Proposal proposal: reSTEEMit
I posted a comment on one of @thebatchman's posts "Regarding the Hidden Gem articles." This is my comment:
It'd be really cool if the STEEM protocol allowed a reSTEEMit functionality. In that situation, a reSTEEMed article would route all of the rewards to the original author and give the reSTEEMer double curation rewards.
But it also exposes the reSTEEMer to double flag penalties.
I think the best way to deal with reposts fairly is to make it part of the blockchain protocol. If someone with a high reputation wants to bring attention to an article, wouldn't it be nice if the rewards went to the original author?
Maybe my solution is simplistic. Maybe it will create more problems than it solves. Or maybe the current approach is perfectly fine, as long as certain guidelines are met.
Whatever the case, I'd love to see a proposal to officially handle this in-protocol.
Update: I used the wrong tag. Didn't mean to post to #humor. But I can't change it now. So here's a joke:
A man was walking down the road with a large case of beer under his arm.
His friend sees him and asks, "Hey what's the case of beer for?"
The first man replied, "Well, I got it for my wife, savvy?"
His friend exclaims, "Great trade!"
This needs to happen, or something like it...along with several other changes IF Steemit actually values quality content equal to, or very close to equal to, its cyptocurrency goals. IF however, quality content is a distant second on the list of priorities for the creators and users of Steemit, then everything is working as designed.
I continue to find it difficult to see Steemit reaching mass appeal at even a fraction of the popularity of other "social media" outlets without a lot of changes. As it is, quality content has little to do with Steemit. I would posit that one litmus test for determining when Steemit has reached the next level will be when posts on Steemit about Steemit are rare and rarely earners. Of course Steemit has grown very big, very quickly, and as such is already feeling the implications of "lots of human beings doing the same thing". Many are discontent, many are hoping for balance, and many are defenders of the faith. As is usual, we all believe we are in the balance group, but most of us are either discontent or fanatical. I am discontent, but trying not to be. I would write a post about it, but a) I do not want to add superfluous meta posts to Steemit and b) my influence and success on Steemit thus far make it highly probable no one would read it anyway. Of course this is somewhat ironic, because unless a whale (or preferably several) upvote ideas about change they will never be seen. Add to that the further layer of irony that meta posts that are upvoted by whales become big earners which only encourages further meta posts. Perhaps we need another change related to payouts for meta posts? Oh boy.
I was thinking, it would be just like how twitter does it. Retweets appear in the timeline of the person who retweets them. If they're true retweets, they even have the avatar of the original author. And on the twitter platform, people have the ability to turn off retweets, if they want.
It is a fundamental problem that someone with a lower rep will make nothing than someone with a rep of at least 60 even for the same content. Steem is broken.
You just made a few cents for yours.
No he didn't.
Damn, it said he did.
I like this idea!!
This is a really good idea @intertia. I really like it.
This is a great idea! I'd love for the devs to implement something along these lines.
Nice thought. nice idea. Agree with you for sure.
Haven't heard that joke but I'm sure the ladies would like it. :-)
I think they should implement something like this asap!
I wrote about this kind of feature today here
Would love your feedback if you have time.