stay and post at all. Reducing that median payout to .005 SBD isn't going to drive higher retention.
The downvote pool may be the worst aspect of the HF for newbs. They might not grasp the fact of retaliation and run around flagging trending posts. If they do, they're going to be retaliated against by folks with more stake than them. That's just how Steem works. Newbs aren't going to just ignore that and keep on Steemin'. They're going to do the obvious thing and leave, pissed off.
Adding a tax shrinking the rewards pool is highly regressive and going to hurt small stakeholders most.
None of these things is going to solve any problems Steem faces, and all of them are going to make those problems worse.
This is the best explanation I have read yet! Only thing is at end it should read "None of these things are going to..." Besides that A+!
Exactly! and.....no response duly noted.
Or maybe I’ve answered hundreds of questions today (not even a top 20 witness), it’s 1am and I am reviewing questions to fully answer them in the morning.
Or maybe you’re right it must all be a conspiracy
I was actually a supporter of this until you kindly brought the geek speak down to a level I am comfortable understanding, for which I thank you. I will leave further points until I can construct a cohesive list! But this particular point that has been made is extremely relevant.
I was not criticising your silence, I understand you are the messenger and we all know, you should never shoot the messenger! :-)
Sleep well...3pm here in Thailand.
Actually, due to the weight of the stake of whales, they actually get about ~90% of rewards, all 35 of them, and the other 50k of us share the remaining ~10%.
Othewise you're completely spot on.