I haven't checked but someone mentioned users paying premium were literally told they'll "earn more/bigger upvotes if they are subscribed" and I doubt most of the value of those is coming in l2 compared to l1. Noticed another post today by a big stakeholder mentioning they'll give people a 100% upvote if they subscribe to them, so I guess it's kind of brushing off on them.
l1 curation should definitely not be advertised as an extra perk if you pay for certain services, people should want those services for other reasons.
Ah, yeah, that's kind of sus then. Isn't interesting that no matter how much we try to get rid of it we always come back to vote buying or the whole bidbot thing. As much as I enjoy the content on Hive, I don't think most any of it is valuable enough to support pay walls. I guess value is relative though.
I've asked this question before and while I personally have grown to enjoy a lot of content from authors on Hive that I'd definitely pay for to continue consuming it in the future, it's not really a necessity when we already have inflation rewards and feeless tips.
Generally it feels like inleo is copying ideas from X who are generally moving in the wrong direction. For instance removing basic functions people have been able to do on Hive in forever unless they buy subscriptions/premium. Now I read that X won't share adrevenue with people unless they have at least 500 premium followers, it's literally all just about getting more money and it feels like leo's following that trail at the cost of layer 1.
Hope to be proven wrong, though.
Encrypted content shouldn't be stored on chain and thus shouldn't receive l1 curation IMO, imagine looking at trending/your feed and seeing a post/comment in gibberish getting hive rewards. Just doesn't make sense. (I don't even know if that's what they're aiming towards but it seemed that way reading a few posts regarding it)
@threespeak however offering encrypted images/videos is a different thing cause they can't be stored on-chain, but will be interesting to see how that evolves and if they'll want to reward paywalled content with layer 1 as well.
Definitely some good points there. I definitely can't fault them for looking into a business model that is more or less working for someone else but I also won't be surprised to see it fail either. I think all of these things should also be taken into account when it comes to DHF funding. Sadly though people don't seem to care. Personally, I won't be putting my content behind a paywall. I hope the majority of the people I regularly follow feel the same way.