You are viewing a single comment's thread from:

RE: Investing through delegation and curation

in #smt6 years ago (edited)

A 50/50 rewards model would result in high-quality-content creators being rewarded the most, while low-quality-content creators find great difficulty.
A 50/50 split creates a competitive environment, standards are raised, content creators put more thought and effort into their creations, the platform becomes a source of great content that will attract people from around the world

See, thats exactly whats wrong with this proposal. It makes people jump to what could be best described as the "most intuitive conclusion" without actually having to look deeper into their arguments.
Its great that you have a lot of faith in "humanity" but the facts point into another direction.
We need to try and analyze behavior patterns before making such a drastic change.

Im sorry to say but not a single thing you said here is likely to happen.

  1. Whats "high quality" and whats "low quality"?
  2. Standards are raised? Why would they be raised? You reduce the payouts across the board and expect people to put in more effort?
  3. The platform becomes a source of great content?

I appreciate your positive outlook but everything points in another direction..
Under 1. you just put all your faith into the hands of a few whale curators that might or might not know whats best. Might or might not increase their effectiveness. You widened the overall wealth gap between have and have nots.
Under 2. that standards will be raised? Not really. If people dont leave they are actually more likely to increase their content volume because you just cut their earnings. Instead of putting hard work into a 1-2 post/videos per day... They will put in less work per post and increase the number of posts made.
... high, low quality, etc, it doesnt matter. .. What matters is increased centralization in token distribution.

On the 3. point.... This proposal makes upvote buying cheaper and completely destroys the trending page. Trending will actually look far worse then it does now.
Unfortunately no one is willing to even consider that, because large accounts, even if they are nice enough to curate, like @acidyo here, the prospect of having such a big boost to earnings just closes their mind to any valid criticism. Witnesses follow in suite because these curation accounts are vocal and have indebted thousands of people with their work over these last 2 years..
Not until passive investors start taking back their witness votes will witness resolve start to buckle.

anyways...

What this proposal does is reduce earning potential for non-boting creators and increases earnings of large whale curators.. Small account curation efforts will not be changed even in the slightest since they earn nothing from curation. The passive investors will move their delegation away from bots, if they dont leave, will look for the next profit maximizing option which is vote selling.
Buying votes becomes cheaper and trending looks much worse then it does now.
You just made things 10 times worse.