While talking about some things with the curators of OCD yesterday, this idea (which originally existed but was abused very early in steem's history - even before the payouts were initially sent out and could be transferred).
Right now what you can do with reward.app is set it as beneficiary to receive liquid rewards instead of 50% being in Hivepower, this is pretty much what 99.99% of people use it for.
The other thing you can do with it is send it a memo with a % value [0-100] to forfeit your author rewards to go to curators. By default reward.app does this with 4% of your author rewards which is why you often see reward.app send you small sums of hive and/or hbd.
Unfortunately not many used the second option, I've some times used it on posts I felt didn't deserve a lot of rewards knowing there may be quite a bit of autovotes waiting for me and other times I keep forgetting to set reward.app as beneficiary. So the data to see how this is used in general (bad or good marketing/promotion) is very limited due to almost no usage.
This now brings me to my idea I had and I'm a bit skeptical if anyone's going to be using it but I figured I'd ask anyway to see what you think.
The thing that existed very early on in Steem was that part of the author rewards would automatically go to commenters. Of course you can now imagine how it was easily abused since the blockchain would calculate that and just give commenters part of the rewards, but the way I thought of it would be like this:
Author makes a post, sets reward.app as beneficiary like usual but before he posts he'd send reward.app a memo indicating the % the author would like his post rewards to go to comments.
As I mentioned, there already is a command for this right now in place which determines the percentage of post rewards that instead go back to curators, but I assume this could easily be done with a different command, example, memo: "comment 50" which would mean take 50% of the post rewards and spread them out to the comments.
To avoid abuse, and since this is something the author has to decide on to begin with if he wants to use or not, reward.app would also have a bot that would check which comments the author curated in said post and spread the rewards evenly among those comments. If there were 2 comments, author voted the first comment up with a 40% vote, the second with a 10% vote the post rewards would be split 80% to the first comment and 20% to the second comment.
So this would give the choice back to the author how to distribute the rewards, mitigating any abuse.
Why?
Well, engagement hasn't been great on the platform for a while now, partly cause everyone is too busy being a content creator and partly because the EIP introduced the reward curve tax which made most small votes from small stakeholders worth a lot less and a lot more difficult to get to the top of the tax curve where the penalty is lifted so neither the curator nor beneficiary loses out. If authors are willing to part with their author rewards instead which are way easier to reach the tax curve as there's more curation happening at the post level than the comment section, this could even the playing field a little.
Another idea that would be cool, but would need to be discussed with @cardboard who's the developer behind @reward.app would be if the rewards would instead be tipped to the comments so when people go back to reading the posts on front-ends like @peakd they could see the tips on the comments (hopefully a feature that will also be added to hive.blog at some point in the future) and at the same time burn some hive by sending a small fee to @null which the tipping feature already does which is also created by @cardboard!
Anyway, interested to hear your thoughts on this. If there's ways this could be abused, if there's some negative actions that could come from this, etc.
Thanks for reading!
We'd get 'nice post'ed to death. I've always voted for comments, for the most part. If it's one of those over the top compliments coming from someone I don't know, I usually skip them. I think we'd see a lot of those disingenuous commenting for the sake of reward types if they saw the post was automatically paying out.
I once jokingly wrote a post asking why people follow an idiot like me then listed a whole bunch of bogus possible reasons, again, as a joke. Some folks did show up and say, "Because of your votes!"
The majority are genuine folks who sincerely enjoy shooting the shit with me. But I know better than to advertise 'free money' because it's heartbreaking when you find out someone is just using you. I don't want fake testimonials under my posts and I think that would be the worst case scenario if comments were automatically rewarded.
I'll still vote comments and burn through my voting power and take a potential profit loss. But at least I'm in control and know who's getting what and why.
Yeah, not sure if you missed the part, since my post was a bit here and there, but it wouldn't be automatic. First off you'd choose if you want to do this, @peakd could then maybe add an icon to that post like they do with liquidated posts using @reward.app, then the distribution of the % you want to give comments would be determined based on which comments you voted and for how much - again giving the author the power to choose. So of course you could also just not use it at all and continue the way you've been doing things but for smaller accounts who want to reward their engagement but have to give massive votes to do so to even get the comment past the 0.02 payout threshold they may appreciate just giving part of their author rewards instead which won't be affected by the tax curve if curators and curation projects have gotten their posts past it. In turn they could just use tiny %ages to tell the bot to which comments their cut they've set of the author rewards should go.
So once you choose, and people or bots detect that little icon or something in the code, they might be all over it due to the increased chance of being rewarded.
To be fair. I don't have a problem with this idea. And it does add an element of fairness for those who can't compete with someone who has a fat wallet.
In all honesty though, it takes more than rewards to generate engagement. A lot of posts here don't offer the consumer much of a reason to say anything and that is perfectly normal. What's lacking is content consumers outnumbering content creators. On Youtube there's one instance of content, 100k views, maybe 800 comments, and some of those comments are responses to other comments, so it wasn't the content itself that triggered the engagement. It was the engagement that triggered more engagement. Majority don't even read the comments. I rarely leave a comment on Youtube or anywhere for that matter. Here though, wtf? I can't seem to shut up.
So just so we're clear, I'm not against this. The platform lacks dedicated consumers. Consumers should outnumber creators by a huge margin, otherwise we'll never see the results we all want to see, and maybe offering more incentives to consumers is what's needed to tip the scales.
So say Alice gets 10 genuine and good comment she wants to reward, it would take her 10x40% vp to get them all to 0.02 at least burning 40% of her daily vp.
For Bob it would only take 1 daily vote to give the same amount of comments votes up to 0.08$ and at the same time get a tiny bit more curation and give the comments more rewards than the vp he burned compared to Alice.
So Alice could instead choose to allocate 10% of her post rewards to the comments, these post rewards are past ~16 hive in total thus aren't affected by the tax curve and she only uses 10x1% votes to evenly give all 10 comments 10% of her post rewards in tips and only burn 0.1 votes of the day.
lol, that's a blast from the past
Simply demonstrating how engagement triggers more engagement.
Plus I couldn't resist.
So, do the comments not receiving any author upvotes wind up having no rewards?
Yes
But yeah, I mean technically the authors could just save some liquids from their last post and just use tips for comments if their stake isn't high enough for it to make a dent and still not waste a substantial amount of voting power. Guess that kind of makes this idea useless now that I think of it. :DD
It's too bad we didn't have a 'like' button as well. Use that to trigger the event.
Nice post
Too soon?
Nice comment.
I'm with that one! ...Just not to waste HP for small stakeholders like me on comment-votes :)
... !LUV ... !BEER
Oh... Just realized I'd need to vote the comments too, well, how about if Reward.app do it manually, tip the actual comments and leave the spammy ones?
Yeah this one would still require some votes but you could easily use 1,2,3% instead to direct where part of the post rewards would go to in the comment section instead of trying to get the comments to the 0.02$ reward threshold which for many accounts requires quite a bit of voting power.
Hmmm... Makes sense, still, I vote with the PeakD-Tip idea, would look better and maybe drive more engagement (Hope we don't get arsed with spam-crickets)
...However, waiting for the announcement :)
Command accepted!
More engagement would be great! I usually upvote comments on my posts already, though, and I have enough weight to make a vote worthwhile.
Yeah, but looking at LEO it seems many enjoy voting up comments there with linear curve more seeing as they don't have to waste as much vp to the tax curve which eventually all ends up back to the maximizers anyway.
Hey Acidyo. I just recovered my keys from years ago. Glad you're still here. It's amazing what you all have done here. I'm completely floored.
Is there really less interaction between author and readers? In the short time I've been back on Hive, I haven't seen that much difference, to be honest.
Well, speaking about the idea, I'm not sure about a few things, what if, despite having allocated an amount of author rewards to comments, there are no comments? Does the amount allocated for comments go back to author rewards? Or do those rewards get burned?
Great question!!
Let's see if "everything" has been taken into account.
Out of curiosity, is it possible to do something like this after something has been posted?
This is just a proposal, kind of. Some of the features are not there yet.
I know. But this isn't the issue i am asking. Currently, where payouts are sent are dictated at the time of posting, but I wonder if it is possible to affect this after posting.
Yet to use the reward.app but I'm tempted to try it out now that I've got to know about its main feature. I don't think you can set it after the article has been posted.
It would be possible with owner authority to allow the app to auto transfer once paid - but I am not giving that authority :D
Yeah that sounds a bit like too much, never give anyone authority over your active key. :D
"here you go sir, please take all of my tokens"
For me I think there's no editor for that or is there any?
No, but the editor isn't the issue. I am just wondering if it is possible to do on the blockchain after, so that funds can be sent after. I guess, it might also be possible to distribute straight from the posting account once it has been paid out, but that would require giving too much authority to the app.
View or trade
BEER.Hey @acidyo, here is a little bit of
BEERfrom @stayten for you. Enjoy it!Learn how to earn FREE BEER each day by staking your
BEER.I think it is worth a try as far as I'm concerned. We need to keep tweaking things til we get it right with engagement. Comments are as important as posting and I'll like so see people build their reputation and rewards as commenter. Just like on Reddit, comments sometimes get more votes than the actual posts.
I buy your idea, course it's not easy to go through a whole and make a comment if it's not attractive.
Well, you've spoken well my friend but I will prefer tipping instead. 🤷♂️
Hey @acidyo, you were just shared some LUV. See the LUV tokens in your wallet at https://hive-engine.com or learn about LUV at https://hive.blog/@luvshares
Hi @acidyo I have some questions about reward.app, If I set the additional liquid curation rewards to 0%, does that mean that the curators will not receive any reward for voting the post? I understand that if I set it to 4%, the curators receive 4% of their upvote, but do they receive that 4% as an extra or is it all they receive for voting on a post? If I set it to 0% wouldn't it be counterproductive for curators?
the default 4% means 4% of your author rewards go extra to curators, setting it to 0 is like the usual 50/50 split.
Wrong account, but yeah.
Muy buena la información. Pude leer su post y aprender nuevas cosas. Lo felicito por la dedicación en su post. Está información llega fácil al lector. Cada día aprendo cosas nuevas en esta plataforma. Bendiciones para usted
Mantap sekali kawan