Entitlement has been mentioned a few times today and it just came up again in a conversation with @abh12345 on what exactly are we entitled to here. Well the obvious answer is nothing followed by, our stake. The system is designed to reward based on what is in our powered up wallet, it is our influence over the system and our draw on the pool. So, does that mean that we are entitled to the value of our vote x 10?
Now, I am not recommending self voting 10 times a day and I will get to why later however, if we were to think about it as an investment, we have that value to play with each day which means if we were to maximize our own vote to use only on ourselves, it would be current vote value x 10. For me (only my stake) that would means 25,286 SP = 1.75 x 10. Lets pretend no one else votes, and I get full curation return.
That means I am currently entitled to 17.50 per day based upon my personal stake. Using this draw on the pool I would get about 25% return on my held SP per year which is about 6300 SBD per year (There is also a compound effect in play that increases it but my head hurts). That is a pretty incredible return considering that a bank offers 0.25 percent or some nonsense like that.
But, I have 25,286 SP. What if I had 100 SP? 100 SP has a vote value of 1 cent but has an identical entitlement in the system. and at the end of the year I have my 25% on top and have 25 SP extra. Fantastic. I of course would need 10 targets each day to do this which is 3650 posts of some kind and vote each one. That seems like a lot of work for 25 SP which has a value of 20 dollars US currently.
So, self voting is only really beneficial if one has stake but, it is what people are entitled to as the code allows it. So, anyone who has earned more than their stake value on average has benefited from the system, from the community, from the platform above and beyond their entitlement. Remember that most people have stake here without buying in, it is community provided.
But of course, if everyone just self votes in the system that leads the system absolutely nowhere and it will collapse because it holds nothing of value. The value on the Steem blockchain is the content itself and that content is supposed to draw value to it based on the community opinion about whether it is valuable or not. The reason it is designed this way I think is so that it can distribute and reward Steem to where the community believes Steem is best rewarded. It is a community responsibility to decide what has value. Decentralized free market.
But it isn't a free market because there are unnatural processes like vote buying that draws large amounts from the pool and places them on targets that the community hasn't chosen, rather the source has chosen it. This is fine as people have their stake and do with it what they will but it is essentially self-voting 80 or 90% and then placing the excess on something that the community would not support under normal circumstances. This is quite an important factor in a free-market environment isn't it?
Yes, no one is entitled to more than their stake but, this doesn't mean no one shouldn't get more than their stake worth, does it? This is the case because not all content is created equally. While some content has low value for the community, other content can have high value and if everyone is only getting the value of their stake worth, it doesn't discern the difference as there can be high value content from low stake and low value content from high stake.
This isn't about fair. Proof of Brain (whatever that is supposed to mean) should be on the voters and their decision making ability about where to put their stake to satisfy their goals. For example, while some whales self vote themselves 10 times a day like Haejin, most do not. Either they do not vote 10 times or, they spread their vote value into the community.
For example, if we are all entitled to the value of our stake than @blocktrades with their 1.7M SP and 117 dollar vote is entitled to vote on themselves 10x = 1170 a day or 8190 a week. That is a large draw on the pool and if they did that, there would be that much less in the pool each week for others. But, they are not idiots, they know that they have a business to run and in the long-term, their business activities will outstrip those earnings because the value of Steem will go up. Or at least, that is the plan. If all the whales and orcas spent their stake getting what their stake entitles them to, the place is very, very likely to collapse very fast. If everyone did it, it would be almost immediate.
This is the problem with the code is law because the coding laws allows the system to implode. The reason it doesn't is there is enough active stake currently either spreading or, remaining inactive. Personally, I prefer them to spread for two reasons. Number one is because if they have significant stake they are more likely to take an interest in distributing to value adding targets or people. Secondly, I think that I am somewhat one of those people who adds some content value here and plan to continue doing so. The first reason is more important than the second though.
The problem with the bought target votes is that the value of the purchase goes to vote sellers who are indifferent to the content itself which means it might not have any value to anyone whatsoever. Their purchasing price even if it gets powered up goes to vote sellers who will sell it continually back indifferently while continually increasing their draw on the pool. In the long-run, the only content that has any support is that with paid votes and, the system doesn't work as there is no content value required, which makes a content blockchain valueless.
If there is no reason for anyone to come here to read and all they see is adverts and low quality boosted content, there is no reason for them to stay. If they come here and find content across various topics of interest and quality, they are likely to stay and consume it which means, there is attentional value in the content on the blockchain and therefore value in Steem. This is good for anyone who holds Steem.
This was meant to be about entitlement but I think it has turned more into something about our responsibilities in a decentralized community that is supposedly looking to expand and add value to the community. At the moment it represents a crony government system, because the community can be bribed into placing its stake on content it normally wouldn't. We normally call that a crooked government but on a decentralized blockchain it is poor governance. But the code allows it because we are free to act with our stake as we choose.
This isn't about whales, orcas and dolphins because, minnows and redfish do exactly the same thing. Not all, but many. I often talk about the evils of consumerism but it isn't necessarily evil, it is just that we are prone to buy what harms us. We buy on credit and inflation increases, we buy disposable trash and pollute the environment. The problem isn't in the buying, it is in what we are spending our value upon. If we let the corporations choose for us, what choices will they make and what happens to their product quality when we give decision making power to them.
I don't want my content in Trending unless the community decides it should be there. I don't want to have 1000 dollars on my post unless it is worth the vote of all the whales required to get it there. People are boosting with nothing to sell but their content and it is often severely lacking and of the type that no one with eyes would buy, especially at those prices. That isn't promotion.
In my opinion, we need to think about these things more and consider what this blockchain is. What that means is to decide where, what and who our stake goes to support because with so much stake going to so few and those few bringing very little of value to the blockchain (they add value to the vote sellers), then the blockchain as a whole will struggle to gain traction.
We know that we need a consumer class of user here who isn't interested in earning but is interested in commenting, watching, reading and spreading the decentralization of content so distribution can widen also but, what are they going to consume? "Get rich quick schemes" in trending? Who the hell wants to consume that other than people who are looking to benefit from the system with as little input as possible? Are they value adding?
Despite the issues, the future here is bright and at some point, the change will come that will minimize the benefits of vote selling and maximize the value of being active and sensitive to where stake is applied to distribute. It will change with RC delegations, it will change with SMTs and airdrops, it will change with competition and technology but eventually, something will put a stop to it and those who have enjoyed their boosted unseen sense of grandeur will be left out in the cold and those who built a network and a community will be firmly at the core.
What we think we create. What we support we encourage. Find the people worth supporting, the people who will fill this blockchain with content value, personality value, technological value and of course, community value. Everyone is entitled to decide what they do with their stake. Some have brains, some are blind.
This is a bit of a rant of thoughts pouring out but the medical treatment I had today has me with a migraine, it is 3 am and I have been up for 21 hours already. My aim was to write a short post with some outlined thoughts for some discussion value as I haven't written one of these pieces for a while.
Taraz
[ a Steem original ]
Having done the babies and toddlers thing previously, I know the time you use for writing is probably all the time you have available to write. But sometimes I really think you should give posting a miss (maybe jot down some notes quickly if the ideas are really buzzing) and just sleep XD
On the entitlement thing you mentioned earlier well pretty much the only thing I feel entitled to is people to be polite to me (and ideally everyone else) because I'm (usually trying to be) polite to everyone, but I know that I'm probably not entitled to even that so I'm usually just exasperated if people are being obnoxious..
We do definitely need more dedicated consumers in here (didn't think I would actually need to say something like that XD).
I think that this is just golden rule stuff unfortunately, there are people who are disingenuous, scammers, trolls etc that upset the barrel cart. For the most part though, I think that it is pretty well polite here :)
It would make the place healthier since it is a content platform that requires it :D
It is more polite around here (at least for now, I wonder if that would change with more curators/consumers) which is why I eventually started reading comment sections again :) Prior experience on other blogs and socnets generally had me learning to avoid comment sections like the plague XD
I was actually chatting about the returns the other day.If you invested in a bank you would be lucky to see 6% here I don't know what it is in Europe but is still low.
On Steemit you can double your investment in 6 months if you are smart and have a following.I would be disapointed at 10 percent a week but then it is easier when you are smaller. You are a lot bigger so I guess if you did 2% a week that would be great.That is still nearly more than 100% more than the bank per year. It does make you think and how it snowballs very quickly. I was on 500 SP day before yesterday and crazy enough nearly 600 SP today.
What I don't get is that people spend so much time worrying about others they forget to check the mirror.
Once i stopped using bots, realizing of course that its pointless and useless anyways, and once i realized that i will never make much more than 5 cents to a dollar only if i am very lucky... all the hard work just seemed for nothing. Steemit is now just a place to dop by once in awhile, read the regulars, resteem some things, cash in the few fractions of a penny every week or so for my "curation" work, and if i ever want a place to write an article if i get the itch, i have it.
The haijen thing and the flagging wars were a bit much.
Its like socialism, i guess. Relying on people with the power to do the right thing for the community is a pipe dream. It never works and It will never work.
Limited government is best... or forks that incentivize the desired behavior. If left up to our own devices, humanity will fail every single time.
yes and no. Slowly the distribution would happen organically but the problem with the bots is it encourages it to a narrow point again.
Probably. Accepting it and doing nothing guarantees it.
It's 11pm here and I'm not sure how coherent I am, Because I'm ready for sleep!
My biggest bugbear with the bidbots is that they affect the trending page. I've no issue with paid advertising, but they should be on a promoted or sponsored page. Trending is supposed to be what the community has decided is popular, so when people from outside see our trending page it reflects on what kind of a community we have going here and it's not currently reflecting us very well.
If we all followed haejin's lead it wouldn't be a very interesting place, would it? Nobody reading each other's work, just posting and upvoting their own.
Posted using Partiko Android
Yep. they should be at the very least marked promoted.
there are many who complain about the experience here and when i check their accounts, they don't engage with others at all. They post and expect rewards to come their way.
Hey, @tarazkp.
I guess I've always thought of entitlement as something you don't have, but that you want, but don't have the resources to get it with. But you get it, because someone else gets it for you.
But in this case, you're using the definition that means you have the right to do what you want with your own property, mind, life, etc., or in this case, your own stake in STEEM.
Which I wholeheartedly agree with, even if it includes self-upvoting, buying bid bot votes, delegating SP for a fee, etc. Those are all things you have a right to do.
But just as you said when the post turned to a discussion on rights vs. responsibilities, just because we have the right to do things, doesn't mean we should.
It took a while for me to change how I look at STEEM, since I came into it under the belief that it was strictly a social media site where I got paid by other users who liked my posts. Well, it's much more than that, even though that's what is happening.
What I've decided defines it better is a global digital economy in waiting, that currently serves mainly as an investment platform, but that has a working social media platform and some side businesses, too. Platforms and businesses that at once work together and against each other depending on the natural needs of the parties involved.
That, too me, makes it dynamic, ever evolving, and somewhat of a herky jerky mess in the process.
Hope you're feeling better from your medical treatment and got some rest in the process.
First of all I like photography are fish and these are my favorites
Since Steemit was updated there have been many questions we know that the flow is not as before but it is perhaps because we still do not understand this completely and everything has a reason why
It's always good to read you because it opens my mind and leads me to think more there I have little SP so everything is a bit more complicated for me
I feel the same way. Community interaction is what makes Steemit. Organic value is the best...much better than the bought type. I do not upvote myself but perhaps I should. LOL Yes a whale vote or support like @blocktrades is sweet.. and motivates the heart. But too much of a good thing can diminish the appreciation of the gift. Creative quality posts do not go unrewarded. Thanks @tarazkp
This is the problem with the bought votes. It is guaranteed support regardless. Yes it can get flagged but there aren't many with the power and will to do much damage to them.
Dear @tarkzp. Your analysis is very interesting because it explains better what are the advantages and disadvantages of working in steemit and get better performance of the platform in function to the publications made.
Congratulations @tarazkp! You have completed the following achievement on the Steem blockchain and have been rewarded with new badge(s) :
Award for the number of comments received
Click on the badge to view your Board of Honor.
If you no longer want to receive notifications, reply to this comment with the word
STOP
Do not miss the last post from @steemitboard:
I think you are speaking about a concern I have with SMT/Oracles and the big circle-jerks staying clear and continuing to do what they have done for years now. Why involve yourself in the above when the circular voting and bidbot delegations continue to pay?
One possible outcome of this is that the STEEM token loses its value compared to that of an SMT, which is backed by stronger governance (one account one vote, no bid-bots, etc) and becomes the 'alt coin' of the Steem Blockchain.
It's not clear in my mind as yet, and this is unlikely to be the case until it happens, if it happens, but it's something to think about at least.
Yeah, it is all speculation and conjecture. For example, a lot of people have said that the curation returns for small accounts would go down after hf20 but from what I have heard, they are going up a lot since they can now compete fairly.
There is a greater % of Rshares lost with a smaller vote, but a good vote time of 500000 (or so!) rshares will do well now, as it did in the past.
Thanks for writing this one, it's given me a topic for today, if actually leave the bar 🙄
It seems that the 1.2 SP lost is made up for by the increase in game.
I don't have a clear enough picture yet or at this hour) but there is also the potential that communities could form on SMTs that change the way they reward and interact and although use steem, empower the communities though SMT value. The Steem circles might flail while the SMTs thrive on the blockchain.
I will think more on it tomorrow.