The Boy Who Cried Wolf

in #rewardpool4 months ago



The push to get rid of the reward pool seems to be growing stronger every day, and I am thoroughly annoyed. Correct me if I'm wrong, but spearheading this movement seems to be @therealwolf, the one witness who I've had the least respect for over these last few years.

Why's that?

Well, it seems that everything he does caters to the elite here. His resume involves creating bid bots and catering to the other witness elite. Literally everything he does seems to be centered around either personal enrichment or the enrichment of the top 20 witnesses, forever solidifying his position of power.

To be fair, there are plenty of people like that around these parts, and perhaps I'm singling him out simply because he stands out and is good at his job. If I had a chance to boot him off this network, I wouldn't, because I think the value that he brings to this place is undeniable. I'm simply not a fan of the tactics or mentality he employs.

I've stayed off of Twitter for months now, and what do I see when I do a small checkup?


Uh huh, okay...

What if I told you that block producer rewards were an experiment that have run their course and witnesses need to step up and run this network without getting paid inflation? Don't worry, it's cool, we can pay with with some side-chain shit token that nobody wants! Better yet, do it for free because the stake you hold in the network should make it worth it.

But it doesn't end there.


Wow that's adorable.

You mean like what you are literally doing right now in the same sentence?
How ironic.



I do not appreciate these micro-terrorist fear-tactics.

Do what I say or we well be left out in the cold during the 2021 bull run.


Are you fucking serious right now?

Do people here have the short-term memory of a goldfish? We went x10 four months ago while the rest of the market stood still. We are showing time and time again that we have become untethered to Bitcoin and the market at large. This is a good thing, not a bad one. Yet that doesn't seem to stop people from freaking the fuck out whenever the rest of the market goes up and we stay flat. Get over it already.

To make the claim that we would somehow not run up with Bitcoin and the rest of the market as constant all-time-highs are being made is ridiculous. To make the claim that the reward pool being responsible for that is even more nonsensical.


As I have explained time and time again, the reward pool combined with HBD mechanics make this network extremely MORE volatile. Meaning there will be higher highs and lower lows. To change the system right before we are about to get those higher highs? How about no?

Again, as I have explained time and time again, these people who want to remove the reward pool don't even know what they are talking about. Why remove the reward pool? Because inflation is bad and we want a higher token price so we can make more money. The problem with that logic is that we'd actually be accomplishing the opposite. Removing the reward pool will cause all investors to actually lose money.

Who does the reward pool leech value from?

Again, inflation leeches value from the people who do not control it. In the context of Hive this means that inflation takes value away from those who are holding liquid coins. Are these the people complaining about the reward pool? No.

Here's what's actually going to happen:

If we get rid of the reward pool it's not going to do what the investors here think it's going to do. They will end up losing money, and they're going to notice that loss. In all likelihood, the reward pool would be reimplemented.

The unintended consequence of all this is that it makes us look like flip-flopping toolbags who can't just pick a lane and stay in it. The reason Bitcoin is so valuable is that everyone in the network knows that the inflation schedule is never going to be messed with. There's a certain stability there that is unrivaled by the entire cryptosphere.

I'll be the first to admit that 3 years ago I said that Bitcoin was already old news and doomed to be overshadowed by all the other projects. Now it's painfully obvious that nothing could be further from the truth. We can't even begin to talk about dethroning Bitcoin until crypto is fully mainstream. By that time we should all be millionaires anyway so who cares?


Removing the reward pool from Hive to "increase value" is like a child that pours a glass of water into the ocean thinking it's going to raise the tide. We need to stop messing with the existing system and focus more on building for the network we already have. Stop nitpicking over these drops in the bucket.


I was vehemently against the EIP Hardfork.

  • Convergent Linear Curve
  • Separate Auxiliary Downvote Pool
  • 50/50 Curation

Think about it.

All the people who are talking about eliminating the reward pool entirely... they all supported the EIP. Now they must admit that supporting the EIP was foolish. Clearly, they have no idea what they are doing. Why listen to what they have to say now regarding our economy?


I don't like to complain about problems. I want to offer solutions. If I had unilateral control of this network I'd certainly make a few changes.


@therealwolf doesn't understand interest rates.

I'm randomly reminded of this little gem on Twitter. @therealwolf doesn't even seem to realize that there is a multiplier when it comes to our interest rates. Our total coins become divided by the coins that provide inflation and then multiplied to said allocation.


Did I get any kind of acknowledgment back or understanding of the issue? No. Is this acceptable from a top 20 witness? To not even realize how the network works and then make threatening suggestions as to how we should change it? Seriously, I'm over it. Stop listening to this guy.

Why does the reward pool make no sense?

I don't want to be totally one-sided here, so let me explain the other side of the issue. Does it really make sense for Hive, a platform of platforms, to allocate inflation using a custom smart contract (posts/comments)? If we are a platform for many other platforms as we claim, then no, it doesn't really make a lot of sense to force the other platforms to use a custom comment contract and RCs to allocate inflation in this way.

That doesn't mean we should take away the powers of inflation from the entire network and only allow top 20 witnesses take the lion's share of inflation. Seriously though, so shady for a top 20 witness to be pushing this idea so hard with that kind of history.

As I've stated, allocating a lot of inflation to the bank accounts largely fixes this problem. Everyone who simply wants to "upvote themselves" will move their money to the bank accounts, thereby only locking their funds for 3 days instead of 13 weeks. It's a nice solution. As a side note we'd have to give RCs to those who hold money in the bank accounts as well so they can transact on the network and build their platforms without having to power up.


Now is not a great time to be ruffling feathers, but I feel forced into it. Truth be told, I only wrote this one because @theycallmedan floated the idea recently on his own vlog. That signaled to me that I need to step up and fight against this disaster of an idea a little bit harder.

Unfortunately, when we take a look at MY_RESUME here what do we find? Not much, if anything. Why should anyone listen to what I have to say? The only response I can give to that question is to ask that everyone employ their own critical thinking skills when it comes to this situation and come to their own conclusions.

When it really comes down to it, petty squabbles like this do not matter. When the EIP went into place, I was disappointed, but I will always stand by this network no matter what decisions become reality. Truly, it doesn't matter what the network decides to do; I'm here for it and I'll be trying to build value no matter what happens.

Would I like to see this project head in another direction? Yes, but if that doesn't happen I certainly won't table-flip and abandon my favorite network. We've got a long way to go, I've picked fights with the biggest downvoters on this platform and everything was just fine. I'm grizzled, and I'm not going anywhere. That being said, I've also got to say my peace from time to time.


I think it is inevitable - but....

To change the system right before we are about to get those higher highs? How about no?

Now is definitely not the time to be doing it. Bullrun on Hive, high value token, potential to get it for free by participating - far, far more important for onboarding toward the future.

Taking away all other inflation except witness rewards and HP staking rewards would lead to the death of decentralized consensus. All power over consensus would forever be firmly entrenched in the hands of a small cabal of 20 individuals guaranteed to be in power for the rest of their lives if they so chose. Removing the additional inflation would be poison to the very foundation of decentralized consensus and thus the value proposition of this chain.

Fuck, second time didn't put up the slider and just threw the vote, oh well

Condenser is having some issues at the moment it seems. It has also been laggy to commit since the update. Peakd is working.

I really think your ideas regarding using the "savings" wallet function to be a really refreshing and innovative proposal. If there was a way for investors to stake and earn higher rewards without daily participation post/comment/upvote standards, it might make staking much more appealing though and may help reduce the amount of placeholder posts that are simply created to achieve a higher ROI.
I've also said that I don't know how difficult that would be to code or implement as that is not in my wheel house. Yet, from a purely theoretical perspective I think it is certainly a sensible proposition and one that I hope generates more interest and attention from the community.
Curious, if you've had any conversations with other devs or witnesses about how feasible such a proposal might be from a technical standpoint?

I also believe the less investors need to be involved in reward distribution the better.

Unfortunately, I have not, although I assume it would be pretty easy, but you know what they say about those who assume things.

Actually I'm suddenly reminded of a conversation I had with the PALnet guys. I told them they should really turn the ability to upvote content with a HiveEngine token into a custom JSON operation instead of mirroring upvotes on Graphene. Turns out, that's a terrible idea because piggybacking off of Graphene was the entire point that makes the process so simple.

You know I am reading the main text late. My apologies! But I must say this is perhaps the best written post on the subject!

Agreed, I wish I had seen it during the voting window.

Can we increase the rewards pool if anything, I need to buy more weed I am almost out! 💨 ✌️

The push to get rid of the reward pool seems to be growing stronger every day, and I am thoroughly annoyed. Correct me if I'm wrong, but spearheading this movement seems to be @therealwolf, the one witness who I've had the least respect for over these last few years.

That guy doesn't deserve to be a top witness. He is either too short-sighted, greedy and cynical or not fit to decide about such things. I took away my witness votes from him and I'm hoping everyone who cares about this issue will do the same.

DPoS without additional inflation to balance out the centralizing tendency of high witness rewards is a consensus mechanism for true shitcoins. I truly believe Hive without the global reward pool would be a worthless shitcoin. I certainly wouldn't hold it in the long term. Only as a speculative play to dump if a pump happens.

I agree with most of your suggestions, particularly using the bank accounts for building a real stablecoin. What don't agree with is taking away curation rewards, nor do I think it's a good idea to let authors decide the share they are willing give curators. That's bid bots reinvented.

Honestly I think it's a bit too early to talk about getting rid of curation as well, but ultimately I think it will make a lot more sense in the future. I hope to make some applications that will make that point far more obvious.

I would like to remove the curve and make curation flat. With flat curation you get a more natural voting pattern. If a post has a lot of rewards but deserves more, people will vote it under a flat system. Rushing to ninja curate at 3mins before you can even read the post? That will be eliminated. As a large stskehodker I would love to see these changes.

Sounds good. I think curation can be salvaged, but it needs a lot of work. Flat curation would be nice because it takes the advantage away from all the bots and automatic upvotes.

The competitive curation adds the single most stress to investors. It makes it tough because now you have to find good curators instead of just any curator. It's as if I have a limited amount of clients I can rent to as a homeowner. With flat curation, renting out becomes much easier to do as you can say hey look you'll make x in x time so I'm charging x amount. Hard to do that now because some people make 8% ROI and some makeover 20% ROI while curating, the swing makes the market making a headache. Also, forget about actually ever using the stake as a whale yourself for "fun" who wants to crackhead out and vote at 4mins or lose out on a ton of curation rewards? As I said, I'm willing to but 95%+ of other investors won't be willing to take that hit for the "long term good" of Hive.

Wasn't the curation curve supposed to be about "content discovery"? As in, those early curators would identify a valuable post and be rewarded for boosting it into Hot or Trending.

Agree with this; at least for a certain time period after the post (say 24 hours). It also makes it more complex for people to maximise their return. This would simplify passive staking for investors as well as following any curation trail would provide maximum returns while still keeping some form of POB intact.

Rushing to ninja curate at 3mins before you can even read the post? That will be eliminated.

100% THIS!

I would like to remove the curve and make curation flat.

Let's get this show on the road!

I agree with that. Competitive curation leads to autovoting and curation sniping. If your curation rewards are the same regardless of the other votes, then you are free to vote what you enjoy without taking into account what it might cost you financially.

I completely agree with this as well. With the current system, the curators won't bother to vote a post if the reward is already over 1$. Even though it is a well written epic post. I would love to see this implemented instead of having conversations about removing reward pools. The current voting system has only created many snipers who rush to vote the posts with their big sniping trail in the 3 minute mark.

Even if someone comes up with a plan to change the curation to flat, I don't think it would be implemented because there are many snipers in the top 20 witnesses. 😉

No matter what game you play, you play by the rules of the game. Creating a financial incentive to upvote posts simply creates a game of financial incentive, rather than promoting actual curation.

Financial interests aren't the only values in society. They're not even the most substantial. Curating content should not be about financial matters, but about the value of that content to society.

Want to focus on financial returns? That's what savings accounts are for.

Wow this is unexpected, I am new to Hive and willfully admit to my new to this level of knowing things. I would like to however ask why @therealwolf would want to take the stimulus out of the economy?

As a small business owner irl, I very much appreciate when customers come to purchase coffee with bonus or credits they are received for my business for a variety of reasons, its difficult for me to understand why someone would want to remove the incentive that drew me to the platform in the first place, in which I hope to be able to curate my own revenue chain for my blogs here on Hive. I dont have a bottom line unlike with my business, the quality of the content I post affects how much I get voted right? shouldn't we keep those rewards as they are? I am new and feel my pay is fair, worth a maximum of usually $1 per post.

I assume it is because he already owns a lot of that previous stimulus.

well they say it is about investors, investors don't want to put effort, they want to buy hive and just power it up and get max ROI for that. so they don't want to vote for their ROI. then there is also a conspiracy theory of not changing the power structure.

I also didnt like the EIP fork... nor do I like the new reward pool agenda..

reminds me a bit of our govs and their MMT, new magic money tale.. they just print. brrrrr

I'd like Hive to transform into a kind of open market for ideas and tools for coming together, participating, discussing/ trading ideas, "decentralized self organising" (not only regarding the network and where it goes but many more problems of the world, technic, economy, law.. like tools for real anarcho capitalistic "democracy" .. ;) and where hive moves to and big changes of the network will ofc be the first big topics discussed by various big thinkers using this kind of idea market and its tools [HIVE] :) )

@tipu curate

lol I guess the wolf and his crew didnt see what we did to Justin Sun who is more powerful than him, lol do you see the way they talk condescendingly about Hive Users?

They refer to us as sheep because of the name of therealwolf, its actually hilarious to me that they use those condescending sub connotations to their dialogue while trying act as protectorates.


"Yeah I am on the last placed team in the league, seeing as we are not in good mental health, let me suggest that I would just quit if this got worse somehow..."

Thats team spirit boys!!!! FUck the beer after the game, lets just cut our wrists and cry together.

lol its actually hilarious that after managing Smart Steem he has the audacity to judge anyone collecting from the rewards pool, he also robbed me of my promotion for sharing the New Zealand Shooting for public interest with a warning about censorship and having to spend hours finding the video which is on LBRY anyway. He is full of double standard and I would NEVER support the wolf with a witness vote. This guy will likely rage quit the platform and all his fan boys make jokes commonly about "how close the wolf is to being done with the sheep?" LOL WHAT FUCKING SHEEP YOU FUCKING GOOFS WE WILL EAT YOU ALIVE WITH DOWNVOTES IF YOU FUCKING REALLY WANT TO TRASH THE PLATFORM, LOL did you see what happened to Justin Sun, step right up pal.

It didn’t know this was an agenda point right now, but maybe that’s part of the problem. Removing the reward pool is crazy but removing curation is too though...



I even had a poll about this on Dpoll because it was disturbing me, its so messed up that these small factions keep coming on here and using Gustavo style bribing to manipulate the rewards pool, then end up turning on the rewards pool that made them so rich through the service smart steem they maanage

I don't agree with your every point, but this article makes me so happy to support @hextech !

So, yeah - TRW's model of "give everyone their share and they can give it out if they want or keep it if they want" is what whaleshares has now. If that's what you want, go use whaleshares and see how great it is 😝

Long run, yes, I do want to see more tokens doing stuff on the chain - but the governance token should always be rooted with the communication/voting token. Call me crazy, but that's where the value comes from. People should be fighting over it, DPoS's design down to it's very fucking inception is that people fight over the pool. Darwinian impacts form the chain

If you want a "safe" blog platform on Hive: make one, give it a token, and go figure out how to give it value

Hive's value comes from the fact that it is a governance token
The social aspect of the chain allows for the on-chain governance
Two things that should never be separated

I didn't even know this was up for discussion.

I agree with you about using bank accounts, it makes more sense to use more of the blockchain features, than it does to switch things up.

Posted Using LeoFinance

I dont have a bank account, would I be able to use Hive if that was the case? my bank in Canada also wont let you have accounts that manage cryptocurrency

We're actually talking about the Hive bank accounts.


Unfortunately, when we take a look at MY_RESUME here what do we find?

Well I for one do not need to see a resume, since I have been following and watching your actions and those of a few other witness/dev types. I remember your displeasure with the EIP, and it matched up with mine somewhat. I still think the down vote issue is far from fixed. I don't think it will ever be fixed.

I do not see nor understand the removal of the reward pool, all I see that doing is making a carbon copy of reddit or other more, non block chain, personal media type sites. The reward pool is what makes places like Hive and Steem stand out. I honestly don't think the witnesses understand that, it seems all they understand is they get more of the pie when they can kick people away from the table.

One thing I don't understand about what you wrote is doing away with curation, yet still keeping down votes, (yes I went and read your referenced post just now). From what I read it was pretty confusing to me, no curation reward would mean few votes. Do we need to become the Patreon of the block chain? Where everything is taken care of via tips? Removal of self votes should be the first step to repairing the curation issue, we should be talking about ways to repair, not just throw away one of the biggest draws to Hive, and Steem Style block chain personal media activity sites.

The curation issue is a topic I've discussed a dozen times so there's a lot there left unsaid in this particular post. At it's core, what is the definition of curation? Getting exposure for quality content that has a smaller audience than it should. The network is currently defining curation by how much money a post is paying out, and that is determined by the frontend (controlled by a centralized entity). To then enforce curation on the backend and require users to participate in it is incorrect, because a frontend with completely different curation mechanics could come out at any time permissionlessly, and the system we have now would cease to make sense. Perhaps we just have to wait for that to happen before the network realizes the mistake its made.

It is a touchy subject, even more so than the down vote issues. There are applications trying to fix/take advantage of curation issues, and some of the front ends could put forth fixes that may draw people to their front end verse another front end.

For now before any drastic changes, I am looking forward to the first two HF's of Hive to see what direction will eventually be taken. The first HF complete separation out of steem and all air drop issue put behind once and for ever. The second one to stop all the hype pro/con about Smart Media Token issue and just finish the issue.

Those two will not really set the direction, it is the third hard fork that will tell us of the direction the creators of the Hive Fork will be taking. Will it be the first fork with a variety of community created tweaks/fixes, or will it continue to be some shadowy group of developers/investors/witnesses that continue to set the direction and control of any and all hard forks.

I am looking forward to next years first Hive anniversary, the answer above should be apparent by then.

no curation reward would mean few votes.

Not on Earth. Which social media platform that has votes but does not provide curation rewards has few votes?

If one wants to be part of the facebook, youtube, twitter, and reddit crowd, that would apply. On steem and on Hive tokenization ahs been a part of it from the beginning. If I remember right at one point either facebook or your tube removed the like, (thumbs up), people did not like that and it was restored in short order. Blurt has no curation reward, or at my last visit there none.

If the people on Hive want to do away with curation then there is no point to being on Hive verse being on facebook, twitter, youtube, or reddit. If your vote only rewards post then self voting would run rampant, and hive would be nothing more than a token mining operation.

All curation rewards are is token mining.

It is author rewards that are the seminal advance Steem originally introduced by distributing rewards to creators, not centralizing them in the wallets of platform owners. Curation rewards actually degrade this decentralization by financializing the distribution of rewards, and will eventually result in the same harm to the Hive rewards distribution mechanism that they have the IRL economy.

Folks like some content and dislike some. Folks like to say so, and votes provide that ability, which folks, substantially staked or otherwise, will use. It is extremely important to keep separate that human social function regarding ideas from the venal corruption endemic to financial manipulation. Far more predictable, and less easily corruptible, returns can be availed investors via the bank accounts @edicted proposes.

Curation rewards don't give people incentive to vote for good content. They create incentive to ignore the quality of content and cast votes to maximize financial returns, which is utterly contrary to the purpose of free speech.

It sounds reasonable, and we will be able to see how the concept works in real life on line. Blurt has no real significant curation rewards, in fact it cost people to vote. So the highest paid content should be the highest quality content. It does not appear that way on Blurt to me, but then perhaps it is the fee to vote.

Transactions on Hive also have a cost, the only thing that does not have a cost on Hive is the 2.5 down votes. With no incentives it quickly becomes a game of who has the most friends and family, who has the greater ability to buy votes from the ordinary user.

If there are no rewards for casting a vote, then why vote? I guess we will see when it comes down to removal of the curation rewards. The rewards both author and curation, are what set Hive apart from the four primary social sites. I for one hope we do not see the removal of curation rewards, and would like to see it return to a 75/25 split.

If there are no rewards for casting a vote, then why vote?

There are rewards for casting votes, and this is why they are cast on all platforms that enable voting. It is revealing that your representation only considers financial rewards as rewards, and completely fails to reckon all the other benefits and blessings of civilization.

In fact monetary rewards are not your own highest values, but you are not considering what is actually meaningful to you in your considerations, because the indoctrination we are subjected to fits you into the place you are intended to occupy in society, and the banksters imposing financialization IRL are succeeding in making you profitable to them thereby.

I have long observed that Hive, and Steem before it, was a social media platform, and it's purpose is not financial, but societal, which makes it's neglect of more substantial values than financial a perhaps fatal flaw. It certainly doomed Steem, by that exact mechanism.

It is notable that Hive maintains the exact governance mechanism today that enabled Sun Yuchen to seize Steem. Financialization is the enemy of society.

Curation rewards are financialization. Author rewards are definancialization, because they decentralize the economy and distribute rewards across society. Curation rewards do the opposite.

There are rewards for casting votes, and this is why they are cast on all platforms that enable voting. It is revealing that your representation only considers financial rewards as rewards, and completely fails to reckon all the other benefits and blessings of civilization.

Not a clue what you mean by the entire sentence especially the part I mad bold.

The post and conversation were about the reward pool and curation rewards. My response was contained with the post in mind. There are only three platforms I have cast votes on, steem, hive, and blurt. It has been two months since I cast a vote on steem, and one month since a vote on blurt. So Hive is the only platform I still vote one.

In fact monetary rewards are not your own highest values, but you are not considering what is actually meaningful to you in your considerations, because the indoctrination we are subjected to fits you into the place you are intended to occupy in society, and the banksters imposing financialization IRL are succeeding in making you profitable to them thereby.

This entire paragraph makes no sense in or out of context to the subject matter, pretend I am a pre-teen, and try speaking in a manner that does not seem to be talking down to or a demeaning manner. Now exactly what does that have to do with the content of the post talking about the pros and cons of doing away with the Reward pool?

Curation rewards are financialization. Author rewards are definancialization, because they decentralize the economy and distribute rewards across society. Curation rewards do the opposite.

Exactly how are the authors distributing rewards across society???? Are all the authors super nice communist that will take all the monies people have given them and then divide and divvy it up in equal shares back to society? What mechanism do they, (the authors), use to distribute rewards, what rewards are they distributing, where did the rewards they received come from?

"Exactly how are the authors distributing rewards across society????"

Author rewards are not distributed by authors. The statement I make you so reply to is regarding the rewards distributed to authors on Hive, and I do not address subsequent distribution by those authors.

This is in fact the value of the reward pool. The economy is a vitally important part of society, and IRL it has been centralized to an unprecedented extent today. Worse, the rate of increasing centralization is itself increasing today. It is this decentralization author rewards effect that TRW and rewards pool haters attack. They seek financialization as is currently destroying the global economy today mirrored on Hive.

Broader distribution of economic assets, as author rewards effect, increases the salubrity and felicity of society by improving the circumstances of it's members. TRW only seeks his own felicity, and this is why he seeks to destroy the rewards pool and the felicity of society derived from it. He has bribed his way to a position as a consensus witness, and intends to profit when he and 19 of his ilk are the only beneficiaries of inflation, and the rewards pool is no more.

I do not think you actually comprehend how rewards work so poorly as you pretend, and you did in fact know that author rewards are received, not distributed, by authors. Accordingly, as I have no interest in pretense of nescience, I will leave you to it.

I always thought when Hive started, the witness votes should have not been copied over from Steem. It should have been a fresh vote on the new chain.

Yeah it would be nice if there was vote decay that would dilute these stale votes and force people to revote if they wanted full power.

Yes, a vote decay. That's also a great idea. I have read about this discussion on Steem long back. It would be great if this can be implemented. Guess what, it won't be implemented. Anything that threatens the position of top 20 witnesses won't be implemented.

By the way, the proposal system also needs some fine-tuning.

Think about it. If you're good at gaming the system then you want to change the rules of the game as frequently as possible because you can adapt faster and stay ahead of the masses who are slower to respond. It is a sound maximiser strategy.

Very true, but in this case the system would be changed so there was nothing left to game. It doesn't really make sense in any context; it's just a bad idea.

Don't be so sure. Inflation still goes to witnesses, so gamers can focus on witness ranks. Then there is the "2nd layer" tokens to implement and reward content that way (Similar to how LEO has been implemented). Considering the old bid bots have been effectively ring fencing their own communities, token creation and gaming the platform via community tokens is an obvious next move.

Great points.

But let's not forget that those second-layer tokens have to exist before we even begin the discussion of removing the reward pool. And before that the technology to build the tokens has to be developed. HiveEngine is not an acceptable option; it's just a single centralized database. I guess that didn't stop anyone; counting those chickens before they hatch.

I tend to agree. I was not a fan of SteemEngine when it first came out, but I consider it now a bit like a "proof of concept". Yes it's centralised but it's allowing some innovations to prove that they can work. Hopefully one day we'll get SMTs, the worthwhile tokens will be able to migrate over and get implemented properly.

Removing curation? WTF?

Hm yeah I guess I didn't explain that part super well. Ultimately there are many ways to curate content, and I think the most obvious way (reblogging) should be monetized as well. Curation should be an opt-in mechanic taken out of the backend consensus layer and made as more of a frontend contract to be controlled by content creators directly.

I also know we need to make a bad ass reputation system that helps content get exposure but I could probably write like 5 pages on that topic (and perhaps already have) so I'll just leave it at that for now.

This is a key problem - all the discussion of this stuff is totally incomprehensible to most of the people who produce content, and most potential investors.

Meanwhile there are investors watching this platform who know that money in the bank is going backwards and it's far from safe, and they want an investment that pays a return. If Hive can pay 10% return from passive investment (mainly curation rewards from delegating) they would be in. But any threat to that or danger of infighting like on Steemit and it goes into bullion - no returns, but a safe bet.

If potential investors watching my account are asking me - would I get 10% returns?, my honest answer is I have no frigging idea. What we want is things just left as they are so we can see how it goes.

And for me most reblogging is just a pain in the arse - I want to choose who I see on my timeline myself.

Reputation - whatever system is used, geeks with $ will always have the highest ones. I'd like that left alone too - getting to 68 took me ages, but that is the way things were, why change it now?

Four years of constant change leaves everyone totally sick of change. Fakebook never changes and it's #1 - same with Bitcoin - change is not a desirable thing, especially not at this point in history. in 2020 everyone is looking for a rock to hang on to.


change is not a desirable thing

I think that is the main point we can really all take away from this.
Patience is a virtue.

Facebook never changes?
Here's a history up to 4 years ago:

Here are the massive UI changes implemented in 2020

And that's just looking at the superficial stuff. Algorithm changes are far more frequent and have a bigger impact. They integrated a way to send money through their messenger, and host marketplaces. Many things have changed with FB over the past 4 years

If anything, Facebook has changed more over the past 4 years than Hive (going back to when it was steem, obvs)

The other thing with fakebook is that it just gets worse every time they change it.

But the big things - algorithms that control the content, millions of fake accounts, promotion of globalist agendas, the pretense that the site is owned by the sock puppet mark suckaturd - that stuff never changes.

And for the sheeple who actually use the horrible mind programming site - it looks pretty much the same as it did 12 years ago when I used to use it myself.

I just went and tried that new interface - apart from dark mode, what a fucking mess!

Actually my account got a seven day block on my third comment because I used the word "tranny" - good job, it stopped me wasting my time looking at it any further - and I hope never to use it again

(Yes I loath and despise fakebook)

The other two parts I don't grasp:

Is there a payout for HP of about 2% as well that would bring the total return up to about 10%?

But is there also a loss due to inflation that brings the return down by about 5%?

Thanks for that handy link


I have just began some personal blogs, I will make a blog eventually and tag you along with a few other curators I enjoy

This is the age old method of killing free markets. You make as much as you can, and you fight to close the door behind you. How many people here are actively participating in governance with HP they earned from grinding out posts? The fact that people can rise in network influence organically and participate in governance is a big reason I am here. Take that away, and I'd seriously considering leaving.

Yeah, the reward pool is arguably the best thing about this place that provides us with a lot of decentralization. Everyone obsesses about token price going up and they fail to realize that a declining token price can be super healthy as long as coins are flowing from the whales to the plankton on average.

Wow, exelente post. muy instructivo, te dejo mi voto y te sigo.

I'll be the first to admit that 3 years ago I said that Bitcoin was already old news and doomed to be overshadowed by all the other projects. Now it's painfully obvious that nothing could be further from the truth.

Well stated.

Thank you for writing this ... it is STILL timely ... thank you for breaking down the math and offering a good and creative solution.