interesting point, as someone that has a partly knowledge of how this work and i may be wrong, you missed one big point. number of authors vs number of witnesses. let's say there is 100.000 steem to share. authors get 52.100, witnesses 11.100. lets say there are only 10.000 authors, it is 5,2 steem per author. and there are 200 witnesses, that is 55,5 steem per witness.
one of the things that i don't know about steem, if there is no authors, would witnesses still make steem?
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
I didn’t miss that point at all. Authors/Commenters are actually taking in 56% of the reward pool. The rest is divided between curators, witnesses, and interest.
By far, the largest single group of users and potential users is content consumers. Most people are not bloggers and don’t want to be. That is the demographic that would benefit most from curation rewards and would represent the exponential growth that everyone wants to see.
But what do we say to them? ”You don’t matter! Put your money in and give it to authors who need to get paid!”
If there are no witnesses, who would sign the blocks where authors put their content? Author rewards are a byproduct of actual investment. They aren’t needed in order for the blockchain to function or for speculators/investors to speculate/invest.
that is what i did not know. so technically steem does not need authors to exist and witnesses and investors will still earn steem?
no problem with giving more to consumers/curators. but to curate/consume you need something to consume.
As a continual buyer of steem i'm not worried about the nothing to consume bit.