Burn post for January 23. Current rules are here: https://steemit.com/steem/@smooth/burn-post-experiment-one-week-review-and-rules-update
Steem experiment: Burn post #8
7 years ago in #steem by burnpost (82)
$543.47
- Past Payouts $543.47
- - Author $418.82
- - Curators $124.65
47 votes
- blocktrades: $260.88
- smooth-a: $166.93
- shaka: $38.78
- cryptoctopus: $30.41
- fabien: $16.97
- netuoso: $14.37
- anyx: $10.16
- amartinezque: $1.69
- armentor: $1.57
- offoodandart: $0.62
- alao: $0.42
- katharsisdrill: $0.39
- healthbasics: $0.10
- meldesixym: $0.03
- deliberator: $0.03
- thabiggdogg: $0.01
- tigeriseye: $0.01
- nickonator: $0.01
- khalilakirar: $0.01
- miss-marple: $0.01
- and 27 more
looking forward to tracking the result going forward.
nice experiment on steem keep it on
Interested to see how this turns out
Is it a burn post now or how do i understand it? ;)
nice experiment ✌👌👌
Question. I understand the burn is meant to, long-term, decrease the value of SBD as well as increase the price of STEEM. This is meant to deter those wishing to spam content in order to generate and sell SBD, to the detriment of the community as a whole.
Another argument for these burn posts is that increasing the value of STEEM is good for everyone.
But, in order for the value of STEEM to increase based on the actions of 1 (or an easily trackable number of users), I assume this means that there will be less liquid STEEM on the market, correct?
So when you say "good for everyone", in reality, increasing the price of STEEM in the short-term this way actually overly benefits those already invested in the system. It's a price manipulation that is beneficial to those with the most money already. Which to me would seem counter-intuitive to the whole ethos of Steem based platforms (though that is perhaps just my assumption).
Overall, while I understand the desire to reduce the incentive for those who take more than they likely should from the rewards pool, decreasing the value of the liquid rewards (SBD) also hurts new users who don't already have lots of STEEM. The incentive that drives user growth is the same as that which drives these "scams", and fighting one inevitably affects the other.
I'm certainly no economist, but I daresay that those making these decisions to burn rewards, as well as those upvoting these posts, are not either. And the narrowly focused efforts of price manipulation in this manner to combat what we can only hope is a small percentage of user actions feels like a blunt response to a nuanced issue.
Not necessarily. Rewards are determined based on both STEEM value and SBD value. If the STEEM value goes up that also benefits those receiving rewards, not only those who already own STEEM. However, to the extent that the price of STEEM goes up and the price of SBD goes down, the rewards will return closer to their intended mix of 50% SP and 50% SBD. This is likely to be more attractive to those interested in the long-term health of the platform and less in milking rewards and immediately cashing out.
Proof of burn
Author reward 209.405 SBD, and 34.867 STEEM POWER for burnpost/steem-experiment-burn-post-8
Sold 209.405 SBD for 227.490 STEEM on internal market
https://steemd.com/tx/ef6dc2f53e7ef817003406ed806cb5f276e0a9f1
Power up of 227.490 STEEM since SBD > $1
https://steemd.com/tx/9b24e7d4d5b00fc39d644fb18855c62a50ac87b1