You are viewing a single comment's thread from:

RE: Arguments For Keeping the Steem Reward Pool Whole

in #steem8 years ago (edited)

I still can't see the problem. What is 38% of a completely speculatively valued token? Those that are treating this like a pay cut are behaving as though the money comes from the the amount of steem you have access to and not the actual value of that steem. 38% of a rewards pool that would be split between over 1000x more engagers than bloggers was never a high number. The mechanics of using posts vs comments doesn't change! So I don't understand how this "steem isn't just steemit" point is relevant to a split reward pool.

You say steem is not just steemit yet maybe fail to recognise the inherent flaw in a shared reward pool when comment threads become embedded on other websites. That reward pool would not increase enough with a less super linear reward pool because curators will always gain more curation by staying on steemit.com. But this is to become much bigger than steemit and engagers are or at least will be our most valuable asset.

Here's my defense https://steemit.com/comments/@beanz/justification-for-comment-reward-pool-without-curation-rewards

Without this feature the hard-fork is pointless me.

Sort:  

Experience has proven Steem is better left untailored towards any specific application. Tailoring it towards steemit.com or some as-yet unbuilt Disqus type thing adds complication and limits its scope. Leaving its potential open (and making development choices simple and with less doubt about future feature support) could be an important driver of growth through Steem-connected apps that aren't specifically for commenting or blogging.

And as I replied to your other comment: In the separated comment reward fund that Steem 0.17.0 includes, curation rewards are still in effect for comments. https://steemit.com/simplicity/@steemitblog/update-on-simplicity-cutting-complexity-with-steem-0-17-0

Without this feature the hard-fork is pointless me.

A 255-comment nesting limit, no 4-post/day penalty, independent comment payouts, and incentivizing Steem apps by splitting post earnings are pointless?

A 255-comment nesting limit, no 4-post/day penalty, independent comment payouts

These are backward steps in the right direction. So not pointless, but not the same as progress.

I understand the resistance to limitations for external applications. But Steem will not be applicable to everything. By trying to make it so we limit progress as we stand at crossroads never taking any direction. It was intended to be a social media platform. We can either accept that or come to a consensus on an alternative. Do you think we would ever reach that consensus so far into the game?

Claiming that separating the reward pool limits applications is also no more true than posts being inherently different from comments on the blockchain already does. There is already limitations that any app developer would have to work around, perhaps by disabling comments and using posts only. The reward pool makes absolutely no difference to their ability to build.

To make that claim please provide an example of what you imagine and then let us determine if the separated reward pools would really hinder it.

I also remember you at the forefront against removing that portion of curation rewards, which made the implementation easily gamed.

Once again steem can't be everything, if we try to make it everything it won't ever be anything.

Experience has proven

Experience suggests, it alone rarely proves anything.

By trying to make it so we limit progress as we stand at crossroads never taking any direction.

If Steem is left open, progress can be made on the application level. Please see my and @smooth's [indirect] reply to @edje's comment above.

There is already limitations that any app developer would have to work around

This is true. Specifically rate limiting of comment replies vs. posts. But there isn't any reason to make more hurdles, first of all. Second, arbitrarily changing the basic rules of rewards distribution does not make an inviting platform. I'll point again to the replies to @edje above.

I also remember you at the forefront against removing that portion of curation rewards, which made the implementation easily gamed.

I agree that curation rewards on a separate comment pool are a bad idea. I touch upon it in the fourth paragraph. And further, removing any more curation rewards thus eroding SP earning potential should be avoided as well. It's not mentioned in this post because it's a non-factor. The separate comment pool, as it is in v0.17.0, has curation rewards.

These things considered, both having and not having curation rewards for a divided reward pool aren't good options.