You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: The Reduced Author Rewards of The Economic Improvement Proposal is Moronic and Unfair
I'm including you all in the comments for my post because I firmly believe the move to a 50/50 rewards split is extremely unfair to Creators on the platform. Please do not implement Hardfork 21 if this aspect is still included in the package!
@therealwolf @yabapmatt @blocktrades @gtg @someguy123 @roelandp @themarkymark @aggroed @cervantes @good-karma @thecryptodrive @ocd-witness @anyx @ausbitbank @smooth.witness @lukestokes.mhth @followbtcnews @clayop @drakos
Noone will care.
Take your cynicism elsewhere.
You'll see.
Looks like you were right. The ratio of hate the 50/50 is getting is massive and everyone is just marching forward. No sense of doubt it seems.
Posted using Partiko iOS
I've been here since the very beginning. :) I've seen it all before.
Increasing the incentive to hold Steempower by improving what people make via curation aka their staked Steem? Genius!
Are you being sarcastic? I'm genuinely pissed off about this because I care about this platform and the authors that keep creating original content on here DESPITE its negative aspects.
I write a reasonable and detailed argument with citations about how the top 20 witnesses are planning to dramatically cut my rewards as an author and when I plead with you to NOT do it, I get back this nugget
Are you serious?! Do you have anything meaningful to add here?
https://steemit.com/steem/@therealwolf/50-50-fair-and-for-us
https://steemit.com/steem/@therealwolf/steem-2020-reducing-inflation-to-less-than-2
https://steemit.com/witness-category/@therealwolf/security-prosperity-and-innovation-for-steem
This is going to be fun.
EIP is aimed for:
This change is to empower creators of valuable content by encouraging SP holders to vote for them instead of selling VP or self-voting.
Additional note. Selling VP to bid bots is actually form of self vote, but in stealth mode. In the end, one chose not to vote for content you value, instead chose to get $$ from the bid bot. Effect is exactly same.
Do you have any actual evidence that reducing creator rewards is going to accomplish anything this proposal claims to do? Any Testing that we can look over? I haven’t seen any data. Any economic theories you can cite to justify this change? I haven’t seen one presented. Any scientific polling done at large to see if the community was okay with this change? Any market studies?
I’m just expected to take this halving of rewards because of... self voting?
You are aiming at a moving target blindly. I keep seeing these assertions without evidence. All these claims of how it will benefit the community all the while shrugging off substantive complaints like mine.
I have real questions that look like they can’t be answered by Tim or you or Wolf or MarkyMark. Why are any of you worthy of changing the rules so substantially when I can’t see a coherent justification for them, especially the rewards change. I get the rewards curve change, but cutting the creator’s reward this dramatically requires a justification I haven’t seen yet.
Posted using Partiko iOS
There have been numerous @steemitblog posts and resteems about EIP and its various components including rewards curves and downvoting. They further reference other posts and discussions which go back years and dig into further aspects of the economic theory behind it.
If you are writing as an investor/stakeholder then no you don't have to take it, you have a vote on the matter.
If you are writing as a poster, then yes, it is true you have no say. Investors pay you some of their money via inflation because they believe it helps accomplish a goal. If they don't view the goal as one that is successfully being accomplished (and many do not), then adjustments can and will be made.
Nevertheless if EIP goes into effect then: 1) As a poster there will certainly still be money paid to you by investors, and 2) It is far from clear to me how the various adjustments will play out in terms of the amount of money going to good posters and content relative to now, when a large portion of the pool is being milked out and not going to good posters and content.
NOT GOOD ENOUGH. These discussions need to be accessible in one place and held at regular intervals. I read a lot of the posts and comments over the last few days. This process is scattered and confusing. It's garbage.