You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Steem Foundation Proposed Roadmap
- To explore and consider the feasibility of paid subscription models on the blockchain.
I think those are already there. SPS 10% of all post rewards head that direction do they not? If a d-App want to charge they already can, like d-tube did for a long time, may still be doing, I don't know. So I really do not understand that bullet point at all.
It's more along the lines of thinking of out of the box options that haven't been presented yet.
Paid subscription models should not be hard to come up with, if you want to use my dApp this is how much a month it will cost. SMT's were expected to bring a use-case in for companies/business/people that want to earn money. If the thought is that in order to post in a particular community or to read content in a particular community, or vote, then that I think would drive people away from those communities to others.
esample: Let's say freewrite community wants to charge a fee to view items on their community page, why would I go there when I can see similar if not the same content on the inkwell community page?
Right now a few dApps and their creators are struggling, example steemworld.org, I understand that, I like and use it every day, I know in todays market 1 steem is not a lot, but 1 steem a week I send to help in the cost of it, because I like it. If the price was to high I would find other ways and means of getting the information provided even though I like the layout of his pages.
So if thinking of out of the box options include extortion, (that is how I feel about the SPS) from the users then I think all the options should stay in the box.
!ENGAGE
Yeah? And wouldn't steemit inc funds be used to fund it also? Or did I misread it somewhere.
I don't think it should be assumed Stinc funds will be used for anything. The wording on that would be "Approach Stinc for funding" as it is an offer to them but not an obligation of their stake.