You are viewing a single comment's thread from:

RE: Improving the Economics of Steem: A Community Proposal

in #steem • 6 years ago (edited)

Just quoting myself from earlier:

Curation is about incentivizing stakers to actually vote on content which they believe others would agree is appealing by rewarding them for it. It's true that established authors can become very 'sticky' but this is also true for all other platforms. It can incentivize people to build a long term reputation.

Curation is a zero sum game which forces voters to compete with incrementally earlier votes over established authors and at some point you'll likely lose more due to the 15 minute curation tax timer than if you were to seek out less established authors with appealing content

Some amount of free downvotes is one mechanism that can further serve to increase mobility away from established authors, as people will be more liberal in their use to bring down posts that are overpaid, and curators over time will need to adapt their behavior if they wish to maximize their rewards.

6 years ago in #steem by
$0.00
    3 votes
    Reply 2
    Sort:  
  • Trending
    • [-]
     6 years ago  

    It's true that established authors can become very 'sticky' but this is also true for all other platforms.

    So because you can't figure out how to improve the situation you want to double down on it?

    It can incentivize people to build a long term reputation.

    And it can incentivize giving up if it looks like becoming successful is an extreme long shot.

    at some point you'll likely lose more due to the 15 minute curation tax timer than if you were to seek out less established authors with appealing content

    The current proposal doesn't change the 15 minute thing, so whatever effect you think it has should already be in effect, no? Also, in response to someone else in the thread you said:

    The 15 minute curation tax timer are one of many other secondary issues that deserve another look at, but they're not what I call core economic issues, that is I don't believe they'll materially affect the content indifferent voting behavior problem we have

    So which is it, it doesn't have an effect or it's the solution to the problem?

    [-]
     6 years ago  

    The current proposal doesn't change the 15 minute thing, so whatever effect you think it has should already be in effect, no?

    Currently we have pretty much complete system wide failure as the vast majority of active SP are just winding up back into the staker's pocket via some form of content indifferent voting (self voting vote selling).

    The 15 minute timer has an effect on the issue you're raising: the mobility of votes when it comes to established authors. Currently, the focus is on avoiding the near complete failure of votes to reflect content on any level, which it doesn't have too much of an effect on.