I will leave it to those prosecuting to the case for 50/50 to prove that authors won't be adversely effected under this model.
Though I can tell you the members of the communities I am involved in most likely will be adversely effected - they were getting 75% of their post rewards and under the proposed system they are getting 50% of the post rewards - seems pretty clear to me.
I agree though - the price will shoot up for a short time - long enough to let a few of the whales sell down some of their stake - but still make the same rewards on the other side.
Some will do really well out of this proposal - and I can assure you, it won't be the working man.
SirKnight.
Posted using Partiko Android
You were right in calling it a "model". The thing about models, or, in this case, "economic models", is that we can't really know how they'll work in the "real world" until we test it.
I say, test the fucker (please pardon my French), because, as I see it, this system is not running very smoothly where the dials are set at the moment. We may be pleasantly surprised, or not. Whatever the case, there is logic to setting a higher curation reward over author rewards, namely that there are far, far more content consumers than there are content creators. Why shouldn't you appeal the economic model to the majority?
The one concession this Knight will make is that curating would be much more fun under a 50/50 model.
Why such an extreme change though? Wouldn't 60/40 be a better mix.
Again, all this will be solved with SMTs - so I think this is where we need to focus our energies.
SirKnight.
Posted using Partiko Android