Thank you, @laonie. You were certainly someone I had in mind when I made my comment. I don't agree with everything you've said here (I really like the concept of vested shares which represent a long-term commitment, along with the idea of purchasing influence on the social network side of the ecosystem), but I really, really appreciate your perspective. I really hope, in the long term, your investments turn around, and you are made whole here. In a very real sense, you have been funding Steemit for the past few months and Dan and Ned (IMO) owe you a rather large debt of gratitude.
I'm curious why the change would attract long term investors as you described? To me, Steem Power was a long-term investor's dream. Unfortunately, the liquid steem dumped on the market caused that dream to turn into a nightmare as the price of steem fell through the floor.
I don't like the idea of rewarding bloggers with stakeholder's money
That's a really interesting way to put it. If we don't reward them with that money, who's money do we reward them with? Value can't be created from nothing. I don't know what the balance is, but if we're going to continue to have valuable payouts, the money has to come from somewhere (i.e. investors propping up the value of the rewarded token). As you said, though, if other systems did this, their share price would tank.
I agree entertainment should be the key, but I also think different people come here for different things. Some value the long posts more than any other posts anywhere else. I hope there's room for everyone's preferences.
Thanks again for your reply. It means a lot to me.
For long-term investors, if the price increased tenfold in a short time, most of them would want to sell most of the stakes, they don't want to be forced to hold. The long withdraw time is a big turn off for them.
We should treat every investor equally, it's hard to tell who is short-term holder, who is long-term holder.
If you are a reader, you like a post, you can reward the author with your own money, if you reward the author with other's money , that's called corruption or tragedy of common.
Paying users for content is a market differentiation for Steemit and is it's biggest selling feature to gain adoption. The revenue will come from the attention economy and advertising.
Bringing in ad revenues is the real solution that will add value for investors.
This is what I have been saying for a while now too. The content brings viewers, so it should be paid for by those who want exposure. The pool of rewards needs to be neutralised by income somehow, or it destroys the investment potential.
Ads are dying online.
Way better to allow for topical writing prizes, of which steem keeps some fraction. See: Rancher's article bounty system.
@laonie wrote:
Tipping will never be viable.
I understand that perspective of rewarding them with other people's money, but bitcoin rewards miners with investors' money as new bitcoin is created. I see steemit doing the same thing by rewarding those who create the content which give the social media ecosystem value. Other cryptocoins are investments only whereas this one includes author rewards. As long as the price is going up, it works well for everyone. Whenever the price just goes down and investors can't get out, it does seem fraudulent.
@lukestokes
The beauty of PoW is that there's no centralization of power, bitcoin treat every miner and every stakeholder equally , and bitcoin has the first move advantage, but STEEM doesn't , if steemit cann't grow it's user base, it would be dead.
If people don't get paid to post, what exactly is the selling point of steemit.com?
If people are leaving even they get paid to post, what exactly is the point to pay for ?
That's waste of money.
If you want to win a user's heart, money just won't work.
@snowflake Thanks for asking. An update will be released after Steemfest.
How is steemQ doing? Any progress report for the community? :)
@laonie wrote:
You are correct that users won't stay just for money and the site must be enjoyable/meaningful even without remuneration, because it is mathematically impossible to pay users enough for blogging from debasement of investors.
However if users stayed because they are investors, then they could have both their heart and mind vested in it. That was one of my key insights when I realized how to make a better Steem "clone".
Voting is the problem (because as one of my blogs pointed out, it is impossible to avoid Sybil attacks without handing that voting power to the whales which thus centralizes the ranking and reward system).
Btw, remember I responded to one of your blogs in August and warned you that you were throwing your BTC down a rat hole. Maybe next time you listen more carefully to what I have to say.