You are viewing a single comment's thread from:

RE: posh talk

in #poshlast year

Thanks for listening to share holders and delegators. I was worried. Why? Cause once ecency boost was introduced and sold in playstore for local currency. Then till today I counted 13 burn L2 token and get a upvote in L1, if they gave in L2 I don't care but it is inorganic way of getting votes. It all started from one point and soon spread. Now in posh case hbdstablizer got funded through comments and it is till today but they also pay back to reward pool while stabilizing hive. So it was a income generating asset for us and still running and auditable algorithm. While auditing of posh funds and it's use is shaking confidence of investors. Not because we don't trust ocd or posh or you. Mostly because I personally fear it will start something similar to ecency boost with new heads appearing everyday. So I don't want projects to use authors reward pool. If they want to be funded then use hive funds or get a sponsor. I believe this will leave more on the table for authors and it was designed for this purpose. Imagine many new projects choicing this path. It will be just out of control to audit anyone. It's too hard to draw a line what is allowed and what project is not. I hope posh team understands this.

Screenshot_2023-04-11-21-30-34-716_app.esteem.mobile.android.jpg

Sort:  

The way it was funded was okay I believe, it had a fair airdrop of only earners receiving tokens, no team allocation or premine so it wasn't favoring anyone in particular and the main point of it was to reward those bringing traffic to Hive and growing their influence on Twitter to promote hive. It's kind of like funding marketing and I don't think there was really a big issue that it was taking it from the rewardspool. While I don't mind doing a proposal for it in the future, if we somehow get past this roadblock, considering how a lot of stakeholders believe post rewards in general are quite big along with the userbase remaining small I don't believe it did any "damage" to the userbase. Many stakeholders, especially those delegating to us were okay with the way it was being funded and from the lack of downvotes after I've talked about it for many years now I figured others were as well. For now I decided to not continue that funding due to the recent API events but if things change I'll be bringing this up again and see what everyone thinks and if there are any good reasons not to fund it this way.

PS. part of the reason we had a lot heavier upvotes the past couple weeks compared to in the past was due to our new "POSH accounts only" liquidator called @nomnomnomnom that takes 0 fee and also sends out l2 tokens which reward.app couldn't/stopped doing. In combination with our recent POSH curation and @poshtoken receiving a lot of delegations it meant that we were dishing out a lot of rewards for sharing which made the liquidator account grow fast and in need of a lot of liquids since the powerdowns couldn't match.