Agree with much of the sentiment but not so much the seemingly prevailing notion of eliminating the reward pool.
That imho would be a crucial error if we were to follow through with it. If we think our community is niche now, get rid of the author reward pool and you will see things quickly devolve.
The fanatical cultish die hards should have no problem but predict the users chasing the figurative dollar on a fishing line will lose interest unless they belong to a niche community with solid economics such as @leofinance.
What I find to be a pity is that Hive was never able to transcend it's own ideological dictates in what is mostly born of anarchist capitalist / libertarian worldviews. Now, don't get me wrong. I love freedom but I am also a strong advocate for order which entails a certain degree of organization or the dirty word *centralization.
I don't have a problem with centralized structures in place working using coordination and the collective capacity of human thought to accomplish greater objectives.
It became apparent to me that these adhoc downvote groups and trails were ineffective and inefficient in disposing of the circlejerks, vote collusion and broad exfiltration of value from the chain. (Not to mention some had their own issues that may have trumped those they tried to police)
Not to toot my own horn too much but I do believe what we had with @steemflagrewards (with @hive-dr) with the broad net we had working against comment spam and the myriad forms of token manipulation on chain could have been so much more.
Perhaps it will
As a hobbyist coder with full plate of existing responsibilities, it will happen in my time but the overarching idea is to not only use the project to mitigate token manipulation on chain but also provide moderation services on platforms off chain using a system of tokenization similar to what we had on Steem.
It seemed the ad hoc groups seemed to think they were able to handle the abuse without a centralized group working as a hivemind of sorts in a decentralized reward structure. I've been accused of being an authoritarian utopian before. Maybe the shoe fits but doesn't change the fact that the thing that proceeded from that vision was proportionally more effective than other moderation entities... Operating at a fraction of the cost.
Now, I don't mean to suggest that moderation is the ONLY issue. There are other vectors of significant value loss that should also be addressed. My opinion, based on some data is the DAO is one of them.
Edit: Sorry noticed some typographic issues and felt the need to clarify so updated
It would never scale. It doesn't solve the problem because the global reward pool is a bad idea. There's literally no unified standard for judging all content except in obvious cases.
It forces these "groups" to play perpetual "whack-a-mole" on the same target. Guess what? You can't stop them from earning curation unless you want to wipe bystanders out.
Tribes (and SMTs supposedly) can allow or disallow the flow of rewards without these pointless bloat that don't go anywhere.
No global reward pool means:
Less pretense "content creators"
Less pretense "curators"
Less pretense "social" bullshit
Maybe more focus on the actual economics
Some people tout the "millions of transactions on Hive" a day, but they are worthless metrics, especially for a group of people we like to dangle "genuine interactions" as a catch phrase or ideal.
the pretentiousness is what killed most of the fun and it shows in the price and people leaving or barely interacting
The Hive doing a new page showing what "level" people are in this idiotic aquatic ecosystem is about the dumbest 'marketing' tool to do what? Negatively reinforce people to invest so their lil' avi isn't a tiny fish? smdh
I agree with that assessment. There are a bunch of people "in charge" that literally don't have expertise in social media and yet they try to "build it".
is why anyone with any real stuff laughs at dpos and is either leaving or powering down their accounts it looks like, the marketing is beyond poor, the people who actually have real life connections and leverage are starved out by this little group of middle aged basement dwellers who just wait for noodz.....over it
Even the nudes here aren't that good. lol
I don't think it necessarily follows but I understand there are significant weaknesses while at the same time it has it's strengths in its topical versatility. Granted it requires curators but things go awry when too much bias enters the process.
That's when we get voting cliques that turn people off as they become disillusioned from the buzzwords that may have brought them here. I personally do not think it's impossible to manage a global reward pool but it requires some degree of judiciousness and organization.
It just seems to be an asset of great potential if we get it operating properly. It's like having a crab bucket but getting rid of it because we can't seem to get rid of the leaks. I just can't seem to get around this idea that removing the RP is like putting your car in a donut.
The issue will still have to be addressed eventually.
Is the concept that these siloed layer 2 communities would be able to reward and moderate their users and minimize selling of the native token? Is that the idea?
And how? Without overwhelming stake? And why do you suppose those with stake are obligated to help you in your crusade? Did it ever occur to you that the person who bought all that stake didn't want to be involved in this complexity? And why do you suppose "mob A" is better than "mob B"?
Obviously yes. Is it easier to stop the leaks because you control the flow of the tokens? Or is it easier to somehow acquire millions and millions of HP to suppress the so called leaks on a decentralized global reward pool?
Not to mention the time and commitment required to operate like a ridiculous "police state".
There's also more incentives to build the value of your token than fighting the overarching market forces when it comes to HIVE.
Do you know how the current tribe tokens work?
When an account is "banished":
What happens on Hive:
Whether or not SMTs would work the same way as imagined is another story.
It's a reasonable argument but regardless the reward pool being present is a huge impetus for engagement, whether genuine or contrived.
Move it to second layer and it won't change that incentive, but enhance it so people aren't just farming at everyone else’s expense.
It would only affect some instead.
I hear you on pretense. That's a by product of ego. More we keep it in check the better.
Personally, there is genuinely good interaction on chain and it would be nice if it were advantageous to reward engagement again on general purpose blogs.
Maybe when hive engine is decentralized things will be better. Hard to say how things are gonna shake rn
NO!
Decentralizing Hive Engine is retarded. Go straight for SMT. Why the hell are we creating TWO consensus layers.
You know they work on atomic swap to help two CHAINS interoperate. Why the hell are we doing this two chain thing to ourselves?
Good point!