You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: The Future of Steemit
Nothing would be better for us minnows than for the whales to flag each others VP to nothing every day.
We'd get more than $.02 payouts then.
Nothing would be better for us minnows than for the whales to flag each others VP to nothing every day.
We'd get more than $.02 payouts then.
:)
True that!
What's a whale but someone who brings a disproportionate amount of attention to the platform? Minnows don't bring me here, whales do. If you want to be a whale, and get whale-sized payouts, bring whale-sized value in your content. Dragging everyone down just so you don't look so small (relatively speaking) just makes everyone lose. It's not like @Haejin is being accused of hacking the site surreptitiously. From what I can see, he's getting attacked because others are jealous of his massive appeal. This is the behavior of children. If you think better content needs to be produced, make it! Otherwise, don't complain when the payouts go to those who do!!
TBQH, the content we post has little to do with our rewards. @haejin exemplifies this, particularly. If you exclude all votes from @ranchorelaxo from the debate, there is no more reason to debate whether @haejin's posts are problematic in any way.
This issue is about rewards distribution, not content.
Further you completely misunderstand my position. I don't seek to 'drag whales down'. I want them to profit MORE from their investments.
The price of Steem has rewarded whales more in the last week than all the self-votes they have cast in the last year.
I seek wider distribution of rewards not because I even care about my personal rewards, but because that will cause Steemit to grow, and create price pressure on Steem upwards, producing capital gains for whales.
I want Steemit to become more than a rewards pool mining algorithm. The mechanism of rewarding content creators on a social media platform has the potential to topple tyrannical banksters, and produce a new libertarian model of democratic governance all over the world.
That's really my goal.
This is a fact that could be addressed.
Perhaps if Ranchorelaxo only voted 2% or something other than 100%
I don't see @ranchorelaxo, nor @haejin, as a problem either of us should care about. Why should we care what happens to 5% of the rewards pool?
The top 1500 accounts care, and really only the top 39.
You and I are impacted so infinitesimally by 5% of the rewards pool that it literally has no impact on our rewards.
We have a different problem.
Our problem is that the bottom 99% of accounts split 1% of the pool. Since 99% of any rewards that are flagged away from @haejin back into the pool are then extracted by whales, you and I see but 1/50kth of 1% of all of @haejin's rewards (if we average all minnow rewards).
It is literally meaningless, and that's the problem we have. If minnows aren't delivered orders of magnitude more rewards - which would decrease the amount of rewards the whales could tap by about 25%, a substantial, but not debilitating decrease in their ROI - then retention will continue to be a dismal, ~10% YOY.
Even those of us that stick it out aren't much good in terms of supporting the price of Steem, as we have little of it.
Give us 30% of the rewards pool, as the white paper specified and intended, and we'd be a lot more use as price support for Steem.
I wouldn't mind it either.
Would you?