it's quite a conundrum. For one, keeping at least the hp part would help distribution and decentralization, you could make the argument that 1000 minnows have as much sway as a whale on witness and other gov votes, and they'd be able to start earning a decent amount of curation rewards over time for passive earnings as to not force themselves to post all the time or get in gray area farm activities.
At the same time, you are here, you see it working in your favor, you much like everyone else are quite a nobody outside of hive that wouldn't earn anything anywhere else so you could easily understand how nicely this place could scale if everyone was rewarded for their social activity yet you still choose not to leave any stake in the project that's been so nice to you? it's quite weird indeed.
Now of course some can't help it, their financial situation may call for it, etc, but when you see other people that ought to be better off still have no stake it's like why do we keep throwing money at them.
If hive were to exist on another chain I bet there'd be way more downvotes and they'd be a lot more protective over their l1 reward distribution.
100%. Anyone who has HP benefits from downvotes. (Assuming they are not the one who got downvoted and the downvote isn’t on something they curated).
Downvotes reduce inflation and allow you to curate for higher quality content which benefits HIVE. There is literally an economic incentive to downvote. And also, it’s like a button that’s right there. It’s pretty innocuous. Nothing on the user interface says, “WARNING! People will go absolutely insane if you click this button!”
Let me see if I understand your point. If there are negative votes, fewer new hives are generated, lowering the hive inflation rate. But I have a question: Don't negative votes cause rewards to return to the reward pool? Do they result in fewer total rewards being paid out?
No that was not my point.
No. The dislike button does not “return” rewards to the pool
Do they result in fewer total rewards being paid out? I have no idea how I could even prove this so idk what you are asking.
If the downvote doesn't return the rewards to the Hive rewards pool, I think I understand your point.
IMO (and what I am thinking is constantly evolving):
• Minting HIVE for low quality content = inflation
• Minting HIVE for high quality content = value creation
HIVE is essentially "backed" by the quality of the content on the platform.
This is how I am currently thinking about it anyways.
Quality is a relative concept.
I don't believe any post creates real value for the blockchain, regardless of the author's reputation.
I see more value creation coming from more responsible projects, more swaps, more apps—in short, more developers and ecosystem growth. I also don't think it's about simply adding more people at any cost.
I just disagree.
HIVE is social media. The quality of the content and the quality of the conversations does impact the valuation. Just like every other form of social media.