I have mixed feelings on this. For one thing, as I read more on this topic I increasingly think I should create an after-the-fact proposal for my creation of the 4 lesson video tutorial, especially before I start uploading it as a free course to course marketplaces to bring new people into HIVE.
On the other hand, I realize that working as a part of an ongoing team isn't the same thing at all, and especially once competition is introduced. It feels so unattractive to me, more like a commission-based job than a service to the community; one that is hopefully compensated somehow, but focused on cooperation instead of competition.
But then, I guess the proposal system as it is now is still something of a competition isn't it? Just with a lot less people participating because it isn't fully understood and integrated into community norms.
Point. We are talking about "creation" - creation of videos. And they can go to YouTube, or stay here. And if this creation brings effective results elsewhere - and if you feel like you should try seeking funds, then by all means... you can make a proposal with the metrics (YouTube views, for example).
It is important to mention "group" once again. This is a small set of people interested in, like you said, commission-based job. So we really have two things: 95% focussed on creating content... and 5% on marketing for this commission. This 5% will bring more new users.
So really it is all about merging two roads here. At the same time.
It is. And it is really around development. The idea is to allocate some funds for promotion too.
I wonder though about the team element. For example, when a bunch of us were using Twitter to put pressure on exchanges to do the right thing, and piling shame on Sun, we were each acting independently, but also in loose concert. I wonder how that would have worked had we been a formal team splitting rewards (presumably equally) and so having to divide up the work formally, even though some may have a following <100 and some >10,000.
Or with the example of my tutorials, well no one can really help me make them, nor really with the course creation which is easier for me to do on my own into existing accounts. Sure folks might be able to help spread links to those courses to drive traffic beyond the native platforms, but my thinking is that the native platform traffic is the social promotion element at play there, not just more Twitter/FB/YT.
Could one be a team of 1? How much of a chance would a team of 1 have of winning? Would this run in parallel with the existing system, so that a non-developer might try their hand at either?
Hence the condition that a "group" should apply before the start of the month. So only those who do that will be eligible for it.
The idea is to promote Hive outside of Hive. Ongoing content creators like us simply continue as it is. We are not shutting down anything - only introducing an element of new job (as you said) that will work parallelly to drive more users to the platform. This way, even our content, gets more visibility due to a large portion of the users here.
Right now, we are simply living in our own world. We can accelerate this process. No reason not to.
Hehe. I have mentioned that solo efforts are great (just CTRL+F). Just that it has its own flaws, so we move to the group model with at least 3 members. If you are a team of 1, you have to find 3 people who will work with you. Even if those other 2 don't work, that's cool.
Again, one important fact is, the number of groups are unlimited but only 10 gets paid (for example). So low-quality groups not doing anything earn nothing.