I accept the current system as it is, even if my preference would be for something different. Whatever the system in place is, we need to explain it to new people who learn what it is and may object to it. They may not be the kind of people we want at Hive, anyway, but that's a different discussion.
I expected that a lot was involved in making the current 7-day earnings period what is is; lots of analysis and evaluation, lots of visualization to make sure it made sense, lots of coding to implement and enforce this system, etc. I'm not asking about this lightly, and I want to know how it can be explained in a way which can be marketed as a plus rather than a minus. No one likes fine print, and that's what this is.
While it would be nice for content to bring us earnings as long as it's available, Hive cannot turn into Web 2.0 for payouts. So we are where we are, and we're doing OK with it because our experience here more than makes up for it.
Just as a small percentage of Web 2.0 people hit the big time in earnings, it's the same way here. And it's true that many people on YouTube are just happy to get exposure even if their content gets a small number of viewers or subscribers; it's that way everywhere.
I was asking because I wanted to know how we can bring high-powered influencers to Hive and even to Layer 2 where the dApps and games are. For them it would be culture shock in more ways than one. Hive is about more than money, but it's not a charity either.
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta