If steemsports would be non-profit
This is a nonsense argument. They never claimed to be non-profit, nor is there any requirement that businesses within the Steem/it ecosystem be non-profit. We want to attract and encourage businesses to form, invest, build, market, and create value in the Steem/it ecosystem, which is exactly what Steemsports is doing.
The whole vote-buying aspect is completely irrelevant too. Most of the rewards on Steemsports, and everything else, come from whale voters who probably don't participate in the contests at all, or disqualify themselves by voting for both outcomes. If whales do participate (occasionally I do, just for the hell of it), the payout is far less than what I could earn on curation voting for something else (if I win, which isn't guaranteed).
When it comes down to it, Steemsports isn't really gambling, and it isn't really vote buying. It is sports blogging with a give-away or faucet-like contest attached to it. But either way, it certainly isn't non-profit (nor are most posters on here) and that's perfectly okay.
I beg to disagree since it is the reason so many people band wagon into the game with no interest in the content or "fun" and clearly the reason they are afraid to dump that aspect.
It's a sports-themed faucet. Faucets are popular (surprise, free money!) but they have their place. The nature of all faucets, including this one, is that they appeal most to small holders or non-holders (large holders can't be bothered), thus broadening and expanding the distribution.
I see nothing wrong with giving away coins, nor with getting support from major stakeholders to build a sports-themed concept and blog and a game around giving away coins, something which major stakeholders of crypto platforms often support. We'll have to agree to disagree.
Well said @smooth, thank you!
I do not said that they have to be non-profit. I said that if they would, then I could believe, that they are not taking advantage of whole community.
If the whole steemsports team were to be paid from the daily rewards, it would be more profitable for us to quit steemsports and go work @ mcdonalds for 1hr each and enjoy the rest of the day.
Free games have a place and time, and currently they are helping us bootsrap SteemSports (amongst other things, such as providing a faucet and driving engagement).
However, the only way how SS can win in the long term is if we can build something that can attract thousands of players from the outside of steem community that is willing to play real money games. That requires time and capital, and because SteemSports is based on STEEM, its user acquisition is also STEEM user acquisition.
More users on STEEM + demand for STEEM and SBD are a net positive side effect on the long term.
Perhaps we did a bad job of communicating our vision. SteemSports of yesterday is completely unsustainable, and it was never intended to be the final product. We are working hard on making SteemSports real, and no - we are not getting rich of the rewards pool. It merely gives us some bootstraping power to fuel future growth, as well as drives user engagement / marketing in the interim.
We are building an app that is a more user friendly frontend to the STEEM blockchain for these types of games. The Beta is out already. We create high quality content that may hold some SEO value and bring new users to steemit.com trough search engines. The voting mechanism, if working correctly, is supposed to reward this.
We are experimenting our way into a product market fit. We have built traction and following already. We know there are thousands more people out there that we will eventually serve.
+1
Giving away free coins would be fine if it were coming from the company or person. But it isn't. It comes from the reward pool and it given to them directly by the people who want the reward. It's a game of
"I'll give you some money if you give me some money" and this is what causes a band wagon effect and this is what undermines the system in place to prevent pile ons for rewards.
The point of curating is to find quality content that other people will like. By selling our votes we are choosing content that we have been bribed to choose instead of content that interests us.
It is voters deciding that coins from the reward fund should be given away (as part of a sports-themed concept that includes blogging, an element of gameplay, and wider distribution of rewards with a low barrier to participation).
It is no different than voters deciding that coins should be spent on a billboard, or a photoshoot, or developing a mobile app, helping to fund Steemfest, or paying a writer/blogger, or anything else.
That's the nature of this system. Voters decide to allocate rewards where they think it provides the most value. I and a good number of other voters think Steemsports giving away coins to players is a good use of reward funds. I don't even participate in the games most of the time.
@smooth , if this were true then they would not need to buy the votes. Somebody who votes to get a few pence back does NOT think that adds value. They're just "playing the game" because the only way to lose the game is to not play the game.
Someone for whom voting to get a few pence back is attractive likely has a vote that is so tiny it makes no real difference. You don't seem to get that most of the rewards on those posts come from the whale votes. The requirement to vote is actually a deterrent to play by larger stakeholders and focuses the benefits of the game on smaller stakeholders because for the former, the value of the vote is more than the payout. A larger stakeholder would make more just voting on one of his or her own comments (as I did here as a demonstration for a currently-estimated payout of $7, compared to the $0.16 I got from a recent Steemsports game; I'll burn the comment reward when I receive it).
Come on Boys :)
@smooth - how many % do you own of @steemsports? and how many % does @nextgencrypto own? etc.. etc... It is a serious question btw.
come on guys - this smell "organized crime" (in lack of a better term) long way, are you taking us for fools? Are @beanz and @noisy idiots who don´t understand it, then make us all a favor and do a real keynote-presentation and account for everything in the plans, you just paid yourself a $7 upvote, and obviously you like money and business no matter if you burn the $7 publicly tomorrow matters nothing when there is a million users on @steemit and that 50% rake is worth millions of dollars over time.
I have seen how @engagement, @illbeyourfriend, @thecyclist, @croatia, @ozchartart, @coinbar, @steemservices, @ozmaster, @nextgencrypto, @silversteem, @silver, @justin, @nextgenwitness, @berniesanders and yourself (guess how many real people are behind those accounts) shit and piss on @ned & @dantheman whenever you can, wherever you can - and I think it is time for all of you "who mined Steem from the start" to put all your cards on the table and tell us what the hell it is that you want.
Why not open up the " @steemsports company " for everyone and hold an ICO and be completely transparent about it and make sense instead of sneaking around acting like first time petty thieves/pick pockets.
Have you ever considered that there might be hundreds of people in here that would like to buy shares in the SteemSports Company? I mean seriously - that account will be worth billions of dollars over time accumulating steempower, or it will become worthless if everyone who is not an owner of @steemsports organize into a union against your casino in old fashion labour-party-style.
And who knows - maybe that is exactly what will happen as smart money is coming into steemit, while ... well, "the early miners" are trying to rule this little world.
How about some common decency and transparency for once? You all gave me hell for yelling at @heiditravels one time, and you guys are a gang who points fingers at everybody but yourself. Do you not understand that we see everything you do, and talk about everything we see?
How about you guys stop being shady, and start talking with us, be upfront and honest about things for a change?
Would be profitable.
@smooth , I absolutely understand that it is the whales who are funding these vote buying games that is why I am removing my witness vote from anybody who does.
It is quite peculiar that you think providing opportunities for smaller stakeholders to easily increase their holdings and broaden the distribution of SP would be harmful and a reason to change witness votes, but everyone is entitled to use their votes as they see fit (well, not apparently according to you, but I do believe this, and that it applies to everyone including you).
This is an illusion. The minnows are increasing their holdings by a rate of less than 20c per day while this one account goes from being a minnow to a whale within a couple months without ever having to buy any steem like the rest of us. This reduces the demand for steem as successful vote buying gamers no longer have to buy to become a whale.
There was never any idea that one had to necessarily buy to become a whale. The premise of Steem has always been that if you are successful in getting votes for your content, as Steemsports has been, along with many others, you can earn your SP. Or one can buy. Both paths have always been there, just as they are now (along with mining and witnessing).