50/50 reward split? I spent hours, days to write up my content and I have to share half of it? Why do I even bother writing a 500 to 2000 words post when i can just autoupvote posts. And here i was complaining about appics' reward distribution. 65% to author 10% to company 25% to curators. Video editing can take hours as do writing. As a content creator, 50% is not a good incentive. What happens when everyone just prefer to autovote and no contents gets produced? 80% is a great number to incentivise authors to produce. I think the 50/50 will not fly and will greatly devalue steemit.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
50% of what your quality post makes today, probably not; but for 50% of what your post makes if whales were voting for you instead of for themselves, I think you'd continue to grace us with your presence.
"If" whales vote for me. I don't think distribution is the answer anyway. If they can't be stuff about curating who can force them to. If they want to vote for themselves, it is their money after all. If they want to circle jerk each other so be it. I don't think we will find the answer until we test out the waters. Implement something, see what happens. How about a rule that stops a whale from voting their own post?
I am sympathetic to your arguments, as @carlgnash just managed to convince me they weren't as incontrovertible as I'd thought on this post.
Whales can just buy votes from bots. Such a rule would do nothing. It's also how to get around the 4 post limit. Just post from another account.
I'll reiterate here the reason that it's a good idea to split rewards 50/50, since you may not see my earlier discussion with @carlgnash.
It's a trap to focus on the labor of writing or creating content as a guage of it's value. This is illustrated by the old saw about 100 monkeys typing out Shakespeare eventually.
The value in content comes from the ideas presented therein, and curation is the act of delivering value to those ideas via the market. While the act of upvoting is trivial, seeking out good content (particularly on Steemit with it's broken feeds) is a significant task.
Also, ALL the curators split the curation reward, and thus are but fractionally rewarded compared to the author. So the dichotomy isn't quite as stark, except for posts where whale curation might dominate the curation reward.
While it takes significant labor to create good content, it takes labor to produce crap content, and one being rewarded and the other not depends on good curation.
It's worth compensating.
Beautifully well said.
Comparing the effort of writing with the effort of upvoting is looking very superficially at the issue.
If money is a substitute for labour, then the money I have tied up in the SP I use to upvote, is 'effort' I've expended engaging with the post.