You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: De-Spinning the Spin - The real truth
"We should get rid of the reward-pool and just give it to the witnesses."
That kills the Steem.
Please explain.
"We should get rid of the reward-pool and just give it to the witnesses."
That kills the Steem.
Please explain.
There are plenty of sites where you can blog. Steem creates a new paradigm, where you don't just provide information to your peers, but your peers can provide Steem to you for doing so. This elevates society, and our speech, our communications to each other, to the same socioeconomic level as working for wages, or investing in commercial undertakings.
Steem isn't just blogging for rewards. It's a new socioeconomic paradigm enables peers to create mutual economic support, outside of legacy financial mechanisms captive to predatory institutions and persons, and replaces hierarchical neofeudalism. Steem replaces overlords and serfs with peers and decentralization by it's blogging for rewards mechanism.
If it's done right, it's a model that can be a vector for change more powerful than we commonly imagine. Eliminating author rewards eliminates that paradigm changing potential.
Go ahead and eliminate curation rewards. They're only parasitic. Steem is far from perfect, but like a lungfish clumsily flopping about in the muck catching bugs out of water, brings new possibilities to the world.
Steem-power still generates 8% APR, which could be used as "free tips/upvotes".
The reward-pool is just an additional 3% distributed interest anyway.
I don't think that shifting the source of the upvote-tips would "kill the steem".