RE: How Much Have You Spent on Entertainment in Your Lifetime?

You are viewing a single comment's thread from:

RE: How Much Have You Spent on Entertainment in Your Lifetime?

theycallmedan in #steem • 5 years ago

It seems that the content creator follows an inefficient model. It's like you have 5 rocks, one being gold, and you jump lump them all together and sell for a much marked down price. Creators never had anything like steem/hive before, so it does take awhile to click. For me it took a long time to click and it's still clicking.

We got sidetracked a bit due to bidbots, it went from tipping creators with your stake to tipping yourself with your stake. But with the new EIP, vote selling isnt a thing and we are seeing people vote other people, for better or worse.

It would be really cool to have a "curator" style front end that put the emphasis on the vision you laid out.

I'm curious, and I know you're prob tired of hearing of "tweaks" but as a content creator, how do you like the current voting system. Talks of doing what Leo did and moving to a flat curation extended window. This way, lets say a very popular author comes over and explains hive gets users to power up etc. Now he is getting a lot of auto votes, but the curators are competing so much they are voting at 3mins and ruining curations rewards for all. I think the flat curation could solve the getting shafted crackhead feeling.

I'm at a place where I'm not looking to tweak "layer 1" that much, more so moving to a new frontier called layer 2. But before I completely get my focus off of layer 1 I'd like at least one last community effort to see what can be improved. The EIP really changed this place forever, and that was really the first main community-oriented change outside of INC back in the day. I'd like to take what we learned and see if we can do it one more time as a community.

5 years ago in #steem by theycallmedan

0.00 BPC

1 vote

Sort:

Trending

[-]

nonameslefttouse 5 years ago

This post was more recent, again talking about consumers. I don't think many saw this one. Every time I start thinking about changes and tweaks, I look at what we have, what might be coming, and what's missing. What we have depends on consumers, what's coming depends on consumers, and what we're missing are consumers.

0.00 BPC

4 votes

[-]

nonameslefttouse 5 years ago

The problem with total freedom is when you give it to someone, they don't know what to do with it. Early on a few things clicked for me, then the thoughts morphed into something tuned, still with room to improve.

Bidbots were a disaster.

When it comes to voting, for one, I don't want to be penalized when upvoting comments. I held on to these tokens because I saw the benefits of catering to consumers early on. Drinks are free at my place. I thought there'd be a lot of competition, so offering perks to consumers would be necessary. That would lead to a positive feedback loop where other creators see and ensure they too have tokens staked in order to be competitive. Should have led to more with skin in the game resulting in less selling pressure, protecting my investment. I've never been a fan of this five minute window nonsense and the penalties. I was all for the 50/50 split because it was offering consumers more. Leo is probably taking the right stance. But as a content creator with skin in the game, voting and supporting other creators should be the last of my personal responsibilities. Can't play every position on the field all at the same time. Those going around acting like drunk referees, downvoting creators because they didn't go out and downvote, that was obnoxious behavior. Free downvotes were introduced because instances of actual abuse were running rampant and nobody wanted to do anything about it, or it cost them money. They were not to be used to place salary caps on honest creators. More on that here.

The EIP has yet to mature. Much of that has to do with Sun's interference. Many of the positive changes required more people in the mix in order to be able to see the full potential. The only problem I have now with changes is the common trend where things are changed then not pushed out to the general public to see if it worked. Improvements or the new direction isn't marketed. Instead the community shrinks, people panic, then start messing with the knobs again. The most important step is always skipped, and that's bringing the masses here. Of course, any time I say "attract more people", many automatically assume I'm talking about content creators. I swear, any time I say, "We need to attract more consumers," I'm met with, "You're right! We need to attract more creators!"

0.00 BPC

4 votes

[-]

jrcornel 5 years ago (edited)

Shifting to a linear curve makes sense in that it doesn't disproportionally favor large accounts, which is how the voting system works currently. We want the smallest accounts to feel like their vote matters to get them hooked and keep them hooked. Plus I would vote for getting rid of any sort of voting window on a post, which is exactly the way LEO is doing things. It doesn't matter when you vote, you get half your vote and the author gets the rest. It prevents autovote piling and lets people vote more on the things they like. It's more akin to a tipping system. The drawback to this change is more potential for vote selling. Also, I think we need to change the powerdown period to 4 weeks instead of 13. Also also, the DAO needs an overhaul with some kind of checks and balance system put in place. Or, at the very least we should be able to downvote proposals we don't think should be getting funded. Also also also, we should expand the top 20 witnesses to something larger in order to further decentralize things, a nice round number like 100 for example, at the least.

0.00 BPC