IMO the most important thing is to widen the appeal of the platform beyond blogging. That could be the promised marketplace, it could be adding better support and encouragement for microblogging, picture sharing, link sharing, etc.
Blogging is too narrow a market with little growth potential, and one that naturally concentrates contributions (and therefore rewards, under any rational scheme that rewards according to contribution) with a relatively small group of successful bloggers.
That is why there isn't much demand for SP right now. Introduce more visible growth potential and investors will be more interested.
It is almost as if someone who is a himself a blogger designed and built this system oblivious to the fact that most social media users and most people are not and do not want to be bloggers.
Constant tweaking of the rules, apart from its own harms, is a massive distraction from addressing the key critical issues that need to be addressed in order for this system to be viable at all. Without investors wanting to buy in, it isn't, and without much better visible growth potential investors will not want to buy in. Period.
A huge untapped potential still exists with blogging. For instance, zerohedge would be a huge score if they moved to steem. They could get paid for every post (probably $1000s), solve their troll problem, and create a permanent record of their work in case they were attacked. It seems like it would be an easy sell for a marketing department targeting these types of users. The devs should allocate some funds towards this.
But who ever heard of a @dantheman project that didn't involve constant tweaking of the rules?
I'm starting to think you're a sockpuppet of mine I'm posting with in my sleep.
I think trying to widen the appeal of the platform beyond blogging is indeed a great idea. This can attract new investors to join steemit and stabilize the steem price.
Secondly, lowering the interest on steem power should be done asap. People are powering down, simply because they earn more interest than they lose by powering down. The high growth in interest makes everyone want to power down.
This 2 measures combined together will already have a huge impact on the stability of the steem price. Many people will immediately stop powering down.
Maybe the powering down rate should be tied to inflation. 1% is fine when there is 90 percent inflation but when inflation is 230 percent power down is 3% per week.
Yes. That is a possibility. I just think that we need to get our act straight, and start following the white paper. In the white paper the system described seems sustainable.
Can you explain this in more detail? Why would reducing the benefits of holding Steem Power increase demand for Steem Power?
When reducing the earnings for powering up from 0.6% per day to 0.19% as stated in the white paper, people will have less incentive to power down. While today when powering down, the earnings of steem power is still greater than the conversion from steem power to steems. If your steem power is growing even when you power down, why would you power up?
Secondly when doing this the distribution, which is one of the goals, happens also much faster. It takes only 25 weeks to get rid of 25%. At the rate of today it would take much longer.
I agree that the "blogging only" aspect makes steemit unlike the social media it is trying to revolutionize and replace.
Most traditional social media users have a more "consumer" behaviour, rather than "producer" (content creation, i.e. blogging) behaviour; therefore hindering growth and widespread acceptance.
spun content.If it remains blogging only, as @bacchist warns we will end up with more
THIS is exactly what I am grappling with. I'm not a blogger, why am I here?
One word.
Commerce.