Hardfork 21 is HAPPENING. What will change?


hf21 change coming v2.jpg
Hello Steemians, exciting times are upon us. On Tuesday, August 27th at 11:00 AM EDT, Steem will go through its 21st hardfork! We previously summarized the changes, but in today’s post we would like to help you understand what you can expect on 11:00 AM Tuesday morning when the hardfork occurs.

What is a Hardfork?

For those who are confused about all of this hardfork business, all you really need to know is that hardforks are a blockchain-specific term for software upgrades. As you probably know, blockchains are impossible to change by design. That’s why we call them "immutable." The chain grows as information is added to it in new blocks while the old information‒the information earlier in the chain of blocks‒stays the same.

This code has to be carefully designed because it protects all the tokens stored on the blockchain, all the social information Steemians choose to store on it, and it also governs the interactions between these two systems. This code has to be “bulletproof” so that as long as people are running Steem nodes, and as long as people are transacting on the blockchain, the chain will continue to grow in accordance with the rules embedded into the blockchain.

Updating the Rules

You can think of a hardfork as an update of the rules going forward. We can’t go back and change the rules that governed the creation of the chain in the past, but we can change the rules in a way that governs the future growth of the chain. This rule change is a little like taking a fork in the road. Some people running the blockchain may choose to continue using the old rules, isolating themselves in the process.

Because this change requires a firm commitment going forward, whether one chooses the new or old rules, it is hard. And that’s how we get the term "hardfork." It is similar to other software upgrades except that all of the nodes in the network have to coordinate their actions so that it happens at the exact same time. We have chosen August 27th at 11 AM for the next coordinated upgrade. One important factor in this choice was ensuring that exchanges were given enough time to prepare.

Maintaining Stability

In many protocols, hardforks are a chaotic event that threatens the stability of the ecosystem. This is because protocols like Ethereum and Bitcoin allow any motivated person to become a node and, as long as any nodes prefer the old software (i.e. the status quo) to the new, the result is a splitting of the chain into two competing protocols. Examples of these can be found with Bitcoin Cash, Bitcoin Gold, and Ethereum Classic.

DPoS

With Delegated Proof of Stake (DPoS), while anyone can produce blocks, only the top 20 block producers as determined by stake-weighted upvote, are "canonical." In order for new software to be integrated into the blockchain a supermajority of Witnesses have to come to a "consensus." The Steem blockchain guarantees that if a supermajority of Witnesses begin running the new software, any blocks from Witness nodes that have not upgraded will be invalidated. This is a classic hardfork.

However, because a super-majority is required, and because the Witnesses are ultimately accountable to Steem’s stakeholders, the odds are maximized toward only positive changes being made, along with very little interest in creating sister-forks; chains that continue being run based on the old rules.

What to Expect

Hopefully all of this happens seamlessly and you don't notice much of anything at all. We, along with many community members and witnesses, have been testing the new version of Steem on our testnet for several months now and have performed the hardfork logic on several smaller testnets.

But as much as we plan and test, it is possible to run into a few hiccups shortly after the hardfork because that will be the first time that new code will be run at scale. Our engineers will be monitoring the state of the network carefully during and after the hardfork so we can react quickly to any problems, should they arise.

User Experience Changes

There are a few changes that will impact how you use steemit.com and other Steem interfaces.

Rewards

The rewards curve is changing. We expect posts that would make more than 20 STEEM under the old rules to earn more after the changes. Those posts that would have made less than 20 STEEM under the old rules will receive less after the changes.

Reward Split

Reward funding is being changed frrom the 75/25 split that currently exists, to a 50/50 split between author and curator. Tht means you will be rewarded significantly more for curating content after the fork.

Downvotes

A downvote mana pool is being added, which will allow you to make a few downvotes each day without impacting your ability to earn curation rewards from upvotes.

If you would like to learn more about the changes included in HF21, please read this post.

The Steemit Team


Comments 719


Survival guide? There is absolutely nothing in here about sleeping bags and hiding under the bed. I feel cheated.

22.08.2019 20:43
28

Lmao!

22.08.2019 21:08
0

Yea I was expecting how we should remember to change voting time etc.

22.08.2019 21:21
0

Sleeping bags will be having zippers removed in order to make escape easier when attacked by a bear market, @meesterboom ... Unfortunately, beds will be lowered making it virtually impossible for anyone to hide from being jabbed in the ass with a hardfork….

23.08.2019 02:55
2

That's why I don't trust beds!

23.08.2019 06:38
0

And what about steemitblog? Been cheated twice now; they changed the headtitle ...

23.08.2019 06:58
0

Aw. I feel bad. I was only joking! :0D

23.08.2019 07:11
0

...or to hang themselves from...

23.08.2019 20:52
0

hahah ! best reply ever ! you made them change the title .. HF 21 yo !

23.08.2019 08:44
6

It's been a long time, since I have commented, but this is awesome! I have been so busy, haven't had much time for content consumption lately.

24.08.2019 00:44
1

Hey dude!! Glad you are busy, your YouTube channel working well?

It's the same old same old with me!!

24.08.2019 06:52
1

Yeah it is going pretty well! Just passed 70k subs. But it is still like full time work for not even half time pay! LOL Just launched another ebook on Amazon, a little mini cookbook. And started some merch too. Things are progressing, still way slower then I would like! LOL Glad things are well with you.

24.08.2019 22:53
0

70K! You are laughing! Once you got that magic 100K Mark you are in turbo charged mode!! Awesome stuff man!

24.08.2019 23:12
1

oh yes the coveted "Silver" which really isn't silver play button! haha Thanks man!! :) :)

26.08.2019 00:21
0

Aw, it's not silver! Swines!

26.08.2019 12:25
1

Lol

24.08.2019 00:50
0

Crossing fingers for everything to go smoothly.

22.08.2019 20:48
0

Here we go again :) I hope this one goes smoothly as keeping the Steem blockchain going should be the priority. There will be new opportunities with these new conditions. I hope the curators will choose to vote up the good content and not just go for short term profits. Steem has lost enough users lately and we do not want to drive more away. Maybe the big accounts can use their free downvotes to counter some of the abuse.

Onward and upwards!

22.08.2019 20:52
7

I think that the rule that will favour posts over 20 steem will crash all the small content creators to be honest. We have to wait and see of course, but the general impression I have is that if a post make more than 10 $ it is crap and scam.

23.08.2019 09:32
4

Yes! Onwards and Upwards! But can this be guaranteed by this hardfork?? I ask because many a hope were dashed after the previous fork!!

23.08.2019 19:52
0

Nothing is guaranteed. We know there are lots of greedy people on Steem who will just take, but there are some good whales who vote up quality stuff. If they vote down the crap and buying votes has less profit then it could improve. It depends if they go for profit or for the community.

23.08.2019 20:11
1

Well thought out. Let's keep hope alive!!

24.08.2019 15:52
1

Thanks for the update keep up the good work I'm hopeful all go well steem on

22.08.2019 20:55
1

Me too, and then they wonder why Steemit is a dying platform

23.08.2019 02:24
1

Survival guide? Hope we don’t lose 5 days like last time

22.08.2019 20:57
4

Maybe do some pre-emptive upvoting just in case.

23.08.2019 22:19
0

That's what I'm doing.

25.08.2019 06:53
1

My eyes still gloss over when I try to understand the different reward curves. Would love to read a post that explains it for idiots like me. But let take this opportunity to say to one and all involved, wishing you luck making the changes, i'll be in my bomb shelter.

22.08.2019 20:58
0

Summarized version:

Posts that received very few votes, or small votes, will earn less from the rewards pool.

Posts that received many votes, or a few very large votes, will earn more from the rewards pool.

The point where the meet is roughly around 20 STEEM. So if your post pending rewards are less than ~20 STEEM, you should be doing everything you can to get more votes. Either buy using bid bots, or by writing better content, or by expanding your audience.


This, combined with increased curation rewards, now 50%, is supposed to incentivize people to vote more efficiently (on good posts that will receive more votes after yours) and to downvote posts they feel are over valued or spam. (the HF adds the ability to downvote a few times without losing any upvote power)

22.08.2019 21:19
3

thx for explanation! is there any evidence backing the statements of HF21 up? or is it just a lets see thing.

to have many but much small votes and being under 20 Steem does not mean that the content is bad. Actually it means that an organic/majority decision has happened indicating good content. The definition of good content is not subjective it is content maximizing organic interaction. This is how all social media except steemit work.

Where does the magic happen? 50/50 means higher profitability of self-votes, higher profitability of coordinated status quo circles. How becomes a byzantine participant good?

Downvotes are no argument because its some prisonersdilemma type thing where nash-euilibrium is nobody is doing anything, nobody throws nuclear weapons at stronger or equal strong super-powers, they are made for not being used. A flag would lead to a counter-flag. The biggest self voters and abusers wouldn't be flagged at all. I really want to understand it, Is there any paper?

23.08.2019 00:29
2

A flag would lead to a counter-flag

This fails when the original downvoter (flags don't exist any more) isn't depending on rewards (either self-voting milking type rewards or legitimate rewards).

There is nothing that requires all stakeholder voters who have at least some modest interest in growing their investment by policing the reward pool from being milked to death to be bloggers earning large rewards and many are not (and will not be).

24.08.2019 07:28
1

Thanks for clarifying this. It all sounds reasonable on paper (or should I say screen). I just hope it leads to a better function system for all when the human element is applied.

24.08.2019 20:24
0

Cheers, thanks for that.

24.08.2019 20:17
0

Let’s see what happens! I’m prepared! 🤑

Posted using Partiko iOS

22.08.2019 20:58
3

Can STEEM ever go below zero?

Posted using Partiko Android

22.08.2019 21:02
0

You mean could STEEM ever become so undesirable as to no one wanting to accept it without getting paid in dollars? :)

In theory, yes. The government might criminalize the possession of STEEM like possession of drugs is a crime. You could be blackmailed into paying fiat for people agreeing not to send you any STEEM. Criminals might agree to accept STEEM being sent to them if you paid them fiat for that.

22.08.2019 22:32
3

Lol good one. I'm going to send you Steem unless you pay me a $3.50 ransom.

This damn Loch Ness monster keeps hasslin' me about it. Sorry

23.08.2019 16:17
4

Actually... On the SE market there is a token called DRUGS, and well, I could see people not wanting it sent to them...

You could always make an SE token called Contraband.

23.08.2019 22:21
2

STEEM has lost 99% of its value, but it can always lose another 99%, and another, and another, etc...
We can just keep adding more zeros, like 0.0000000000125 USD.

23.08.2019 03:27
9

But HF21 is coming. How is that possible?

23.08.2019 03:36
0

This is way more exciting than Y2K 💻

22.08.2019 21:09
1

This is a "survival guide" about as much as telling someone to "watch out for dangers in the jungle".

There is nothing in here about how to survive under the coming rules. No suggestions for authors/curators on how to benefit from the changes. No discussions about WHY a downvote pool needed to be added.

This was more like a small pamphlet you get at the grocery store with 3 pages but 2 of them have pictures or a list of sponsors. That is to say I felt let down as far as a "guide" for what to expect during the coming HF.

22.08.2019 21:14
11

huehue they changed the title so now you just look stoopid! #trolled #rekt #420noscope

but ye that was a pretty bad title

22.08.2019 22:50
2

Sorry I don't do this stoopid

22.08.2019 23:26
1

Roode :(

22.08.2019 23:28
1

You have been memory holed,...

The original title is still in the link.

23.08.2019 00:20
0

23.08.2019 14:57
4

What a good example of the brochure. I feel that this will not mean well for new members and will also let down third world citizens like me. Sigh

23.08.2019 01:42
0

Maybe:

  • If you are an orca or whale: good times, cheap delegations.
  • minnow or dolphin: move that stake to your favorite scot tribe, it will be worth much more there, or delegate it to bid bots.
  • If you are a redfish: don't bother commenting on anything. Just create good posts and use bid bots like crazy.
23.08.2019 22:17
2

If you are a redfish: don't bother commenting on anything.

But what if we like commenting? Then what?

use bid bots like crazy.

I thought bid bots were going to be going away because of the decreased financial rewards for using them.

Therefore, the only logically conclusion is:

Steemit doesn't want new users... especially ones that would like to discuss anything whatsoever via this Social Platform.

24.08.2019 03:07
1

Most of the most socially active accounts that currently reward their red fish commenters with a single above dust level treshold up-vote for their comments won't be able to anymore. So redfish who currently bring value to the platform by bringing social interaction to the posts of minnows and dolphins, no longer will get "any" growth from doing so. The easy fix (decreasing dust level from 0.02 to 0.002) doesn't seem to be on the table, but the lack of this fix does have the potential to make HF21 a platform killer. It may not seem like much in terms of solar value, but it is massive in terms of social value.

As for bid bots. The bid not ecconomy is going to boom. Stake is worth substantially less for small account than the same stake is for larger accounts because of the curve. This will stimulate minnows and dolphins to delegate their stake. Bid not owners will be able to cheaply rent SP, and on the demand side, with increased curator share for bid not owners, the price for bid not usage will go down to match the compensate for lower ROI, allowing bid not users to use buy larger upvotes for the same bid. Larger bids will be needed, as users will try to beat the curve with the upvotes they buy. New accounts that currently use bid bots will be forced to, because with the new curve and the dust treshold in place, it will be the only way to even exceed dust treshold for such accounts.

24.08.2019 08:56
1

First of all, this is a great opportunity for people to start manually curating the way in which they believe it ought to be done. No more excuses that delegating to bid bots is too much more lucrative. We're all so lucky to be the first people ever with the power to influence and incentivize the behaviors and development that we want to see in the future social web. Let's build that shit together instead of quarreling over "rewards" that don't mean anything else than dilution + lowered STEEM price unless we use it to create something others find worth joining.

22.08.2019 21:16
47

This is a great opportunity to sell your free downvotes if you never plan on using them and to use bid bots to make sure all rewards are 20+ SP so you don't get cheated.

23.08.2019 16:40
5

Hopefully, the stakeholders that have stayed with Steem through the bear market understands that min-maxing returns from selling down/up-votes doesn't result in profit, but a decrease in the value of their holdings. Let's change that.

23.08.2019 16:53
3

@edicted is making a point that is logical. The reality is that most people's posts don't get anywhere near 20 STEEM without bidbots. That's just a cold hard reality. This change is making bidbots more necessary for content producers.

23.08.2019 20:03
11

It wasn't always like this. Hardly anyone reaches that level because so much stake is bound up in bid bots. If we can return much of that SP to manually curate content and also build a new culture where people vote to bring value to Steem then it is absolutely possible for more creators to start earning those levels of rewards once again.

23.08.2019 20:15
1

No the cold hard reality is that new people will loose interest before they even know how it all works. What they should have done is make post with higher value on it reduce the gain. And those with lower votes gain more. That is logic. Now they are kissing up to high sp people.

23.08.2019 20:34
7

No the cold hard reality is that new people will loose interest before they even know how it all works.

We can't know this until we've seen how things play out. But I agree that it is a fair concern that smaller users, communities, and comments in general may suffer.

However, stakeholders can choose to avoid this if they want. We for instance build our curation system on @steempress to add support behind a large number of curation projects. So that smaller users who write original content and get engagement from others can quite easily reach 20 Steem in total post rewards.

23.08.2019 20:40
2

However, stakeholders can choose to avoid this if they want.

Ah! that's the KEY question here. If they choooose to avoid 'this' if they want!! eh?

C'mon @fredrikaa. Please, start reading another kind of stuff. :)

23.08.2019 20:59
0

Well, the whole point of the fork is to try to align incentives better for content cautious curation instead of the system we have now where holders seem to earn more STEEM by voting whoever wants to pay the most for a vote with no real risk of being downvoted. That could change.

23.08.2019 21:15
0

Well, the whole point of the fork is to try to align incentives better for content cautious curation...

Yep, that's the actual conundrum. "Cautious Curation" nonetheless, we are talking of 'Humans' here right? };)

23.08.2019 21:56
0

Hopefully, although at times I wonder😅

23.08.2019 22:15
0

Haha yeah HOPEFULLY!

Btw, did you already read the post in the link I shared with you above?

23.08.2019 22:39
0

@fredrikaa I think this upgrade is based on wishes how we all want it to be, but it's also based on 0% reality. You who were working on upgrade, should have known better by now

23.08.2019 21:52
1

You who were working on upgrade, should have known better by now

Im sorry, but I had very little say in the changes to the curation system. I fear this can negatively affect smaller users and communities as well as engagement due to comments being less attractive to hand out smaller votes to.

23.08.2019 22:14
0

I hope this works out, I really do. But I am concerned. I can understand what they're trying to do with this 20 STEEM thing, but I think 20 STEEM was just too high. I could see it at 5 STEEM, but 20 STEEM is quite difficult to achieve organically. I see the bar as far too high to work.

24.08.2019 00:32
1

Like you said before nearly no one earns 20$ on their posts at the moment. The only people that do are those with either a big pocket or a big following. They will be earning more. But to be frank it is not those people that need to stay around to make a "SOCIAL" network. It are the small people that make or break a big system like steem. We have seen a decline in activity for months now. Because the small people don't interact anymore. Everyone is scrounging to get ever last bit of steem. And what do the devs do? Make shure the small people earn even less while the big whales earn more .... ?

24.08.2019 02:05
8

The break even mentioned in the post is 20 STEEM, not $20. (It is also not a hard barrier; at 15 STEEM or 10 STEEM, or 30 for that matter, the difference is still pretty small).

20 STEEM = $3.60 currently.

24.08.2019 06:55
0

The diffrence is that now the average post gets around 0.2$ in upvotes. I wonder how this wil make a diffrence in the upvote bots? Anyone with money will just buy a upvote of atleast 7$ and the big dudes problem is no more.

The small once however will not be able to.

So in essence this is no solution to the problem. The only thing this achieves is making shure small plankton has no way of building up towards the goal of 3.6$ upvotes.

24.08.2019 15:08
4

@zoef, thanks God there's someone that says that the king is naked. This is a marketing fail and I am curious to see the curation level when what will remain is just a bunch of whales sitting on their coins worth nothing and shitposting. At this point, mass adoption is a utopia. Surely this is going create another disincentive for content creators: why should they write quality posts when their time and effort is worth nothing? Why someone should feel curious and attracted by Steemit? Let's stop being delusional high there, where the oxygen Is more rarefied.

27.08.2019 13:31
1

Well if they would stop helping wales and focus on the bottom tier users. The system would have a chance. But instead they are creating a utopia for the big wales to earn even more. And all that under a pretense that they want to block the bidding bots. Yeah right. The bidding bots are all controlled by those same whales .... hypocracy.

I am personaly pulling out every last dime i have in steam and moving the cash to other coins. I no longer believe the devs have any (if all) interest in getting it to work.

27.08.2019 22:04
4

What I can say is that this coin should be evalued with the same metrics of others, adopting an objective/external pov.

28.08.2019 10:05
0

This is not possible, as this coin is beeing valued by it's users. And to be frank alot of people are leaving. The only once staying are those that are proffiting. Lets be frank why would anyone stay after they see the big holders claiming everything? And when new rules get put into place they are meand to let those big players even earn more?

28.10.2019 18:28
3

I just meant that this is an investment like others, and from this perspective not a very good one. Obviously, being euphemistic. This metrics are not only possible but also necessary if we give value to our time and money and the result is: find alternatives. In my community, we will keep going just out of a passion for writing but we're surely open to changes. Good luck with your projects!

02.11.2019 16:00
1

However, stakeholders can choose to avoid this if they want.

Why would they want to choose to avoid this if they didn't want to choose to avoid this so far?

24.08.2019 22:52
1

I mean we are a SOCIAL NETWORK.. So why not use our voices for things we believe in instead of just making money.. I see arguments for both sides, but I like to personally upvote posts because some people post things I like and sometimes they post things I don't so.. I guess it's like voting.. You have a voice and it's up to you to use it.

23.08.2019 18:14
4

I think if people on Steem just voted what they actually liked, it would result in everyone - especially those holding Steem Power - earning more money. Curation rewards and bid bot returns are not "profits" if you're a stakeholder, because it comes from inflation that dilutes your assets. To make real money is to increase the value of the token.

23.08.2019 18:18
7

Yes to increase the value of the token is much bette rthan blogging and when we get bloggers to focus on posting about steem OUTSIDE of steem on twitter and youtube reddit etc we can bring in bitcoin holders to invest LARGE bags in steem I MEAN LARGE bags
but yeah its sad to realize that so many people would have a completely different outlook if someone early on at steemit inchad just set up a wolf of wallstreet style marketing dept that pulled in users to an inner circle to see how many new investors one single highly motivated individual could bring in and then TASK that work out to thousands of users... the blokchain is about to undergo things like thsi with TASK token and CAPTCHA and @steenm.ninja INV invite token and its possible distribution via @banjo discord bot for onboarding but we need @steemit @steem @elipowell to check out the work of inertia and maybe fund it to get a massive network of discord steembots issuing steem accounts but EVEN WITHOUT steemit incs help it will happen on its own thats the exciting part. steem is going to start working on its own in a free market way that will show off what steem is truley capable off , all the demand steem can drive froim tribes and steem engine trading and much more.

23.08.2019 19:36
1

To make real money is to increase the value of the token

Really Sherlock? and how do you propose to convince some Indian or African or South-East Asian of whom there are many here that they should save their Steem instead of using their reward to improve their lives ever so slightly?

23.08.2019 19:37
1

What the heck does Nationality or race have anything to do with this? Steem has never depended on anyone but a few wealthy whales (From all around the world) to find its true price, and there is no need to keep users that need convincing. They can sell if they want now and waste their steem on a few dollars of food , when they could have held their savings. You arent supposed to cash out of your stock market savings portfolio just because the prices are low :) Your argument really came out of left field and it feels like youre actually upset about something else, and I understand the concern for steemians in developing countries but they shouldnt deserve and dont want special treatment. They knew what they were getting into, and many of us dont look a gift horse in the mouth. Many of these people you refrence got a lot of steem for free and if they did buy it, they can wait the market out like everyone else for steem to find a bottom. There arent that many whales who even own very much steem so the bottom is bound to be somewhere near 7 to 10 cents where a few other whales I know got in (They wont want others to get in) So tell the people in developing nations to place their buy orders very low, maybe then they can become whales on steem and if and when we go back to $ to $8 range this will all have been worth it. or it can go down as far as people are willing to sell it to, but there isnt an infinite supply and it cant get too cheap without certain whales being unable to control their urge to buy millions of steem at less than 10 cents ... etc etc

23.08.2019 19:44
2

Exactly.

24.08.2019 00:27
0

You left out the important of "if you're a stakeholder".

My point was to make it clear that curation rewards and bid bot returns are not "profits" to someone who has bought Steem. Because those tokens dilute their existing stake at the same time. So if you want to get more wealthy as someone holding Steem, your focus should be on what you can do to increase the value of the tokens that you have.

So nothing you wrote made any sense in the full context of what I said.

23.08.2019 19:46
0

Not everyone who has bought Steem has done so as an investment. Some have simply bought it as 'pay to play' to increase their enjoyment of the platform.
Always the talk of is of investment and ROI but this is not everyone's primary motive for being here.
Everyone who has 'invested' time here is also a stakeholder. It is still an unlevel playing field designed to exponentially help those with more financial wealth than those without. Exact the people Blockchain technology would benefit the most.

24.08.2019 02:34
4

My sentiments exactly, @nathen007.

27.08.2019 23:25
0

I think both social and business are being harnessed here! Isn't it a win win synergy??

23.08.2019 19:24
2

Why not both?

24.08.2019 00:24
1

First of all, this is a great opportunity for people to start manually curating the way in which they believe it ought to be done

I read and upvote many articles. If my vote is worth 0.01 now, it will be worth 0.02 after. That's NOT going to change my voting or curation behaviour one iota.

Let's build that shit together instead of quarreling over "rewards" that don't mean anything else than dilution + lowered STEEM price unless we use it to create something others find worth joining.

Rewards mean a great deal to many people here.....not you, of course, you're living the first world dream which is great but there are people here from all over the globe, so try and use a global context to the discussion instead of your simple, rose-tinted first-world perspective.

No more excuses that delegating to bid bots is too much more lucrative

So you will be withdrawing your delegation to OCDB then from which you make a tidy sum each day?

23.08.2019 19:33
2

I read and upvote many articles. If my vote is worth 0.01 now, it will be worth 0.02 after. That's NOT going to change my voting or curation behaviour one iota.

My comment here is mostly addressing the opportunity to get the tens of millions of SP currently delegated to bidbots to be used to curate to create a web that we want, and the potential impact that can have.

Rewards mean a great deal to many people here.....not you, of course, you're living the first world dream which is great but there are people here from all over the globe, so try and use a global context to the discussion instead of your simple, rose-tinted first-world perspective.

If you want to be taken seriously, then make arguments based on the content of what is said and not the identity of the person saying it. Anyone can earn Steem and become a significant stakeholder here. So the comment does apply to anyone anywhere.

So you will be withdrawing your delegation to OCDB then from which you make a tidy sum each day?

That's my plan. Although ocdb is not like other bid bots since it provides good content creators added opportunity to earn mroe Steem.

23.08.2019 19:53
0

Good content creators . Again good depends on your starting definition.

24.08.2019 02:35
1

I hope so.

24.08.2019 00:21
0

I earn less than 20 steem per post, don't like the idea i will be earning less :(

22.08.2019 21:22
9

I guess your options are to try harder, buy votes, or accept the loss.

23.08.2019 03:20
11

I guess your options
Are to try harder, buy votes,
Or accept the loss.

                 - drutter


I'm a bot. I detect haiku.

23.08.2019 03:20
0

Thank you for your suggestions. Ive been here for 3 years, i work hard enough in here and will not buy votes. You forgot 1... stop trying..

23.08.2019 05:47
2

Especially someone like you should benefit from the higher manual curation in this system and that people with shitposts buying votes will now lose their money due to flags.

23.08.2019 10:45
0

I am seen a lot of hardforks on here. The only members i ever see win are always the whales.

23.08.2019 11:33
6

The whales won before those hardforks, after them, are winning right now and will win afterwards. I think there is not much we can do to solve this right now. But, I believe that this hardfork will be worse for abusers and shit posters. This means more rewards should be left over for the good authors

23.08.2019 11:38
1

Im not going to stop trying. Put over 3 years in to this and love the members. The members are a big reason why i am still here :)

23.08.2019 19:40
2

No, the 'pro shit posters' will just use MORE bid bots.

24.08.2019 00:43
0

Awesome, I'm going to flag all of them and they'll lose money. Even better. And the bidbots will lose the curation (also money). That's a win-win for me.

24.08.2019 01:01
0

Yup! Those are basically the options for most of us. I will probably have no option but to accept the loss.

24.08.2019 05:31
8

Yeah, that "earning less" thing is going to be a sticking point with a lot of folks that are new or relatively new to the platform, or just are much smaller in size; I haven't earned a lot on my posts either, so I can understand your position as well, though equally, I've been on here less than a year!

Earning less does slow down my plans to bring another account (with a completely different set of topics) onto here, so it definitely makes me think about things a lot more as well!

23.08.2019 19:36
1

I agree with you, if i am going to be earning less then why should i keep trying as hard as i have been for the last 3 years.

24.08.2019 20:35
1

As I said earlier, it makes me glad that most of my posts are crossposted elsewhere, because I'd have to write those posts anyway; the extra few minutes to copy-paste (and adjust the text for the platform) isn't really going to bend me out of shape, as it's just a few minutes extra, considering I could have spent up to an hour typing up text anyway; I generally use Steemit as the editing medium, as it's the only social platform (except for Golos, which I can't login to atm, and also WordPress) where I have to put the tags in a different section, as opposed to the main body of text, so it makes sense to start it there, then modify it to go elsewhere!

Either way, I'm not looking forward to seeing my loss, but I'll definitely be making use of the tribes where appropriate, as even if I don't get STEEM, I can at least get some tokens as some form of compensation, although I am constantly earning SNAX via activity on here and on Twitter, but I don't know how to make them work for me yet, and I'm trying to save up to get another account on here related to completely different topics; I'm not sure if I'll ultimately bring the account on here (especially as I have a long way to go to reach the threshold for making a new account), but I'll continue to save regardless, where possible!

25.08.2019 10:13
1

Sounds like you are on top of this, I haven't got a clue what will happen and what those other tokens etc are, I have managed to drag myself through 20 hardforks and 3 hard years but unfortunatly for someone who has no clue i don't know what will happen with my account :(

25.08.2019 15:43
1

I'm somewhat on top of it, but I guess the fact I don't exclusively rely upon this platform for social media posts does help things in some respects, although right now, this platform, via its cryptocurrencies and tokens is the only consistent way I'm earning anything at all under this namespace, except for the very occasional Twitch subscription or bits, of which I haven't had much of recently, so, for now, this platform is actually my main source of "income" in terms of any content I create under this name.

I haven't even been here a year yet, but it does seem very tricky for anyone under a certain point to be visible on this platform, and in conjunction with those getting 20+ STU on their posts getting more, and those below that getting less than they did before, it's definitely going to hit the smaller posters quite a bit, but equally, we won't know how things will start to go at least till a month after the fork, but also, we need to see what happens over the remainder of the year; for now, I just have plans to get parity of posts with my Steepshot and Instagram accounts, and that's happening regardless of how much STU, SNAX or other tokens I get, as I just want to make future photo posts easier to make!

Hopefully though, things will pan out for us, but we won't know properly for a few months yet! All that said, I'm actually monitoring a handful of my posts to see how the reward levels change between now and after the fork, though I suspect that it'll be a week after the fork happens that the changes will come into play, as I think that any posts made prior to when the fork actually occurs will be rewarded under the old system, and any posts made after the fork is implemented will come under the new system!

25.08.2019 16:00
1

We will just have to wait and see. Hopefully we will all gain if only a little. I'll keep an eye on your posts :)

25.08.2019 20:53
1

Yeah... here's hoping! And thank you :)

25.08.2019 21:16
0

Great piece but noticed a typo..

"Reward funding is being changed from a 50/50 split between author and curation reward from the 75/25 split that currently exists''

The first from should be a the

22.08.2019 21:23
1

No it shouldn't.

"Reward funding is being changed from a 50/50 split between author and curation reward from the 75/25 split that currently exists''

but it should be:

"Reward funding is being changed to a 50/50 split between author and curation reward from the 75/25 split that currently exists''

or better yet:

"Reward funding is being changed from the current 75/25 split between author and curation reward, to a 50/50 split''

22.08.2019 22:10
3

schooled

22.08.2019 22:53
2

Right! Thank you!

23.08.2019 00:08
0

How can you be concerned with that errata, but not this one?

but in today’s post we would like to help you understand what you can expect on 11:00 AM Tuesday morning when the hardfork occurs.

at 11:00 AM on Tuesday =)

23.08.2019 00:09
0

So 20 STEEM right now would be around $4.04 according to https://steemitwallet.com/market

steem 20.PNG

22.08.2019 21:33
1

Not exactly as SBD is only worth $0.85 right now.

22.08.2019 22:54
2

Yeah I got closer to $3.48 when I did the math to USD.

22.08.2019 22:56
1

So the rich get richer and the poor get poorer...sad :(

Posted using Partiko Android

22.08.2019 21:33
8

Curating manually will become more rewarding financially relative to delegating to bid bots. Hopefully that will lead to a higher price of Steem because of better content being rewarded more than before.

22.08.2019 22:27
1

You're right!

22.08.2019 22:39
0

I hope so.

Posted using Partiko iOS

22.08.2019 22:57
0

How so? We will have to pay bots to get to the 20 Steem.

23.08.2019 21:36
0

Curating manually

This is work. Work is to be avoided. Thus the bid bots exist.

24.08.2019 03:12
0

Bid bots exist primarily for better return on investment. Auto-voting for optimal timing will be much more profitable now. But it takes finding content that is not yet curated by too many frontrunners.

Posted using Partiko iOS

24.08.2019 06:42
0

This is not true. These changes are designed to ensure that good content is more likely to earn more rewards and good curators are more likely to earn more curation rewards. That means that if you're a good content creator, the odds are that your good posts will earn more rewards. It also means that if someone who is just posting low-value posts and self-upvoting them, or using fake accounts to upvote them, they will be much less likely to earn much from that activity. They will also be more likely to earn a downvote now that everyone is getting some free downvotes. This will free up rewards that are being distributed to malicious users who are exploiting the system just so they can cash out, and make those rewards available to good content creators. These changes only impact the rewards pool, which is not distributed based on wealth except when people render self-votes. But these changes are specifically targeted at making self-votes LESS profitable and easier to police. So, in fact, the result should be the exact opposite of "the rich getting richer."

22.08.2019 22:29
8

Very good explanation, thanks! Now it makes sense to me, hope this will succeed for good creators

22.08.2019 22:38
1

My pleasure. I understand it's all very confusing. Unfortunately, when you're dealing with such a complex system, nothing is simple.

23.08.2019 17:51
0

And whose fault is it that instead of creating a simple system, you created a mammoth?

24.08.2019 00:12
0

The idea is to make things as simple as possible, but no simpler.

24.08.2019 07:22
0

It seems to me that for us, a curation team who has spent years not being appreciated for thousands of hours of collective, voluntary work, can vote mostly below the 20 steem threshold despite having numerous high-end supporters and delegators (gtg, curie etc). This means that what we could argue as one of the highest quality sub-cultures on the platform, with a focus on STEM content, run by legitimately qualified scientists and academics and a dedicated team painstakingly quantifying quality and filtering plagiarism, can now, after years of effort, give its authors 57% less than they were getting.

Is this inaccurate?

24.08.2019 15:26
0

be honest these changes are to reward the big fish so they can make more before steem becomes worthless

22.08.2019 22:49
1

The big fish have so much stake in this network, they would lose the most if it were to become worthless

23.08.2019 01:27
1

I'm only sticking around for the free speech outlet. I really don't expect to ever see the day that I start making any real money using Steemit. Congrats to those who got in early 3 years ago and made money.

23.08.2019 02:28
0

Agreed.

24.08.2019 03:16
0

That means that if you're a good content creator, the odds are that your good posts will earn more rewards.

It's not only about creating good content. Take a look at the trendings. There are many low-quality posts. On the other hand there are also many high quality posts outside of trending.

Also in the non-mainstream categories even the best content creators will struggle to reach 20 steem.

23.08.2019 07:44
4

@andrachy what happen to those who are getting rewarded by steemhunt . steemhunt give 1.20$ reward it means all this reward will be burn and author will get very less , it is against the author hardwork and This is not a so called social media that pay , Even no one on steemit upvote without paying him/her a money for upvote . So The big whales will start selling more upvote for poors who get less reward on post and want to avoid extra deduction

23.08.2019 11:22
1

Can you leverage on what is the definition of ‘good content’, a ‘good content creator’& a ‘good curator‘? And what does this HF21 have in place to stop the so called circle jerking where High value accounts keep upvoting every single ‘good quality’ post of their friends? What will the incentive be for beginners or low value accounts on this platform?

23.08.2019 20:54
3

I'm afraid the answer to most of the questions above is: nothing
Can't wait for other "creative" answers on these questions.

24.08.2019 10:33
0

Its also designed so that people are incentivized to use bid bots to beat the curve. It is designed to discourage social interaction. To drive minnows and dolphins to move their stake to scot tribes. This whole HF is one big gamle that can blow up in our faces in more ways than one. The markets are clearly rejecting HF21, but what do the markets know , right? Or people who actually ran simulations to predict initial outcomes and incentives that favor an increased bid bot economy. Well, steem has been amazing while it lasted. Hope Steemit won't destroy the scot tribes in HF22, because thats where most minnows, dolphins and content creators will be hiding out after HF21.

23.08.2019 22:01
1

Based on your response it seems like in order to try to combat the smaller fish who are trying to game the system you're enriching the bigger fish who are gaming the system more...?

I've been here for years and I haven't had any posts make 20 steem or more since the value of steem was much higher... Not saying my content is amazing either, but... It seems like the majority of posts that make 20 steem or more are because of bidbot use or because of being in the "in" crowd and have nothing to do with quality.

I think in the end, the majority of users who see this who are not "big fish" will probably not like that they are making less and that those who are well established are making more. I think it feels like a slap in the face to many people, myself included and I rarely get into the politics of steem anymore, but.. This just seems wrong on many levels.

If the value of steem were higher this probably wouldn't be as big of an issue, though it seems like doing this when the value of steem is so low is only likely to make the value of steem itself go even lower as the smaller users feel less welcome here as a result.

I could be wrong, but that's how this feels and it seems like a lot of other people feel similar.

23.08.2019 22:48
0

This is very disheartening and makes me feel empty inside, I have to question my own viability. Bid bots are not an option for me because I live my life with honesty and integrity, I would rather quit than be a part of this bid-bot bullshit, it's as phony as the day is long. I see steemit walking towards a cliff with a blindfold on trying to pin the tail on a donkey, good luck with that. Irreversible mistakes are the downfall of many in history. I would not be surprised if many lower echelon users catch a ride out on the dolphin and minnow express.

campers.jpg

24.08.2019 05:14
2

Well put.

24.08.2019 06:14
0

I'm a loyal hard working contributor to steemit. I have always avoided saying anything that would cause conflict, but in light of this new development, I felt compelled to express my opinion. Thanks for your acceptance.

24.08.2019 19:18
0

See you on Instagram!

Posted using Partiko iOS

24.08.2019 06:46
0

Sorry I'm not involved in Instagram, however if you would like to talk, pleas comment on my blog. Thank you.

24.08.2019 19:20
0

What is 'good quality' content in your book?

24.08.2019 05:07
0

It would be helpful if you would edit your main post and include some of this explanation. All over Steemit, this part of your message is neither being heard nor believed -- yet it must be clearly heard first.

24.08.2019 08:54
0

Yup. Have a !BEER 🍺

Posted using Partiko iOS

22.08.2019 22:42
0

To view or trade BEER go to steem-engine.com.

Hey @jenina619, here is your BEER token. Enjoy it!

Do you already know our BEER Crowdfunding
22.08.2019 22:42
0

Listen to the rich insiders when they tell you: "This is NOT about the rich getting richer! You just need to try harder and put out better content."

23.08.2019 03:23
9

Good point, it's not about quality of content any more. Some good posts simply get ignored.

26.08.2019 17:44
1

Don’t worry, I’ll give you upvotes 🤣😅

Posted using Partiko iOS

23.08.2019 19:16
0

Ahah I'll give you a surprise soon🤡💥🎈 lol

24.08.2019 03:49
0

It is like a funnel extension which has the potential of bringing more money to content creators by giving more the curators which then leads to content creators getting more money overall.

24.08.2019 03:15
0

But what if the rich decides to dump their steem and go chase a cryptocurrency that yields more profit than steem? Then everyone would become poor! :)

24.08.2019 10:52
0

I have only earned 20 SBD once or twice on a Curied post - before STEEM dropped. (A Curie used to be worth 50+ SBD. Now, it's around 9-10 SBD.)
From what I have seen, the vast majority of quality posters are lucky to earn even 1 SBD per post! So, the ones that have the means to buy their votes will do well from this HF. The rest of us will suffer.

What's your plan to keep good bloggers around? What's your plan to attract new ones? The life of Steem depends on content producers, yet every time we turn around, it's harder and harder to function unless you can afford to put in serious investment - and who is going to do that when the bloggers are leaving - or not even bothering to join in the first place?

22.08.2019 21:52
20

The post says 20 STEEM, not SBD (which is about $3.40 at current price).

22.08.2019 22:46
4

Good catch. Apologies.

22.08.2019 22:47
3

No apologies needed, it’s a bit confusing. I just wanted to be sure you knew!

22.08.2019 22:49
0

Double your curation rewards and ask yourself if that compensates.

They just said, 'we expect the rich to get richer'.

If the whales don't downvote enough to replicate the whale experiment look for steem to go on sale.

23.08.2019 00:17
1

Have you seen the current rates? I would say it is on sale already, steem is down 90% since i joined

23.08.2019 07:09
1

Yes, I've ridden the rocket from .07 to 8.0 and all the way back to .16.
I'm not buying, just yet.
I bought at .2 and am waiting for .1, or lower.

23.08.2019 15:46
0

I'm actually really excited about this, The way I see it. Is Authors will get rewarded more, Because people can make money just by voting. So for those people who are posting just for profit, Won't have to. This will hopefully drop the amount of posters but get those with power to ensure they are using their votes.

22.08.2019 23:22
14

I really, really hope so! If so, it could be a real boon for Steem - and a model for the other blockchains to follow.

22.08.2019 23:23
0

It's just like how the tribes have been, with the incentive to manually curate due to 50/50 rewards which is what I did. Steemit for awhile didn't give too much for hard work, except for your upvotes @kaylinart and then odd times you get lucky to get something decent.

It will be good to see anyone working hard on a post, get rewarded from more people upvoting with higher values and knowing you both get rewarded!

23.08.2019 04:18
1

So for those people who are posting just for profit, Won't have to. This will hopefully drop the amount of posters but get those with power to ensure they are using their votes.

Hahaha Yeah! @kaylinart. I just wonder what the heck will be available to 'Curate' in an environment of exclusively pure c-u-r-e-i-t-o-r-s? ;p

24.08.2019 00:46
0

I agree with you..From last 15 days, I am posting 2 to 3 quality post every day, I hardly make 2 SBD But I believe in Steem. It will rise as of now i am not earning enough but i am trying to build solid reputation inside the community.

23.08.2019 11:10
1

The break even point they mentioned in the post is 20 STEEM not 20 SBD. That's more like $3.60 at current prices. Even somewhat below that, the effect is pretty modest. People are freaking out thinking they'll get completely screwed out of rewards if the post value is below 20 STEEM but mostly that isn't true. At 15 or 10 STEEM you may not even notice the difference given regular daily price change on STEEM of +/- 5-10% as well as other factors.

24.08.2019 07:12
0

Lately, most of my posts (original and high quality) end between 1 and 3 STEEM. (Average 2.) I've been on STEEM 2 years, full time, and I work with a team of models, including my wife. We invested $5000 into STEEM when we arrived. Our current total is LESS THAN that! In fact it's far less, only $500. We have worked 2 years, and invested 5 grand, and it's down to $500. And we are putting out excellent content that is in demand. Will my 2 STEEM payouts be decreased by the new 20 STEEM break even point? I think so.
But we will get a fraction of a STEEM more for our curation, so that's supposed to make it okay?
HF21 is even worse than HF20 and that's saying something.

26.08.2019 19:05
0

We invested $5000 into STEEM when we arrived. Our current total is LESS THAN that! In fact it's far less, only $500

In fact this is the most important thing. Your STEEM/SP is worth less because the price of Steem has declined, in large part because Steem has not been successful in executing on its vision.

That is more important than payouts. You aren't going to make back $5000 in losses (and hopeful make more than that) through payouts no matter what. Work to improve the value of Steem.

People are much too focused on payouts as a source of investment payoff when they should be focused on the success of Steem and the price/value going up as a result.

26.08.2019 20:59
0

The rewards curve is changing. We expect posts that would make more than 20 STEEM under the old rules to earn more after the changes. Those posts that would have made less than 20 STEEM under the old rules will receive less after the changes.

I'm expecting for bidbot owners to benefit from this HF.

22.08.2019 21:56
2

It's more likely to make people question why they will be using them honestly. Since the bot will be getting more of the reward now if you pay them to vote for you. So technically they will be losing money on every bid. Unless the post gets popular.

22.08.2019 23:13
0

Good point. Let's see gow the community reacts.

Here's another guess. There will be lesser accounts who will be posting.

(No longer part of the guess: The lesser the posts, hopefully the more effective the curation/curators will be)

22.08.2019 23:20
0

Unless bitbots owners will pay them back with the curation they receive or even utilize a token as a payback of Value 🤷🏼‍♂️

Posted using Partiko iOS

23.08.2019 19:18
2

Small bots will suffer, large bots will thrive. And as for smaller fish, delegating becomes more profitable than using the stake individualy, larger bots will have no problem geting more cheap delegations to grow even bigger..

23.08.2019 22:25
0

If they don't change their rules, yes; @swiftcash will change its rule to keep bought upvotes profitable for buyers with a minimum of +1% return of their money.

24.08.2019 10:45
0

At last some clarity with the impending HF21 fork.

22.08.2019 22:34
0

It's good to finally have some numbers regarding the shape of the curve. 20 STEEM is currently worth about 3 STU. I wonder how much a post worth 6-8 STEEM, which is what those of my posts that I put some effort into make organically, will make post HF21. If a couple of STEEM less, then the combination of that and the 50/50 split will make curating a lot more lucrative for a dolphin like myself. But if a lot of people like myself come to the same conclusion, there will be less competition. We'll just have to wait and see.

22.08.2019 22:41
0

HF: 21 Savage

22.08.2019 22:48
2

haha youre also chilling here :D

23.08.2019 00:05
0

How exactly is the rewards curve changing? Some of us are averaging 5-6 STEEM on a good post, so it would kind of suck if smaller posters got pushed down. I know that there was talk about very small posts getting reduced payout. I'm concerned that this makes people who don't use bidbots get significantly less. I know there's talk about "well, this just impacts either end and leaves average users alone", but 20 STEEM per post does not seem to be an average user.

If you look at curation feeds like Curie, they're getting something like 9 STU, which might be 20 STEEM now but that's definitely not average.

OCD/Blocktrades gets people up to that threshold, but c-cubed does not.

Any of the smaller field-based curators (e.g. steemstem) just can't even hold a torch to 20 STEEM, if that's the break-even point.

Utopian gets good results, but they're not really a curation place.

If the shift is small, like 5% for people getting 3-8 STEEM, that's not atrocious. However, if that's a 25% decrease, those of us who rely solely on curation and initiatives like SBI for upvotes are going to really have to ask serious questions about whether we're getting anything for our efforts. Will we have to delegate to places like steem-ua or send our liquid STEEM off for upvotes from larger places so that we can hit the thresholds that keep our efforts worthwhile? That entirely defeats the point of an update intended to make curation better.

22.08.2019 23:09
4

People who use bid bots are likely to go down. Because unless the bots lower the cost of votes, it's not worth taking a 15% hit on every bid you make. Because now you have to share half with curators. You're more likely to powerup and self vote or vote on others content. In theory.

22.08.2019 23:19
0

My question is this, though:

Why do bid-bots not just decrease their overhead? Once they have the liquid STEEM they convert it into SP, and the money that other people could have had by curating they receive instead.

This still does nothing to address the concerns with small content creators. How the hell do I get writer friends onto Steem when I know that they're likely to get cents on a dollar compared to what they do elsewhere and the big dogs are going to be the ones getting everything? With a week to get attention to your posts and get them up-voted before they lose value, there's no reason to post evergreen content on Steem when it could fare better elsewhere.

The only reason I'm here is because I wanted to make games and distribute them for free, and Steem seemed like a way to monetize that. Ultimately, I think that's been an absolute failure, in part due to how Steem's been faring on price (I don't believe Steemit has much control over this), but in part because the whole system is weighted toward people who have patrons.

The only reason I'm still around is for the community, but since Steem doesn't really have social features it's limited in that regard because most of the people I'm still sticking around to hang out with I'm interacting with on other platforms.

I think I speak for a lot of us who have left the platform when I say that we're demoralized and we don't have much faith in the system as it stands. To have changes that could seriously hurt people who are trying to claw their way up doesn't make sense. What portion of posts making 20 STEEM right now have done so on their own merits, versus being economically fueled?

The promise of Steem as a platform was that it would be a path to independence, and right now I don't think it's offering that to very many people. There are maybe less than a hundred people who could claim that Steem is anything more than a passion project or pipe dream for them. The nice thing about the linear system is that it's fair. I can see using a curve to weed out dust, especially if it's proven that a lot of very low value posts are bot activity instead of authentic engagement, but I'm not sold on HF 21 doing that.

22.08.2019 23:49
2

Steem got hijacked a few years ago, all promises were changed.
Now thy have different goals in mind.
We get to like that, or lump it.

23.08.2019 00:25
0

How the hell do I get writer friends onto Steem when I know that they're likely to get cents on a dollar compared to what they do elsewhere

Where else exactly?

23.08.2019 01:12
0

YouTube or personal blogs with ads or writing churn for blogs that pay $10 a piece.

It's not glamorous, and you sacrifice a lot of your independence, but it pays better than Steem does right now and there's more likelihood of exposure outside the network of Steem users.

23.08.2019 02:44
2

Now you can't tell me that your "writer" friends make even one cent from writing on YouTube, and personal blogs might net something like 10 bucks every 3 months, if they're good. Which blogs pay 10 bucks a piece for "churn" exactly?

Steem articles have more exposure than just about every blog out there since Steem is not a closed system by any means and everyone can consume the content without any kind of barrier, like paywalls or membership, and to top it all off steem articles dominate search results based on the sheer volume of content and the numerous web sites that link directly to steemit or other frontends.

I don't buy the "you make more on YouTube" or "elsewhere" at all, you know what it seems like: foot in mouth.

23.08.2019 03:51
0

Have you ever worked as a writer?

With things like Patreon tied to another content creation service, people make way more than people make on Steem. Ads suck, but between ads and affiliate links you can do okay.

Also, you'd be surprised how many blogs have outsourced writing. Any small news site is going to be paying writers, as are a ton of company and media sites. $10 is the starving college kid pay, too. You can make more if you really get an audience.

Also, you can't eat off of exposure. I don't even know that you're correct about how well Steem draws traffic, because it's impossible to tell the reader/upvote ratio, but I actually suspect that I generally have a smaller readership than upvotes due to bots that are trying to snipe curation rewards and curation trails. Steem links may get some search results. Even then, after seven days your benefit for any content you've posted is gone (and I know there are ways to work around this, but they're not super user-friendly).

Steem's promise was as a way to achieve independence.

I've earned more in five hours of freelance writing than I've earned for several hundred posts on Steem (I've invested money in Steem too, though I always bought super low so I'm not in pain due to the low value).

Now, that's exceptional because it was a twenty-cents-a-word situation, which is basically the skies opening up and raining money, but I could be pulling down a lot more money off Steem than on. The only reason I'm here is for the freedom, and I'm not even sure that's worth it.

23.08.2019 04:02
1

With things like Patreon tied to another content creation service, people make way more than people make on Steem.

Which people and how many out of every potential thousand do that? You're saying that people make more "writing" for YouTube through their Pateron link than people make on steem but avoiding the facts: how many people do that, how competitive is it. All these blogs and content media web sites that pay their writers but which combined haven't a chance to compete with the ammount of money steem has paid content creators or the number of content creators that got paid and keep getting paid.

23.08.2019 05:03
1

Steem's promise was as a way to achieve independence.

I seen so many things people claimed that "steem" promised them that the accompanied eye rolls are instinctual by now whenever I read such things.

23.08.2019 05:06
0

With things like Patreon...

BAT Tipping Jars are going to replace services like Patreon due to greatly decreased fees and ability to tip lower amounts. A 1 BAT tip results in a 0.95 BAT deposit into a Brave Creator Wallet.... Currently 1 BAT is about $0.20

Right now, BAT tipping is active on Twitter, Reddit, Youtube, and a growing number of social media platforms. It's not too inconceivable that in the very near future, a content creator will be able to post on Platform Whatever and receive rewards into a single location... a BAT Wallet (currently on Uphold)...

Some BAT nice graphics

24.08.2019 03:01
0

https://zapread.com
https://publish0x.com
Probably medium.com

Some alternatives for Steem

24.08.2019 00:10
0

https://www.zapread.com/Home/About

Total Satoshi spent, try not to laugh at what a failure the donate model is, and calling it donate model is a stretch since a large portion doesn't even go to the author.

24.08.2019 01:08
0

try not to laugh at what a failure the donate model is, and calling it donate model is a stretch since a large portion doesn't even go to the author.

Same model as Steem, only hidden.
// You get 1 Steem

  • "Cool, can I buy Bitcoins for this?"
  • Sure!
  • The exchange!
  • Cool, Steemit pays me dollars.
    // But wait, Steem doesn't pay in dollars, he pays in tokens. Who pays in dollars? Investors ...
24.08.2019 08:04
0

It's not the same model by any means, but nice try at asserting that a donation based system is the same as a stake based system.

// You get 1 Steem

"Cool, can I buy Bitcoins for this?"
Sure!
The exchange!
Cool, Steemit pays me dollars.
// But wait, Steem doesn't pay in dollars / BTC, Steem pays in tokens. Who pays in dollars / BTC? Investors ...

It does not matter what it's paid in, it's irrelevant squared, what matters is how it has value and why it maintains it. In a donation system the entire value rests on people spending money/giving money, on a stake based system the entire value rests on people staking more than extracting. If they staked dollars it would be no different, same for bitcoin or any other token/store of value.

Steem is a network worse than ZapRead, Publish0x, but without a system based on game theory.

The system isn't based on game theory, at best it utilizes incentive structures based on game theory, it's based on cryptocurrency communities and social media. The "fact" that you think donating money is no different from staking money means you haven't a clue to distinguish between what a zero sum game is and what a cooperative, everyone-wins game.

24.08.2019 09:07
0

The subsidy system as in ZapRead is even better in many ways. This is due to the fact that by voting for the content you vote only for the best (in your opinion).

The Steem system is the worst in economic terms because you give money that is not yours to another person you probably don't know. (As in socialism).

For example, I like BernieSanders, but I wouldn't give him a grant probably. But I don't pay anything for Steem, so I could give it to him for nothing.

As for Stake. In general, you freeze the funds in your account, but these funds were created from the air. In most cases you didn't pay for the tokens (but I can be wrong), like most of us. Stake is supposed to stop Steem from falling, but if the situation gets worse, people will evacuate and withdraw money from Stake, what's going on.

Hard Fork 21 is supposed to try to prevent it. There will be less liquid, more frozen.

I guess there's always some kind of loss in the system. Someone has to pay for the fact that you get tokens, sometimes for nothing.

24.08.2019 13:48
0

The subsidy system as in ZapRead is even better in many ways. This is due to the fact that by voting for the content you vote only for the best (in your opinion).

Exactly how voting works anywhere: you vote for what you think is the best, in your opinion. So what's the difference lol..

The Steem system is the worst in economic terms because you give money that is not yours to another person you probably don't know. (As in socialism).

The money is yours. You have a stake in the system that gives you the right to distribute according to your stake. Who's money is it if it's not yours. And what the heck are you talking about knowing or not the other person, you think that is relevant at all, wtf.

For example, I like BernieSanders, but I wouldn't give him a grant probably. But I don't pay anything for Steem, so I could give it to him for nothing.

For nothing? Yes because your steem did not cost anything correctly, it was given freely to you, without ANY effort on your part. Damn you're pulling at futile strings, first you tried to claim that transferring wealth, exactly how donation model works, is no different from staking wealth and distributing an inflatory pool of resources. You tried to argue that it's no different because you have to sell your steem for dollars, because that makes sense at all that it's the same as donating, now here you are trying to claim that the stakeholders don't have any right to distribute the wealth, because it's not theirs. Shit, you seemingly think that everyone is as retarded as you to try and assert some utter nonsense like that, after your previous idiotic remarks seeking to defend some oddity that has absolutely no chance in hell of surpassing steem, as is obviously evident by any cursory comparison of the userbase and subsequent success at their "endeavor" (more like a "pay us 10%, always, because).

As for Stake. In general, you freeze the funds in your account, but these funds were created from the air. In most cases you didn't pay for the tokens (but I can be wrong), like most of us. Stake is supposed to stop Steem from falling, but if the situation gets worse, people will evacuate and withdraw money from Stake, what's going on.

Yeah, your stake was handed out, like everyone else, without any effort on their part. What you are trying to say besides that idiocy of "funds were created from thin air" is that staking is not holding value, and thus is a poor mechanism to secure value, which is why donations/tips are so much better, or something, because I'm sure you had some point that tied back into the idiocy that transfer of wealth is no different than wealth rewarded by wealth staked directly to hold power over distribution of wealth to be rewarded.

Let me help you out:

When the mashed potatoes are passed around the table, they are distributed. When you take your mashed potatoes and give them to someone else you transfered your mashed potatoes.

I can only laugh at the thought that you might consider what you said as half intelligent / thoughtful but seriously, invest some time in improving your reasoning and critical thinking skill, it's deplorable.

25.08.2019 02:28
0

Exactly how voting works anywhere: you vote for what you think is the best, in your opinion. So what's the difference lol..

Not really. For example Bidbots upvote the entries of the people who paid for it. So not the best.

Bidbots are only one piece of the puzzle

The money is yours. You have a stake in the system that gives you the right to distribute according to your stake. Who's money is it if it's not yours. And what the heck are you talking about knowing or not the other person, you think that is relevant at all, wtf.

The money you give (for example) me isn't yours. You don't lost anything. Milton Friedman create a good chart about it

So in ZapRead (donate) version you are in point 2. You spending your money for someone else

In Steem - 4. You give money to someone (according to your own Stake) that doesn't exist.

The rest of the fast I assume it's gibberish, so I'm not gibberish, so I'm not gonna write back.

25.08.2019 17:31
0

Not really. For example Bidbots upvote the entries of the people who paid for it. So not the best.

Obviously, does that change the fact that people who vote (not bots) vote for what they think is best?

The money you give (for example) me isn't yours. You don't lost anything. Milton Friedman create a good chart about it

Yes I have, I could have given it to myself. You avoided the pertinent point also, yet again. The point is if it's not my money, who's money is it?

You give money to someone (according to your own Stake) that doesn't exist.

The money is mine, by virtue of my stake, like any stakeholder has rights to the revenue of their stake.

25.08.2019 17:54
0

Obviously, does that change the fact that people who vote (not bots) vote for what they think is best?

The problem arises when you vote for something because it pays off for you. For example, you vote for your posts or you vote for each other with a colleague to maximize your profits.

This is harmful to the platform. It promotes behaviour that destroys the network.

Yes I have, I could have given it to myself. You avoided the pertinent point also, yet again. The point is if it's not my money, who's money is it?

They're part of everyone. The resources that you give to people by upvote do not exist. However, they have one fundamental point. They lower the value of all other tokens. Logical.

The whole problem is that with connection 1 - you are handing out tokens that aren't your people you don't know. But at the same time you can do everything to earn as much as you can.

Something that in the donate system is not possible to fulfill, here is implemented on a large scale.

The money is mine, by virtue of my stake, like any stakeholder has rights to the revenue of their stake.

These tokens (what you are giving away) do not exist. They do not exist until payout, in principle. But let's assume a different situation, they do exist, but they belong to all the people at once.

It's also a problem, if you don't use tokens (don't give them away), someone else will. They don't disappear.

The problem is, you can't say - it's my money. Because they never were.

You give it away as you please. You can give it to the worst post - e.g. child pornography, because you don't lose anything.

However, if you give a grant, you lose money. You choose only the best entries.

25.08.2019 23:44
0

The problem arises when you vote for something because it pays off for you. For example, you vote for your posts or you vote for each other with a colleague to maximize your profits.

This is harmful to the platform. It promotes behaviour that destroys the network.

There's absolutely nothing wrong with voting for yourself or your own posts, the only problem is when you vote for yourself exclusively, and even that does not promote others to do the same, by a long shot, and it's obvious that doing so is not the way to maximizing your profits.

They're part of everyone. The resources that you give to people by upvote do not exist.

So they aren't mine but they are everyone's, but they're not mine, even though obviously I'm also just as much everyone as everyone else. Logic.

However, they have one fundamental point. They lower the value of all other tokens. Logical.

They don't, and your logic is simplistic, flawed and unrealistic, as the white paper points out regarding inflation (of the dollar) not correlating with increased supply, age old myth debunked by facts (read the white paper) that inflation is simply (fundamental) increasing the circulation of money.

These tokens (what you are giving away) do not exist. They do not exist until payout, in principle. But let's assume a different situation, they do exist, but they belong to all the people at once.

We don't have to assume anything. It's a well established function that Stakeholders have rights over the profit if their investment.

It's also a problem, if you don't use tokens (don't give them away), someone else will. They don't disappear.

The problem is, you can't say - it's my money. Because they never were.

It does not matter who rewards them, obviously only those with stake can do so and when they do so it's because of virtue of how stakeholders earn revenue on their stake, not only on steem, but all over the world and in just about every single business that has stakeholders.

You give it away as you please. You can give it to the worst post - e.g. child pornography, because you don't lose anything.

It's established that something is indeed lost, so nice try lying again, like you lied that people got their stake for free.

However, if you give a grant, you lose money. You choose only the best entries.

And those can be child loving adults "foundations".

The hilarious thing is that you first lied, said that donation is no different than steem, now you're saying that it's fundamentally different and it only gets more hilarious because the white paper discusses why donation and tipping platforms are such poor performers, which is why steem is different all together.

26.08.2019 00:11
0

There's absolutely nothing wrong with voting for yourself or your own posts, the only problem is when you vote for yourself exclusively, and even that does not promote others to do the same, by a long shot, and it's obvious that doing so is not the way to maximizing your profits.

Yes, if you give yourself a voice once or twice a day, nothing will happen. Giving yourself 10 times a day may be unwelcome. It's worse if you do the bots that throw in the memes or exchange voices with your friends (there used to be a website that showed relations between people's voices). Then you are generally useless for the network

I'm also just as much everyone as everyone else. Logic.

That's why Steem doesn't work well (and never will).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tragedy_of_the_commons

They don't, and your logic is simplistic, flawed and unrealistic, as the white paper points out regarding inflation (of the dollar) not correlating with increased supply, age old myth debunked by facts (read the white paper) that inflation is simply (fundamental) increasing the circulation of money.

... which causes prices to rise through the loss of the dollar.

It's a well established function that Stakeholders have rights over the profit if their investment.

True. I'm just not saying they don't have rights and they need to be killed. It's just that you build Steem with good decisions and destroy him with bad decisions. Of course, in part, because you have little influence on the net itself, but the snowball effect works.

It's established that something is indeed lost, so nice try lying again, like you lied that people got their stake for free.

I do.

The hilarious thing is that you first lied, said that donation is no different than steem

I don't know where I was talking about. ZapRead or Publish0x (the latter will have most of Steem's flaws) can compete with him.

you're saying that it's fundamentally different and it only gets more hilarious because the white paper discusses why donation and tipping platforms are such poor performers, which is why steem is different all together.

It's completely different, which is not bad in itself. There are other systems that allow you to earn money without a direct subsidy - e.g. a medium (you pay for access to texts, and the money is distributed among the creators of entries).

However, nobody gives money for free. That's why Steem loses value because he gives money in bulk, which is sold.

That's why, for example, Mannabase went bankrupt.

26.08.2019 09:44
0

Tragedy of the commons
The tragedy of the commons is a situation in a shared-resource system where individual users, acting independently according to their own self-interest, behave contrary to the common good of all users, by depleting or spoiling that resource through their collective action. The theory originated in an essay written in 1833 by the British economist William Forster Lloyd, who used a hypothetical example of the effects of unregulated grazing on common land (also known as a "common") in Great Britain and Ireland. The concept became widely known as the "tragedy of the commons" over a century later due to an article written by the American biologist and philosopher Garrett Hardin in 1968. In this modern economic context, "commons" is taken to mean any shared and unregulated resource such as atmosphere, oceans, rivers, fish stocks, roads and highways, or even an office refrigerator.

26.08.2019 09:45
1

A problem can also be when you get less money from posts than from self upvoting. Many people have this problem - and what should they choose?

Yes, if you give yourself a voice once or twice a day, nothing will happen. Giving yourself 10 times a day may be unwelcome. It's worse if you do the bots that throw in the memes or exchange voices with your friends (there used to be a website that showed relations between people's voices). Then you are generally useless for the network

It does not matter at all, the initial point was that donation model is superior to steem, which is ridiculous, you tried to argue that because of bid bots and self voting donation model is so much better, to what you characterized as socialism, saying that stake is not earned but given freely, that one does not lose anything if they vote. The hilarious thing is that you did so in response to the utterly disparaging performance in comparison to steem, trying to defend from reality of what a total shit performance donation model continues to be next to steem.

Now you're saying that a myth of "tragedy of the commons" which has no basis in reality and was completely invented instead of observed and validated as is purported by people who aren't that critical of such things, that it somehow means that the value steem has and the value one's stake has is not theirs based accordingly, but only in some abstract communal basis.

As far as being mistaken on inflation and disregarding the reference to the white paper where it points out that inflation is not caused by increase in circulation, that's fine, whatever narrative you need to escape the reality that donation model is no competition to steem.

True. I'm just not saying they don't have rights and they need to be killed. It's just that you build Steem with good decisions and destroy him with bad decisions. Of course, in part, because you have little influence on the net itself, but the snowball effect works.

No, you were not saying that, you were saying that voting costs nothing, that the stake people have was handed out, and that the steem that is created devalues all other steem and that it belongs to no one but only to everyone. I pointed out that stakeholders/shareholders have rights to the profits, as is recognized by every business that is based on that model and in the same way all steem that one has access to by virtue of their stake in the system is for all intent and purpose, theirs. You though, think that is no different from socialism.

I don't know where I was talking about. ZapRead or Publish0x (the latter will have most of Steem's flaws) can compete with him.

Compete with steem at what? There is absolutely no competition or chance of.

However, nobody gives money for free. That's why Steem loses value because he gives money in bulk, which is sold.

That's why, for example, Mannabase went bankrupt.

Sure, that explains why it went from 6c to 20000% that.

27.08.2019 13:38
0

Yeah, well... Steem with 120k active users due to course drops has now ~5k active users.

Happy Hard Fork, let's see what happens ;)

And if you are rejecting economics, well.

27.08.2019 14:48
0

And if you are rejecting economics, well.

What a monumental retard. You've been referenced numerous times and you think I'm "rejecting economics".

From the white paper :

From August 2008 through January 2009 the U.S. money supply17 grew from $871B to $1,737B, a rate of over 100% per year and then continued to grow at about 20% per year for the next 6 years. All told the money supply in the U.S. has grown by 4.59x over less than 7 years. During that same time, the value of the dollar relative to goods and services has fallen less than 10% according to the government's price index18. This real-world example demonstrates that supply is only one component of price.

The price of a digital commodity, like STEEM, is driven by both supply and demand. If new STEEM is allocated to those who are holding long-term then the increase in supply is offset by the corresponding demand to hold. The impact of this change in supply is postponed until a future date when the long-term holder decides to sell.

From the section that begins with:

Impact of Token Creation Rate

At first glance, 100% annual increase in the STEEM supply may appear to be hyper-inflationary and unsustainable. Those who follow the Quantity Theory of Money16 may even conclude that the value of STEEM must fall by approximately 5.6% per month. We know from countless real-world examples that the quantity of money does not have a direct and immediate impact on its value, though it certainly plays a role.

Here's you:

However, [all newly created tokens] have one fundamental point. They lower the value of all other tokens. Logical.

Vs

inflation and deflation occur proportionately to increases or decreases in the supply of money. Empirical evidence has not demonstrated this, and most economists do not hold this view.

https://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/042015/how-does-money-supply-affect-inflation.asp

Yeah, well... Steem with 120k active users due to course drops has now ~5k active users.

How long did it take for Reddit to blow up? Will any of your "alternatives" to steem where you sneer at steem ever dream of blowing up like steem did?

Fucktards, wankers, liars, idiots.

27.08.2019 22:26
0

Sorry, it looks like I won

27.08.2019 23:01
0

Yeah you managed to claim first in being an idiot.

try-not-to-laugh

However, [all newly created tokens] have one fundamental point. They lower the value of all other tokens. Logical.

28.08.2019 01:39
0

So you're suggesting that if an asteroid full of gold fell to the ground, gold would be fine on the speculative markets?

28.08.2019 08:02
0

Not at all. You think that supply alone, or every single new coin as you say, lowers the value of all other coins, but the value is not simply the number of coins, but the demand to both hold and sell them that determines what the value does.

We don't have to worry about your hypothetical scenario on steem, and like everything else points out, inflation is not as simple as you "logic", though you wouldn't need to be informed of this reality if you'd taken the time to read what I said.

29.08.2019 02:44
0

Every token can be frozen, so here's a different problem. In turn finally it is going to be defrosted and hit with a powerful force

29.08.2019 09:07
0

Stop blabbing on moving from one nonsensical point to the next without even acknowledging the fallacy I kept pointing out regarding "every new coin devalues all other coins", no token can be frozen because no token is serialized and there's absolutely no way to freeze steem, or to defrost it. Clearly donation model fails flat on it's face and is absolutely zero competition to steem, not even a percentage of one percent next to steem, and stake is not given freely and the rewards belong proportionately to however much stake any skakeholder has powered up, and is not 'everybody's'.

31.08.2019 01:38
0

And that is why it is a better system, because the money spent is on really good people (in our case), and not arbitrarily.

Let's see what happens, hard fork 21 is probably a disaster (we'll evaluate it over time, but I see comments), and Steem has lost more than 95% of its active users.

It is very difficult to make a good system, because it has to earn money.

31.08.2019 06:58
0

Why is what a better system than what?
Which system is spending money arbitrarily and why and how?
How and why are the people "really good"?

I said absolutely nothing that would premise your gooblegook non sequitur nonsense, and I don't expect that you'll be forthcoming in clarifying your gobbledygook "better system". You have been defending a dismal failure compared to steem, responding with your defensive bullshit and blatant lies to the obvious dismal performance that is evident in those links I shared regarding those "better" systems. You kept trying to reduce value to a matter of supply, exclusive of any and all demand, to you, it makes 'logic' that every single new coin devalue all others, and you called me rejecting economics even though I repeatedly referenced you to what I was remarking, what a toolbag moron, to you, those remarks and their references were my "rejecting" lol, now here you are, talking about nonsense and bullshit that tokens can be frozen and defrosted tokens and moving seemingly into staring some blatantly bullshit statistics that more than 95% of it's active users on steem left and talking about how much a better system donation? model is because the money is spent on "really good people" and not "arbitrarily". You're a joke, don't know shit for nothing about basic economics but don't let that stop your Dunning-Krueger syndrome from opening it's mouth about it because you somehow think that we were having a a discussion about "let's see what happens" and not about the joke that donation model is and the joke that you are with "stake is given freely", "its not your tokens, it's everybody's" and "all new steem devalues all other steem" among others.

31.08.2019 17:57
0

Why fight? Sooner or later the answer will be who is right.

31.08.2019 19:44
0

If you don't denounce lies, bullshit and idiocy alike, your silence is complacency. #real-value

Why fight? Because truth ain't gone pull itself out of the dirt after you threw it there and proceeded to stomp it out, why fight? Not to convince a complete moron that ain't got shit for brains but thinks he knows what "economics" factors from. It's evident that you have absolutely no problem with inventing shit, lying and spreading bullshit, so of course, when someone stands up and says, no you moron, that's not what every new coin does, no you imbecile, that's not like steem at all, no you idiot those are my tokens and not everyone's, no you cretin, stake is not given freely and people aren't giving something away that doesn't belong to them, no you liar, no tokens can be frozen, or defrosted, no nowhere near 95% of users left steem, that you, the peddler of lies and bullshit, retorts with "why fight".

31.08.2019 19:55
0

tokenfree-z

31.08.2019 17:58
0

Donation is so much better, lol.

26.08.2019 00:15
0

You tried to claim that the, stake people hold is given freely, which is a blatant lie.

You tried to claim that there's no difference between donating money and steem, because you have to cash out in dollars either way, which is retarded as all fuck. Now here you are claiming that there is a fundamental difference between the two, what a moron..

Yeah, it's gibberish to idiots, what else is new.

25.08.2019 17:56
0

You tried to claim that the, stake people hold is given freely, which is a blatant lie.

So press the upvote button and tell me how much money you've lost.

25.08.2019 23:58
0

Exactly how much my vote is worth, duh. You suck at math and critical thinking, must suck going through life like an idiot, wonder how much shit you could have avoided instead of walking straight into it.

26.08.2019 00:18
0

Tell me again by what logic is steem no different than donation platform and how soon do you think until those oddities you think are alternatives to steem will "distribute" (more like transfer and take 10% because it's so superior while only 60% goes directly to the author ) one day's worth of wealth that steem distributes, in a entire month?

26.08.2019 00:21
0

Worse than those oddities that have nothing to do with steem what so ever? Sure.

24.08.2019 09:08
0

The other one is even more hilarious :
The distribution wallet which includes all their "sponsored" authors cash outs:https://etherscan.io/address/0xF9879bB3230f86fFCebcA652C5FB6Ec4504309be#analytics

24.08.2019 01:13
0

Exactly my points!
I get regular Curie upvotes - evidently, my content is of high-enough quality to warrant it. :-)
Between those Curies, I'm lucky if I get 1 SBD per post. (I see SBD, not Steem so much - I think many others are like that too.) It's a far cry from 20 Steem!!! (Except once per fortnight - the minimum time between curie upvotes.)

I'm glad to see curation getting attention - this is a GREAT thing!!!
But I'm one of the creators (because I need to create), and we need to reward high-quality content to convince creators to stay in Steem if we're to see Steem, as a blockchain, thrive.

I suspect the thresh-hold is way too high. As is said here by @loreshapergames, a smaller shift for lower levels (3-8 steem isn't unreasonable), it would be a much more manageable change for those of us who make up the majority (vast majority) of quality content creators for Steem.

23.08.2019 01:10
0

@loreshapergames The biggest vote of steemstem generates an approximate of 18 steem or close to 20 steem, that is to say "it is not enough", taking into account the level of quality of the article that the author must reach to obtain that vote. It's almost impossible!

23.08.2019 01:31
1

Exactly. It's nice, but it's not anything that's going to motivate serious work to be posted to Steem.

23.08.2019 02:42
0

Around 95%+ of my Steem posts I make are on other social media outlets I post as well; my statuses are the same across the board (posted on multiple platforms for increased visibility), whereas if it's a blog post, I post it all on here, then link to the blog post (on WordPress).

The remaining percentage of posts are exclusive to Steem, because they directly talk about in some way; I'm not overly motivated right now to make more posts exclusive to Steem, because - as was said before - if things don't happen after 7 days, then the window for earning potential from your is pretty much gone; visibility on the platform seems to be a bit tricky in many respects, especially for anyone like myself who has been here for less than a year.

I've received a fair few likes on my posts, but barely any comments, and I'm lucky to see even 0.001 STEEM on a post that reaches double digits. I've been starting to use the Tribes feature over the past week, seeing as it (hopefully) will increase my visibility somewhat, but also so I'm able to get some sort of reward (via tokens) for my posts, as in terms of STEEM, it's very easy for me to get nothing at all, even if the upvotes on my post reach the lower side of double figures (between 10-20 upvotes), I have a very strong chance of getting nothing for the time I put in! Not only that, it's very hard to know if there's interest in my posts or not, because I don't generally get many interactions other than upvotes.

This hard fork makes me wonder how people in a similar position to me (or lower), as well as those who are modestly above me will fare, because it really does seem like unless you're earning 20+ Steem, it's going to become a bit trickier to earn even the lowest denomination of it!

23.08.2019 19:54
3

Totally agree

23.08.2019 22:11
1

At the moment, you are barely visible... Soon you are going to disappear off the radar completely.

The message of HF21 is Steemit doesn't want new users.

24.08.2019 02:50
1

It seems so... but without new users, the value of STEEM could really go down further, and things would end up stagnating as a result because it's generally going to be the same accounts, especially after others leave!

24.08.2019 19:05
1

I'm in a similar boat, i don't get more than a few cents if any at all, on each post. One or two comments at most. It is a feeble existence, which may become more feeble as far as earning goes. Perhaps commenting and upvoting more will help?

26.08.2019 17:15
1

How exactly is the rewards curve changing?

There is a link in the original post which answers this question.

24.08.2019 07:18
0

Would be nice to know how screwed I will be with actual numbers that relate to me and all the other little people. I have had 3 or 4 post EVER make 20+ steem in 3 years on here. My curation per week is maybe 2 steem and my author rewards are 30ish steem. So I am looking at getting 4 steem in curation and 20 steem in author rewards? This all seems like it is forcing a lot more work to try and make any where near what we were before without buying votes to try and increase our share of the pool.

22.08.2019 23:16
1

Long live #steem :D

22.08.2019 23:27
0

Cool. Hurry up :)

22.08.2019 23:41
1

Please no :(

23.08.2019 21:36
0

how you going frankvvv?

23.08.2019 22:54
1

So, so. Most of my other cryptos are doing better than Steem :)

23.08.2019 23:12
2

What is with the Comments??? We need more on the Steem.
It is not a Social Network without them.
If we vote a Comment above the Payout Border, the Peoples would have a drive to Comment more. But with the 50/50 change, the dont vote more the Comments. That is a Problem i see. Or is it not???
Salve
Alucian

23.08.2019 00:00
0

(1)3HaJVw3AYyXBBQkN3tCkhE2EjPPNPEEY7rZsT4k8E4aPBLjjU4T3hN4b4jQMDrkJW4bFBpk6VQNnCRorLpNycp7bgm1hTXPpNDBMdiE.png

3HaJVw3AYyXBBQkN3tCkhE2EjPPNPEEY7rZsT4k8E4aPBLjjU4T3hN4b4jQMDrkJW4bFBpk6VQNnCRpJdM2pMYt6mUW59Pwei3SxQgn.png

3HaJVwHaJVw3AYyXBBQkN3tCkhE2EjPPNPEEY7rZsT4k8E4aPBLjjU4T3hN4b4jQMDrkJW4bFBpk6VQNnCRo9ayJPK92LMeg2k8gjnay8AfG.png

geniousenious memes byornangelangel *

23.08.2019 00:01
13

Aw, shucks,....thanks.

23.08.2019 01:56
2

shucks?

23.08.2019 02:04
0

I guess yo expect too much from me

23.08.2019 02:24
0

Huh?

You are great, thanks for giving me the shout out.

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/colloquialism

You are doing better in english than I can in deutsch.

23.08.2019 02:30
0

Ah yea, I just got 10 seconds after I've sent the comment :D

23.08.2019 02:46
0

I HAVE POSTED THIS REPLY AS IT IS- @luegenbaron

Sorry for not asking you first. But this is too good NOT to propogate-

23.08.2019 13:32
0

and because the Witnesses are ultimately accountable to Steem’s stakeholders, the odds are maximized toward only positive changes being made

Laughable, at best.

We expect posts that would make more than 20 STEEM under the old rules to earn more after the changes. Those posts that would have made less than 20 STEEM under the old rules will receive less after the changes.

Well, if you needed a FU newbs, here ya go.

Unless the whales step up it looks like a curtain call to me!
See ya on broadway!

That means you will be rewarded significantly more for curating content after the fork.

Yea! My .002 is is going to .004!

Props for the honesty, stinc.
That took backbone.

23.08.2019 00:12
17

Well, if you needed a FU newbs, here ya go.

It has absolutely nothing to do with newbs, it is about posts being rewarded more than 20 steem which has nothing to do with newbs.

23.08.2019 01:09
2

Sublinear.

Exponentially.

23.08.2019 01:30
3

Yeah, so after I pointed out that your FUD about newbs was bullshit you come back with non sequitur response.

23.08.2019 01:47
0

Lol,...

23.08.2019 01:51
1

I've had several discussions with you regarding not only how (read: not why) we got to this point, but also these proposals and so when I see your bullshit about "they said the rich get richer" or "screw the newbs" it's satisfying to call it out knowing that we both know how full of shit you are. You lately respond to being called out with more nonsense/bullshit and/or snickering, for whatever reason, showing me that you

Have

Been

Reduced.

I've effectively countered your nonsense, and while you've had numerous opportunities to respond in a thoughtful manner you foolishly hunker down behind the same sentiment of "development is shit and stakeholders are worse" with you're snickering and petulant nonsense and you're completely convinced it seems, that by slandering either the community/stakeholders or the development (which is one and the same as far as I'm concerned) you are holding their toes to the fire but what I see you do is neither holding their toes to the fire or honoring the principles behind accountability, chiefly integrity so it simply is slanderous nonsense and its mostly to castigate it seems and because you think them responsible and you think you're holding them accountable but you are not accountable or responsible for what you claim, a burden that is considered so cursory it ought never to be evaded, but you have very high standards of others and think you deserve to lecture them on principles like integrity and responsibility. Cut the bullshit already, what are you trying to do, because it seems like thousands of failuires later you're trying the exact same thing and still sticking to the script, now you have me in the mix though taking every single opportunity (and sometimes tripling it) to make sure that I exemplify the way to respond to bullshit.

23.08.2019 04:41
1

Lol, give me hell, baah!

I'm just trying to understand the math.
You don't have to appreciate my methods.
Nor do you have to agree that when somebody makes changes that were known to be flawed doubles down on those changes I should double down on my contentious resistance to said changes.
If you remember correctly, steemit was on the soon to be deprecated list not that long ago.

As for the shadow banning, there is only one way to prove what I said, and I'm betting it's only a matter of time until I find more broken links.

I will be sure to tag you when I do.

23.08.2019 06:19
2

I'm just trying to understand the math.

Good one, is that why you're asking instead of stating?

You don't have to appreciate my methods.

Cut the crap. Methods aren't unsubstantiated slanderous nonsense.

Nor do you have to agree that when somebody makes changes that were known to be flawed doubles down on those changes I should double down on my contentious resistance to said changes.

What changes exactly? That's what I fucking thought, vague nonsense.

If you remember correctly, steemit was on the soon to be deprecated list not that long ago.

Which list? Who's list?

As for the shadow banning, there is only one way to prove what I said, and I'm betting it's only a matter of time until I find more broken links.

Broken links don't mean shit. You think that the simplest explanation for a broken link is a massive conspiracy to "shadowban" you, because when you regard unadulterated slander as a methodology of operating then the simplest explanation is the most insane and idiocy ridden one.

23.08.2019 06:54
1

I've been informed there was a bug.
The timing is close.
Time will tell.

As for the rest, we've already determined I'm a loon, so I should never be taken at face value.

Caveat emptor.
Dyor.

23.08.2019 07:02
0

I've been informed there was a bug.
The timing is close.
Time will tell.

You mean someone spent their time trying to 'help' you in your "investigation" and pointed out other much more likely explanations than the conclusion you jumped to without qualm?

Time won't tell shit, only a thorough testing, questioning and examining will and let's be honest, even if you undertake the scientific method instead of your methodology based on slanderous accusations will you have the integrity to set your bias aside?

As for the rest, we've already determined I'm a loon, so I should never be taken at face value.

I don't care what you "determine" of yourself, all I'm concerned are the incessant disparaging claims you aim at the development and community and what you base them on, and considering yourself a loon ain't gonna make me avoid your claims.

23.08.2019 14:09
0

I'm still not convinced this 'bug' wasn't intentional.

I'd love to give stinc the benefit of the doubt.
Hell, if they get enough get right I might stop referring to them as stinc.
They have made moves in that direction.
I'm waiting to see how this new math goes before seriously considering that, though.

ain't gonna make me avoid your claims.

Welcome to the conversation.

23.08.2019 16:04
0

Welcome to the conversation.

What conversation, you seem interested in self depreciation instead of taking full responsibility for the burden of proof of your disparaging claims or to justify your mundi operandi, you think that you're evasion just before was forgotten or you have the cheek to mock me with that 'greeting', you clearly have absolutely no interest in discussing what you bring up, instead you rely more on elusion and implication. I guess you'll offer more evasion and silence, what else is new about your bullshit.

23.08.2019 22:27
0

Baah, you won.
We determined that I am full of sh*t and should never be trusted as a source of information.
Why you want to belabor that point is what keeps me coming back.
Most folks I have met that liked to rub things in had large hurdles in life to overcome.
Not least of which was being difficult to be around.
I'm hoping to smooth some of your rough edges so that you can be more effective with your interpersonal skillz.

24.08.2019 01:23
0

I'm not rubbing it in that you're any kind of way, I'm holding you to your claims, which has shit all to do with you being full of shit. Your bullshit claims are full of shit, I don't give a hoot in hell about you or if you need your diper changed, I'm here to ask questions and offer my thoughts, but mostly to question.

25.08.2019 02:46
0

Looks like the bug is back on your end. Everything works on my end.

25.08.2019 06:20
1

You saying the steemit and steemd links work for you?

25.08.2019 06:59
0

I concur, I just tested your last post myself, refreshed it and it was still there. You are not blocked!at least every day for at least a month or two! lol

25.08.2019 08:00
2

Not the steemd link, though I'm sure there a valid explanation for coininstant (and his alts?) posts being banned /not opening, something to do with making threats. Screenshot_20190825_113724.png

Also, coininstant isn't on the irredeemables list, not that his account could not be flagged another way and the "bug" you experienced seemed like default 404 pages while this "bug" is not default 404 page but a steemd 404 page.

25.08.2019 16:44
0

So, if irredeemables is the transparent way to ban people why would he be blocked by another method?

There should be a town hall tonite, I will ask.

25.08.2019 17:27
0

Because the irredeemables are for abusing certain things, like the faucet sign up or the TOS, not that his ban isn't transparent by virtue of it being on the blockchain, and it'll be wiser to ask before jumping to conclusions, time to break that awful habit of yours.

25.08.2019 18:00
0

While we are breaking habits,...does being abrasive help improve the learning curve of those of us needing to learn better?
Did @truthforce need to be characterized in the manner you chose to characterize his person as opposed to the behavior?

You may be right in your facts, but your vinegar is losing you friends.

25.08.2019 18:23
0

My intent isn't to "learn" anyone, quite the opposite, my intention is to mock, to ridicule and to put down idiocy and idiots alike. What they do with the mockery and ridicule is wholy on them. If they don't see me as invaluable for that then so be it, I'd rather be hated and thought of as an assholes for having zero tolerance for hypocrisy and idiocy or trolling alike, than to pander to their feelings and egos.

25.08.2019 18:40
1

Maybe not, he may be on the irredeemables list.

25.08.2019 06:12
1

The people in ‘power’ do not call it that way, but Sadowbanning/blocking is indeed happening sometimes on steemit (not on the steem blockchain). I even have one “true example” for you. Remember, About half a year ago, when that hackergroup (the dark overlord) came out on social media, and demended to be paid in btc for the real truth about what happened at 911???

Well, .... Those guys & girls also posted on steemit, and they got kicked off, blocked/ shadowbanned of steemit, but you could still find their posts on the steem blockchain.

I remember @aggroed wrote a mad post about it, concluding that ...

“The steem blockchain is censorship proof
the steemit.com interface is not
the steemit blockchain isn't a thing that exists“

https://goldvoice.club/steem/@aggroed/a-note-about-thedarkoverlord-and-censorship-on-steem-it

23.08.2019 07:22
2

Look up the definition of shadow banning first and then we can discuss if extortion, which is exactly what those "demands" were, ought to be honored EVER as free speech or enabled in any kind of way.

23.08.2019 14:01
0

It doesnt matter why it is happening, it is happening, and i just gave a simple example. Furthermore, i do not care about it mate

26.08.2019 15:03
1

Obviously to you it's irrelevant what the reason behind banning was, you seem to think that extortion should be honored as every other free expression, that "the people in power" are shadowbanning, but o wait. You don't even give a fuck. So why the fuck did you feel the desire to open your mouth about something you don't care about even? Fucktards everywhere.

27.08.2019 14:17
0

You missed the other half:

Those posts that would have made less than 20 STEEM under the old rules will receive less after the changes.

24.08.2019 21:22
1

What are you talking about? Does that mean that it has absolutely anything to do with "newbs", because you just exemplified how to completely miss the other person's point, point being that the quote is not referring at all to new users.

Fuck it's painful to watch the idiotic nonsense that leaves people's mouths like a bad habit before they consider what they read or even what they said.

25.08.2019 02:41
1

The new payout rules have absolutely something to do with discouraging new users. You just choose to not see it.

27.08.2019 04:48
0

Have to disagree with you on a number of points. But firstly I have said before I would like the changes to have gone further, maybe 10/90 split. The truth is the vast majority of users will never earn by posting, however they can continue to do so in the hope a post goes viral. When most of the upvotes are worth practically nothing anyway, we need a way for those accounts to grow enough so their vote counts, yes the rewards to authors will hit their earnings but if the votes they get are worth more it should compensate for the loss in earnings.

You need some way in my view to distribute Steem to the lesser accounts and then in turn they will distribute it back. You can't prevent some of this being sold but good Curation incentives should be enough to curtail that. What is certain is that the current model isn't working and with the ability to just earn by delegating to bots it just plays into the hands of those with the most Steem.

Another problem is the bad image it presents that you just sign up with a Steem account and the $$$ just pour in, that doesn't help in the long run. Also there is much more to do than just post and upvote so the focus needs to be getting users to get Steem and Power Up. There are vastly more users who will benefit from Curation rewards than will ever benefit from Post rewards. The problem though is this doesn't fix the other problem, that is getting users to manually upvote original content and stop them delegating to bidbots. If you could fix that aspect as well then I think you would have a better Steem eco system.

But like someone above said its also not about how many rewards you get its about how much those rewards are worth so the focus must be on increasing the token value, I think there is enough going on in Steem to attract new users so I am confident this won't have such a bad effect on that as you believe.

27.08.2019 08:35
2

I'm not actually all that much bothered about the 50/50 Split. The decrease in income for postings under 20 Steem bothers me.

And that will hit both small authors and curators. And the amount of posts is already falling:

As is the amount of votes:

As is the value of steem itself. Note that I did buy steem and powered up in the past. But I don't see a point in it any more.

My suspicion: The dolphin to wales have all the steem they want and smaller accounts are disillusioned and don't want to invest.

As for a 10/90 split: Why not go all the way and do 0/100 split like @dtube? We'll see how that will work's out. It's worth a try.

27.08.2019 11:29
2

You just choose not to point out in no uncertain way how that limit has anything to do with new users, so I'll just continue to point out that the curve does not have anything to do with new users, it's entirely about posts, not users.

27.08.2019 14:10
0

If you like pointless nitpicking then go ahead.

But I have a question for you: Who makes those postings? And who curates those postings?

Hint: They are macroscopic so they don't pop into existence out of the quantum foam.

27.08.2019 14:54
0

There's nothing pointless or nitpicky about what I said. Here I'll repeat it again because I like reiterating what you attempted to mitigate to "pointless nitpicking" as:

A curve for posts has ABSOLUTELY no-thing to do with new users.

Do your best to marginalize, change the topic or any thing to that effect.

27.08.2019 15:40
0

You did not answer my question:

Who makes those postings? And who curates those postings?

28.08.2019 11:18
0

I'll bite, who?

29.08.2019 02:47
0

The users you say have nothing to do with the reward curve.

Sure, if you only look one step ahead. Of course if you can look two steps ahead then you see:

1) Users create posting and curate them.
2) posting and curation are affected by reward curve.

I know, pretty complex stuff.

29.08.2019 07:26
0

The users you say have nothing to do with the reward curve.

And who are they, by what virtue are they who you claim they are, evasive like initially.

Let me correct you as well:

The "new" users which I say aren't at all what the post reward curve has anything in specific with.

  1. Users create posting and curate them.
  2. posting and curation are affected by reward curve.

And how and why is the Posting Reward Curve specifically targeting new users disproportionately or at all? You didn't specify anywhere who the users are, you were trying to say again and again by implying that the posting reward curve DOES Screw Over new users, and all you have to say is "users(nondescript) create postings ergo changes to posting affect users", as some logic that Posting reward curve screws over new users. Get the fuck out of here with that inane idiotic bullshit.

31.08.2019 01:49
0

🔥🔥🔥

!dramatoken

As an added bonus, here's a GIF I just made in honor of this most glorious fork.

So, what if our whale overlords have decided the crumbs that we get that fall from their tables need to be a bit smaller?

At least we are getting crumbs! We collect them over time and we just might have enough for a WHOLE SLICE OF BREAD.

Maybe over a year or so we will have a whole loaf! 😋

Now that's a lot of CALORIES! 🍞

So, what if it's a little moldy by then. That's just EXTRA FLAVOR!

Don't be ungrateful, @freebornangel! Fall back in line, citizen! 👮

23.08.2019 14:32
21

Sir, yes sir!
The recruit will fall back into line and make due with his fortunate position in the crumb line!

Just keep that lobster under control!

23.08.2019 15:51
3

If you want the dolphins and whales to enjoy steem more and maybe BUY MORE steem, we MIGHT need this :) Imagine the dolphins who benefit get excited enough from these changes to buy more steem, the price of steem goes up and all of our rewards go up to new levels, levels that we may never have gotten to without these changes

23.08.2019 19:52
2

I have been but with much trepidation which is prudent imo.

As long as the bid bot owners as well as founder circle jerk circles hijack inflation without proof-of-brain it is risky.

Perhaps, the technical changes w the fork may assuage my concerns but I am one to suppose the problem tends to be more a matter of culture and lack of decisive leadership from the large stakeholders up until this point.

I appreciate your enthusiasm but in my line of work here exposes me to some shady things. Things that don't imbue me with confidence.

Don't get me wrong. Steem has countless redeeming qualities but make no mistake. There is a cancer and we are gearing up for a slightly more aggressive yet unfocused treatment.

If StInc would take a hard stance against vote selling collusion and impenitent token manipulators, I think the prognosis would be much better. They could always delegate that responsibility to @steemflagrewards. 🙃

Time will tell.

23.08.2019 20:06
3

Just bought more Steem to upvote you. I'm am altruistic idiot. 🤪

Perhaps, one day dogs like us will have our day.... Without a hard fork.

But I am keeping that on the table if treachery becomes so pervasive that there is no other reasonable option.

24.08.2019 01:12
1

How about all of us buying some Steem?

24.08.2019 14:30
0

Doesn't look like it. Looks more like they started selling when they read the HF21 paper.

Should have done so as well. Silly me.

24.08.2019 21:19
2

Such drama, you've earned a DRAMA!

To view or trade DRAMA go to steem-engine.com.

23.08.2019 14:33
2

:) I like the Drama Token...haha
They def. earned some! ;)

23.08.2019 18:44
2

Unless the whales step up..

50% curation reward and the #NewSteem campaign might change all this.. Or else why are all even here..

23.08.2019 18:22
0

Yes, if the whales step up and put an end to the abuse it might be worth hanging out, but if they chase off most of the people, what are we doing here?

We already can't get many views as it is.

24.08.2019 01:32
0

I liked everything except 20 steem limit

23.08.2019 00:13
0

Looking forward to try new hardfork.

23.08.2019 00:14
0

One thing I notice as I look through all the comments... something I hope that the "powers that be" notice too...
Almost everyone who has commented is in the 60s or higher in reputation. Not all, obviously. But the point is, these aren't newbies who are complaining or concerned. It's the people who have been around for awhile - have put a lot of effort into supporting Steem, building their accounts, their community - these aren't the "get rich quick" folks.

We're not even saying the whole HF is bad. We're (on the whole) concerned that the ones who are going to hurt the most are the ones that are most needed on this platform - the ones who are dedicated to creating great content - and may not have the money to buy their way to greatness. (I know I don't have the money for that - I've built my account from scratch - with hard work - something I'm quite proud of.)

Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater, but please reconsider the fact that probably 90%+ are going to hurt from the 20 Steem break.That's not going to encourage new content creators, nor encourage existing ones to stay. I like the concept, I worry about the details!

(This would also be a great time to prove to everyone that the "powers that be" actually listen to the commoners of Steem.)

23.08.2019 01:22
4

The whales could step up and enforce an influence cap, but absent that, I'm not holding out much hope for any but those already favored by the steem haves to stick around.
Why would they, this doubles down on what the 'accountable to stakeholders witnesses' did when they forced linear rewards on us.

Bring back the n2 and a 500mv cap on influence.

23.08.2019 01:49
0

We should absolutely oppose hf21. Set @tcpolymath as your witness proxy. His system votes only for witnesses running 20

25.08.2019 14:50
0

lets make the next three months better than the last three months!!!

Posted using Partiko iOS

23.08.2019 01:49
0

This post has been included in the latest edition of The Steem News - a compilation of the key news stories on the Steem blockchain.

23.08.2019 02:29
0

I'm glad to see you explaining the basics of the hardfork in this format, something that was lacking before HF20.

I also noticed a surge in media coverage of Steem in anticipation of this - nice work!

@steemitblog, I'd like you to read and consider this post: https://steemit.com/@arseniclullaby/arsenic-lullaby-rant-everytime-these-guys-open-thier-mouths-the-price-of-steem-drops

Though it is lacking, um, tact, it tells of a serious missed opportunity when it comes to marketing Steem. Most users aren't that interested in nuts and bolts. We're interested in what people do on Steem. You don't have to be the mainstream to appeal to the mainstream, you just have to leverage those of us who are.

But don't take one of Steem's best content creators' word for it, take a lesson from those who focus on building communities rather than blockchains. Read 11 Rules for Creating Value in the Social Era by Nilofer Merchant or The Art of Community: Seven Principles for Belonging by Charles Vogl

This place has so much potential; let's do this!

Posted using Partiko Android

23.08.2019 03:10
4

"..posts that would make more than 20 STEEM under the old rules to earn more after the changes. Those posts that would have made less than 20 STEEM under the old rules will receive less.."

aka rich get richer and poor get poorer

"..changed from 75/25 split currently, to a 50/50 split between author and curator.."

So, less for content-creators, more for curators with a lot of money... aka rich get richer and poor get poorer

The insiders have voted themselves another big raise, as the last of the content-creators finally get choked out and chased off.

23.08.2019 03:12
3

Somebody better stand up and flag the crap out of treending, or the next giant sucking sound you hear will be the minnows as they exit stage left.

Our curation rewards going from .002 to .004 is not going to offset a 40% drop in author rewards.
We will know the first week of september if we need to just let the haves have it all.
They can have 100% of a coin nobody wants.

23.08.2019 06:36
1

Is the vote window changing from 15 min to 1 min. Can someone confirm this?

23.08.2019 03:15
0

Yes it is

23.08.2019 05:37
0

5 minutes.

23.08.2019 06:37
0

Hi @freebornangel - can you show me a place where I can verify it? I thought it's gonna be 1 min.

23.08.2019 12:40
0

Thanks! !tip 0.3 hide

23.08.2019 18:25
1

Thanks.

23.08.2019 15:55
0

Thanks! !tip 0.3 hide

23.08.2019 18:25
0

Hey man! Do you know what happens to the old posts that haven't got paid yet after HF21? If the new rules apply, then I'll get a lot less for the upvote I bought! And I won't be the only one! Since curators will get 50% after HF21 :/

24.08.2019 10:14
0

Yep, it seems that those posts will be paid under new rules. But not only 50/50 but also non linear reward curve - so you might get more or less, depending on post value.

At least you got the tipu profit sharing tokens, those will work the same :)

24.08.2019 20:27
0

So no refund? I think I'm gonna lose about 30 STEEM then :(

24.08.2019 23:42
0

Please at least wait for the payout and pm me on discord: https://discord.gg/NDh35gx

Also remember that you can keep those tokens for share in the profits, you dont have to sell them instantly :D

25.08.2019 01:50
0

Ok sure cheers!

25.08.2019 03:39
0

Hi @justinw - I have one more question :)
Currently if I want to calculate my upvote value, it's basically:
(upvote_rshares / recent claims) * reward_pool

Can you give me a little guidance where I can find info how this would look after hf21? I guess is something like:
(upvote_rshares / recent claims / n) * reward_pool
but how I can calculate the n?

25.08.2019 12:00
0

Thanks for the correction

23.08.2019 18:55
0

Np, just keeping folks on the same page.

24.08.2019 01:39
0

5 minutes.

23.08.2019 06:36
0

Thanks!

24.08.2019 02:04
0

Yep.
Np.

24.08.2019 02:13
0

Very excited for the future of Steem

23.08.2019 03:28
0

What a stupid idea that a post contain more then 20 steem reward will be more rewarded are you kidding ? @steemitblog you mean the upvote bots will be need to make your post beneficial so what will be the future of steemit Why always author has to sacrifice take some rewards from whales and witness

23.08.2019 04:02
5

Yup. Have a !BEER 🍺

23.08.2019 11:25
1

Sorry, you don't have enough staked BEER in your account. You need 6 BEER in your virtual fridge to give some of your BEER to others. To view or trade BEER go to steem-engine.com

23.08.2019 15:57
0

Sorry, you don't have enough staked BEER in your account. You need 6 BEER in your virtual fridge to give some of your BEER to others. To view or trade BEER go to steem-engine.com

23.08.2019 16:22
0

Sorry, you don't have enough staked BEER in your account. You need 6 BEER in your virtual fridge to give some of your BEER to others. To view or trade BEER go to steem-engine.com

23.08.2019 16:40
0

Sorry, you don't have enough staked BEER in your account. You need 6 BEER in your virtual fridge to give some of your BEER to others. To view or trade BEER go to steem-engine.com

23.08.2019 16:55
0

Sorry, you don't have enough staked BEER in your account. You need 6 BEER in your virtual fridge to give some of your BEER to others. To view or trade BEER go to steem-engine.com

23.08.2019 17:11
0

Sorry, you don't have enough staked BEER in your account. You need 6 BEER in your virtual fridge to give some of your BEER to others. To view or trade BEER go to steem-engine.com

23.08.2019 17:27
0

Sorry, you don't have enough staked BEER in your account. You need 6 BEER in your virtual fridge to give some of your BEER to others. To view or trade BEER go to steem-engine.com

23.08.2019 17:42
0

Sorry, you don't have enough staked BEER in your account. You need 6 BEER in your virtual fridge to give some of your BEER to others. To view or trade BEER go to steem-engine.com

23.08.2019 17:57
0

Sorry, you don't have enough staked BEER in your account. You need 6 BEER in your virtual fridge to give some of your BEER to others. To view or trade BEER go to steem-engine.com

23.08.2019 18:11
0

Sorry, you don't have enough staked BEER in your account. You need 6 BEER in your virtual fridge to give some of your BEER to others. To view or trade BEER go to steem-engine.com

23.08.2019 18:25
0

Sorry, you don't have enough staked BEER in your account. You need 6 BEER in your virtual fridge to give some of your BEER to others. To view or trade BEER go to steem-engine.com

23.08.2019 18:39
0

Sorry, you don't have enough staked BEER in your account. You need 6 BEER in your virtual fridge to give some of your BEER to others. To view or trade BEER go to steem-engine.com

23.08.2019 18:53
0

Here I can two aspects people are complaining about. 20 steem limit and 50:50 split. The are both interconnected. with split of the rewards its became hard to people lay on bots as they loose 50% and its a loss. And with 20 steem limit the shit posts don't get much reward.
So the people who don't generally get organic engagement on their posts will don't get rewarded much fro now on.

23.08.2019 05:31
0

Ok, so let me get this straight through scenario in regards to awards, curation, etc.

If someone is a regular poster that posts decent quality content, they're likely to be curated more as the system encourages curation, and thus lower quality posts will receive less. Thus clogging up the system with less garbage or (shit posts) getting rewarded for being shit and encouraging good or decent content with effort put into it to be able to potentially earn more through the means of encouraging more manual curation.

On one hand, this could get rid of many of the issues of trash posts managing to rake in some decent steem somehow, but on the other hand, it could very easily also be a massive screw you to the lower staked accounts and their content for no reason other than not being big enough to start out.

I think I see what's going on but I need to experiment with the new hard fork once it's live and with it's kinks worked out before I make a video showcase about how this works and all that jazz.

23.08.2019 07:40
1

Glad to hear that, anyway it will nice if your team bring back a View indicator :)

23.08.2019 08:27
0

I hope to be in Azeroth when the Hardfork happens! :D


Bildquelle

23.08.2019 08:56
0

Traducción al Español de barrio... los que tienen mucho van a tener mas y los pobres van a ser mas pobres... No es una idea del FMI es de Steemit ;)

23.08.2019 09:00
0

Didn't understand a word of this; perhaps for newbies like me you could put it in simple form, very simple English

23.08.2019 10:12
0

It translates to " Bend over, pull down your pants, and we are about to stick it to ya right where the sun don't shine "

Your welcome.

27.08.2019 12:38
3

Very disappointed, I thought we have already done HF21 but now you say there will be more posts related to it in my feed? :(

23.08.2019 10:40
0

As a new content creator here on Steemit, I hope this results in changes that benefit people producing good and valuable content here. There are too many useless posts on Steemit, and the interface is too unorganized for a mainstream crossover. I am already starting to realize I'm wasting more time on trying to build a following than I am on producing good content via my short stories.

23.08.2019 11:41
0

Hey, I noticed you mentioned the difficulty in building a following with short stories. I just wanted to recommend @bananafish - they are a for fun (as opposed to self improvement) writing group, joining in on the weekly contest is a good way to meet other authors who are interested in short stories and maybe even win some steem. No pressure to join in or anything, but took me far too long to find a place on here for fiction and know you'd be very welcome there <3

23.08.2019 13:56
1

It sounds right up my alley, although my short stories/posts are true stories from my family's lives. Do you know of anything similar to @bananafish for non-fiction content. So far I use travelblog type tags, but really I feel what I write are more like short stories. My most recent posts for example:

![IMG_2288.JPG](https://cdn.steemitimages.com/DQmbxWTyZF6rLWRFh6gRHS69UAhg89mE4YRfbaMS7wCZi9L/IMG_2288.JPG)

-|-|

![IMG_2399.JPG](https://cdn.steemitimages.com/DQmafzX669fmAL3ax9mX5j3UWLSiaRn5re4DL2EP3fZjhWR/IMG_2399.JPG)
23.08.2019 15:29
0

Wow, this took me longer than I thought to get back to you on! After a lot of hunting, the power of positivity community I was thinking doesn't seem to still be going. I don't know if you have found payitforwards (@pifc) but they have a pimp my post contest that supports good quality content exactly like this, but then, you seem to be doing really well with the travel tags ;) I stumbled across @steemitbloggers on my hunting for you, and they might be what you are after, I am not certain how you join them, but sure they will be happy to help. I didn't know if you had heard of @contestkings - they list your contest and you automatically go into an upvote draw, but it's just a good way of getting exposure for your contest. Hope that kind of helps :)

24.09.2019 14:33
2

Thank you very much for the info @calluna.

24.09.2019 16:54
0

a love the Reward Split change. a feel its been a problem whit most users selling the power a way somewhere to get shom $$$ back sins curation has been almost point less before but this will help users doing using there power on fellow users, and not delegating away most of there SP.

23.08.2019 11:45
0

I rarely speak out when it comes to technical aspects of anything... but...

Rewards
The rewards curve is changing. We expect posts that would make more than 20 STEEM under the old rules to earn more after the changes. Those posts that would have made less than 20 STEEM under the old rules will receive less after the changes

Isn't this just another case of the rich getting richer and the poor getting poorer (struggling)?

Back in the day when steem/SBD was worth a pot to piss in some of my posts would earn over 20 steem (thanks to blocktrades and other various larger accounts who followed me). I had some posts that were near $100. Now I struggle to stay between $5-$10. Granted I took a month off earlier this year when my husband had a heart attack and heart surgery, but since I joined just over two years ago I have been a mainstay, dedicated to posting and commenting... now to be told keep doing what you're doing and you'll get rewarded even less; which makes me want to toss up my hands and say oh well... just another way to work my heart and soul into something only to barely scrape by. I don't willy-nilly post a picture with two sentences and whip on out the door. I make decent posts, share knowledge, share my daily life, etc.

@viking-ventures mentioned curie votes. I've never relied upon curie votes (the reasoning is not relevant to this post or comment). but have had some in the past- early days.

@vikings-venture also mentioned

What's your plan to keep good bloggers around? What's your plan to attract new ones?

So, yes. What about retention? Good payouts, keeping a good line of commenting and communication engaged and positivity to keep people coming back to post.

Reward Split
Reward funding is being changed from the 75/25 split that currently exists, to a 50/50 split between author and curator. That means you will be rewarded significantly more for curating content after the fork

Is this enough to compensate lesser of the rewards? For me yes. I used to do TONS of curating, commenting, etc, but slipped off the wagon last year when real life took some negative turns. So I guess to earn my keep (so to speak), I'll go back to the old ways which seemed to work well for me.

23.08.2019 12:19
4

Reposting from my comment to @jenina619 who also voiced concern about this being about the rich getting richer:

This is not true. These changes are designed to ensure that good content is more likely to earn more rewards and good curators are more likely to earn more curation rewards. That means that if you're a good content creator, the odds are that your good posts will earn more rewards. It also means that if someone who is just posting low-value posts and self-upvoting them, or using fake accounts to upvote them, they will be much less likely to earn much from that activity. They will also be more likely to earn a downvote now that everyone is getting some free downvotes. This will free up rewards that are being distributed to malicious users who are exploiting the system just so they can cash out, and make those rewards available to good content creators. These changes only impact the rewards pool, which is not distributed based on wealth except when people render self-votes. But these changes are specifically targeted at making self-votes LESS profitable and easier to police. So, in fact, the result should be the exact opposite of "the rich getting richer."

23.08.2019 17:52
0

These changes only impact the rewards pool, which is not distributed based on wealth except when people render self-votes. But these changes are specifically targeted at making self-votes LESS profitable and easier to police. So, in fact, the result should be the exact opposite of "the rich getting richer."

Thank you for clarifying that information. I appreciate it.
Now I guess we sit back... wait until the clock ticks away for August 27th at 11 AM to arrive.

23.08.2019 18:10
0

What about stopping @steemit powerdown? It's draining the ecosystem. A Hardfork can solve that, or I'm wrong?

23.08.2019 12:46
2

Hi @steemitblog

Wh
What is the actual curation window now? I am hearing that it has been changed again to 5 minutes now, but no official info about it :(

23.08.2019 12:50
0

So, what your saying is that if enough witnesses do
not implement the new hardfork, it won't happen.
This means that it's not a forgone conclusion, right?

23.08.2019 12:54
0

"Rewards
The rewards curve is changing. We expect posts that would make more than 20 STEEM under the old rules to earn more after the changes. Those posts that would have made less than 20 STEEM under the old rules will receive less after the changes."

Well, that will be the end of me even trying to create content. You all decided to help the whales get whalier and let the minnows drown? And you think this will help onboard more minnows? Interesting.

23.08.2019 13:55
7

This terrifies me.

Steemit have defended it saying it will help support the quality content, and the good posts currently earn over 20 steem so they will earn more. The idea that steemit would reply to people’s concerns here to say, yes hundreds of tiny users upvoted your post, but the votes you get are worth less than 20 steem so you need to “work harder” is gutting - because we know it isn’t true. A story can be 10-20 hours of work, in some cases considerably more, and going to go out on a limb and say that is probably more time and effort than went into some of the stuff that does well.

Hard work and good content does not mean a post will be worth anything.

I could cite examples of really talented artists who worked more than hard enough on their creations, and never did well compared to other artists who were more of a personality. I am sure most users reading this have experienced creating something they are actually proud of, something that was hard and took a lot of their time/effort, and it just falling by the wayside unnoticed. Instead of supporting them, I feel like this will just lead the more things like big users holding contests just to win an upvote from them, more people to curate at the top where people will get the most back, and make the current "gaming" of upvotes for curation worse.

Steemit introducing free flagging, and letting people take for free what others worked hard for is like a gut punch.

I have been here nearly 2 years, and have just about built up enough steem power for my vote to have value. I currently get bully flagged by a person who doesn’t like me, on the grounds of they don’t think I deserve the upvote due to personal reasons completely unrelated to the content I produce. Once I found out steemit have endorsed that behavior to the degree of making it easier in the HF, I began to experience anxiety about posting. What if one person thinks it’s good and upvotes it, and someone else disagrees or doesn’t like the content I chose to write about, or that my ending wasn’t happy, or they plain just doesn’t like me, and having seen that steemit is now encouraging this in their explanation of the payout curve - flags me. They, for free, can take away the steem power it has taken so long for me to gather, in a single click. No comment, no justification. And I have no control over how much other people upvote me, so I don’t understand why it is okay for me to punished for that?

It feels like steemit is endorsing all the nastiness and bullying that ruins the experience for too many people.

In that vein, I disagree with indiscriminately flagging things upvoted by a bidbot when you can’t stop someone else using one of your content. A person can deliberately trigger a whole load of flags by using a bot on someone else’s comment. You can click to reveal examples in the comments section of the other posts steemit has released on this so far. There is no distinction made between bidbots used by the author and bid bots sent by users who wanted to upvote with more than their vote was worth/sent by a user who is actively hoping to trigger flags. But, if people really didn’t agree with bidbots, they would be flag the bots directly, not the possibly naïve user who used them. Unless these same people are investing in the bot they are condemning the use of, to me it seems more logical to address the cause of the problem and flag the bot. But that isn’t what is being encouraged here and I can’t help but wonder why.

If steemit really cared about stopping spam or shit posting with flagging, they would have added the long requested functionality to flagging, where a person has to select from a list the reason for flagging, and leave a comment with a min character count to say why.

Right now people jump on the flag wagon and half the time, a person gets all their posts and comments flagged for leaving just one comment with an unpopular opinion. How can anyone argue it isn’t censorship? One unpopular opinion and an account get pushed into negative reputation. I have seen it happen without anyone even responding to an unpopular opinion or spampost (that would have been fine on another platform), just a tirade of flags all over a persons other posts that end up crippling them, and they have no idea what they did wrong. That was what created the upset and hurt that led to the Steemit Defense League, a person buying vast amount of accounts purely to flag users to impersonate a group with the intention of damaging the platform. That is how much flagging can hurt a person on a human level, that they will dedicate months, their own money, their own time, to lashing back. Flags for normal users are pretty rare, so when they are suddenly hit with a mountain of them across all their posts and comments without a warning they need to not engage in a certain behavior, or just for expressing their opinion and being noticed by the wrong person, it affects people on an emotional level, and they respond emotionally. Flags should be limited to the offending content, and not targeted at a content creator in general, and a person should be told why they have been flagged and given a chance to address it before they are mass flagged into the dust.

But ultimately, the flagging system is a cop out, steemit are asking their users to police the platform for them, and shrugging off the responsibility for managing the platform onto their users.

I am not alone here in saying this feels like it only benefits those at the top. Their earnings will go up, they get free flags worth enough to destroy even a mid level users who says something they don’t like. At no cost to themselves, they can take away from what people worked hard for. This is framed like it will help people combat bidbots, but what do flagged people do to try and get their rep back up…? They use bid bots.

Steemit could easily shut down or cripple bidbots, but it doesn’t, instead it’s giving out free flags and slashing rewards for those who earn below the average payout. You only have to look at the average post pay out from the trending tags to see that the average user doesn’t come near 20 steem. Most average platform users would agree vote value doesn’t directly correlate to quality. I personally believe people who have voiced concerns, like @viking-ventures, are creating high quality content, but it doesn't reach the 20 steem threshold. I know myself, it's easy to put 10-20 + hours into a story, to say try harder is just missing the point.

To say that flagging is an appropriate way to police users is insanity. There is no one guide we are all upholding, and what is okay and what isn’t is subjective, how is a new user supposed to know they were committing a flaggable offense? There are bidbots, nothing says you can’t use them, a new user sees a post doing well because of bidbots, and thinks, oh that’s what you need to do, okay, and spends the real money they invested in the platform to promote a post. Other users see this, and flag them. That new user lost the money they invested and chances are we just lost a user who was buying into steem.

The new payout curve + free flags feels like something that will lead to more bidbot use.

Given that quality doesn’t equate to the value of a post and the value of the average post is going to drop, the main thing people currently do to increase their earnings is use bidbots, the current most popular way to recover from flagging is bid bots. I am confident the bidbots will adapt, they are run by people who endorse this, I am sure they have a new pricing structure ready to roll that accounts for the 50:50 split.

The suggestion in the explanation from steemit that by flagging someone it reduces what they will earn and could potentially increase what you earn feels dangerous.

People already seem to comparatively judge, they declare their work better than someone else and want to know why haven't they earned as much as that person. Steemit suggesting that feeling is justified and should result in flagging is misguided. Especially given things like curie, which have other factors to qualify for them, meaning a person may not get a curie on an amazing story because they got one 9 days ago, and see a curie on a less polished story but feel like their own story is worth more. Flagging isn't the way to deal with that.

It isn’t censorship in the normal sense, because yes, you can click to show a hidden comment, but it’s creating an atmosphere of self-censorship being necessary for survival.

There is so much hate and anger on here, and so much disagreement, most people would think its okay to buy shares in @steembasicincome, but some people don’t and compare it to a subscription bidbot, with so many opposing opinions, and a free weapon being put in the hands of every user, how can a person survive? Seriously, I need a survival guide, I don’t know how to continue to share content.

TL:DR

  • a 50:50 split encourages curation at the top because you can earn so much more from it so it follows why waste curation on smaller users when you will get more back from upvoting someone big
  • quality is not reflected by post value at all
  • flagging with no singular guide for users isn't good for the platform
  • the average post doesn't come near 20 STEEM, only the top few percent will benefit, at the expense of everyone else
  • Posting is scary when you can lose everything you have built up with no warning just because someone didn't like your story, didn't like you personally, or doesn't think it is worth what it has compared to what their own post got
  • we shouldn't be turning on each other with flags
  • flagging other users shouldn't be explained as a way to earn more on your own posts
  • reducing the payout for the average user whilst increasing the cut for curation takes from the user base and feeds the top

#sbi-skip

23.08.2019 14:36
188

I'm going to come back and read all of this. Incredibly thoughtful from what I did scan.

If steemit really cared about stopping spam or shit posting with flagging, they would have added the long requested functionality to flagging, where a person has to select from a list the reason for flagging, and leave a comment with a min character count to say why.

That's kind of what we do with @steemdlagrewards. Took it upon myself to create a system where users may properly moderate and receive rewards for legitimate flags (NO OPINION FLAGS). We've received a fair amount of community support and are approaching 100k SP but, unfortunately, Steemit Inc has not shown interest as of yet.

With their support, we could go after bad whales, flag em, comment why, vote that comment with an alt and burn the rewards.

...Or alternatively if they desire work out a community support curation initiative with the rewards. We have the bodies in our Discord of about 450-425 (fluctuates) strong and I'm sure we can easily find volunteers among them.

The great thing about our community is the culture and ethos we share. We aren't just trying to bring any jerk trying to make a quick buck but are full of people that really care about the platform and have higher integrity.

I'm off on a tangent. Sorry you are being targeted. I'll take a look at your blog, maybe create a post about your comment later. Check out @steemflagrewards if you have time.

23.08.2019 16:27
12

@steemflagrewards is ridiculous.
You guys go about venting your petty frustrations on unsuspecting users without so much as a conversation. Your actions arise from pure ignorance.

We have one group of accounts here that abuses the platform for its rewards, and you protect that group of accounts by pretending you do not notice.

Flagging is not helpful, if it were, i would be flagging you now.

23.08.2019 21:47
0

What exactly is your grievance? Say it in no uncertain terms. Who do we protect? Substantiate your claim... Otherwise, respectfully request you

Shut 👏 the 👏 front 👏 door 👏

And stop bitching about things SFR has insufficient power to deal with ffs.

23.08.2019 21:53
4

The thing i am completely certain of is this:
You have a positive intention.

What pisses me off no end:
You are stuck in the false belief that violence and aggression will fix something.
You think it is ok to give the @nextgencrypto / @ngc / @berniesanders a free pass on their abuse of other users, abuse of the reward pool, self voting, spam, abuse of top 20 witness selection.

It took me a a day to stop his spam and what support do i get from any of you self proclaimed protectors of Steemit?
Do you imagine that i have a large account ? No I have a brain

23.08.2019 23:15
3

Do you imagine that i have a large account ? No I have a brain

You didn't "drain" any of his accounts if that's what you are on about. Probably just taking a break or a glitch in the script.

23.08.2019 23:52
4

ah so you believe he chose to flag me manually just for the fun of it??

25.08.2019 01:24
0

I didn’t flag you for anything.

25.08.2019 01:27
3

ah so you believe he chose to flag me manually just for the fun of it or because he was sick of using bots?

25.08.2019 01:32
1

The hell are you on about?

25.08.2019 01:34
2

What ever delusion makes you happy man

25.08.2019 01:50
1

Ah so he chose to
Flag me manually just
For the fun of it??

                 - joe.public


I'm a bot. I detect haiku.

25.08.2019 01:30
0

PS

We can shut him down completely without giving one flag

23.08.2019 23:28
2

I do admire this flagging system to the extent it discourages spam, theft, hate speech, etc. Like you said, our perception of things can be subjective as we are humans. So, it might be a question of whether we want a centralized governing body police us or if we would rather attempt to decentralize that policing system. If the policing system can mirror a decentralized, constitutional (blockchain) republic (Steem), if it could seek after three or four branches of governments in Steem, then that might be better. I don't downvote. I don't promote flagging. I promote voting on what we like. I like something, I upvote it. I ignore other things. I don't have time to downvote. But I understand why people downvote. To some extent, I feel tempted to maybe downvote sometimes. So, it might be a better choice to sometimes downvote sometimes. I understand that. Have a good day.

24.08.2019 00:11
0

They seem to forget that voting against others can also be a strategy to reduce competition. A tactic backed by those who voted for HF21 (I was not asked).
If a person with a higher reputation can reduce the reputation of another with a lower reputation, without any requirement or condition, this can turn into a war of flags and markings, rather than content and ideas.

24.08.2019 06:30
3

Technically, that is already a problem. But at the same time, it can also be a good thing. I like free markets. You know that the free market is not safe. But I like it. Steem might not be a free market. But if it was a free market, it would be very dangerous. If Steem was too safe, it would be not a free market. If this second pool is a bad idea, we will all write posts about that.

24.08.2019 08:47
0

I think its going to cause more hate

24.08.2019 10:34
3

Ohhh.

25.08.2019 15:54
0

I have heard of you guys, and I have so much respect for you as people, and for what you do. Flag rewards, where legitimate flags are rewarded, and I am guessing if submitted illegitimate flags are also picked up on. Sadly sometimes, you end up being portrayed as part of the problem. Normally by little users who you guys flagged for copying something they say a big user doing. But that is a wider problem of steemit not backing a project that is already addressing this.

The work you guys do makes such a difference, and would be a much better way of dealing with the problem. If steemit got behind you, then you could take on the big users who are problems. I find it hard not to feel for people who copy a big user and get flagged for it.

There being integrity and a sense of responsibility behind flagging is so important. Flags should be motivated by wanting to improve the platform, not pettiness, personal feelings or wanting to earn more. If steemit gave you the backing, and made it so they at least logged the reason for a flag themselves, there would be an accountability behind what you did. I also bet that would be fascinating data.

A very on point and parallel tangent, and kind of the other side to the coin. The user base has already come together to support you as the way to address spam and shit posters.

It is a good point that it is all subjective, but then that makes it hard. The flagging you guys do is different to the flagging that really causes problems, and I would like to see these things separated. Although that said, people still get very upset, but if you were backed, and the functionality of flagging was there so they could see why they had been flagged there could be so much more. Its a tangent of my own, but if flagging was left to people who understood what they were doing, a group that ordinary users could click to report things to in place of flagging, it would be far more effective in stopping abuse and addressing the issues.

The person who flags me does no damage at all, it is purely trying to hurt my feelings so I have ignored it entirely until now. But I know I am not alone, and that a lot of people in the same position are hit more by being flagged out of spite or as part of splatter retaliation flagging, and are more upset by it, and given the amount of people I have crossed paths with who have been misflagged, I couldn't not say something. Thank you very much for your response, I was pretty anxious about having posted this and getting others to sincerely consider some of these things is the most I had hoped for here. Thank you :)

24.08.2019 17:55
3

STOP PROMOTING YOUR FLAG GROUP....

YOU HAVE THE BIGGEST WHALE PLAGERIST DESTROYER AS YOUR BACKER
HE HAS DRIVEN GREAT CONTENT PROVIDERS OFF THE PLATFORM
YOUR GROUP OF ZEALOTS GOES AFTER LITTLE GUYS and done more damage to an already crippled system by driving so many off the platform.

You put up bounties on content creators who can't fight you and have to cowtow to you.

you don't follow rules like cheetah and you vilify people.

you then tell contest runners promoting new contests to change their rules or you threaten with a group of attack dogs who only do it because your cheating angle playing funder is putting up bounty money!

if you did not have that 2 whales (who plagiarize even in their avatars) you have nothing.

there is no adjucation, tos, your only a group of fake vigilantes.

26.08.2019 01:01
2

Who may I ask?

26.08.2019 02:42
1

YOU HAVE THE BIGGEST WHALE PLAGERIST

Who?

BIGGEST WHALE PLAGERIST DESTROYER

What's wrong with a plagiarist destroyer?

Or are you too afraid to speak up?

YOUR GROUP OF ZEALOTS GOES AFTER LITTLE GUYS

Oh yeah? Tell this "little guy" to fuck off the platform. https://steempeak.com/@crystalliu

Oh wait, you won't. You can't. You are more interested in your overbid memes. That will soon change.

26.08.2019 14:15
3

You've spoken the mind of many down flagged accounts here. One was a friend whose religious views spurs a bully flag whenever he made posts!!

23.08.2019 19:47
5

That's true. My publications are clearly about religion, someone or a religious congregation other than mine (with members of greater reputation than I currently have) will have the possibility of marking me negatively without giving reasons for it.
It is a possibility for religious, political, anti-gay, progays, pro-drug, anti-drug censorship.

The HF21 will bring to this platform the means to convert what should have been an exchange of content in a bid for the power to publish what I am interested in being published.

24.08.2019 07:01
2

Quite pathetic. But we have to continue the ur individual or corporate campaign against unwarranted flagging until, hopefully, steemit comply to our request!!

24.08.2019 15:59
1

Thank you so very very much for that comment, sincerely. I had felt like I had to try, so many people get their voice effectively taken by flags.

24.08.2019 17:57
3

Completely agree with @calluna
Especially with regards to "Hard work and good content does not mean a post will be worth anything."
I am lucky if I get 20 votes on a post. For example, here's a video that I had commissioned for a conference
6 months of work, dozens of fo people involved. Several tens of thousand views and likes on other platforms but only 7 votes here in Steemit:We must Return: Building the Moon Base. https://goldvoice.club/steem/@epicdave/4858lgu0fgw
Same goes for news related text posts "The A.I Medical Revolution?💻: https://goldvoice.club/steem/@epicdave/the-ai-medical-revolution-jg3cambh

No way in Hell are both posts combined close to 20 steem.

It's difficult to grow here on Steem as it is, but these new changes are going to make it next to impossible. It seems like the whales are the priority with this update.

I wonder if these changes will cripple the likes of @actifit and similar projects?

23.08.2019 21:49
18

Value is determined by supply and demand, right?

24.08.2019 00:01
0

Since the whales will have the ability to end the competition, this could end up being suicide.
If only whales have the possibility of generating content that cannot be marked, those under them have NO opportunity to grow.
This platform was already unfair to the issue of whales, now it turns out that they themselves will decide the future of all, because it depends on the use they give to the power that with the HF21 self-concedes

24.08.2019 06:38
2

Well said @galatas 👍

24.08.2019 12:17
0

This terrifies me.

It shouldn't. :-)

(btw, I would recommend reading @timcliff's Open Letter to all Steemians - Hardfork 21: Culture Change)

I'm sorry for a relatively short reply, it's way beyond my abilities to respond properly to such long comment on a Friday's late evening. ;-)

Hard work and good content does not mean a post will be worth anything.

True.
But for original, high quality content there's a better chance to lure voters because it increase probability that ... it will lure even more voters.
Steem never promised people to pay for their hard work as if blogging were their full time job as successful professional writers.
Steem can pay something instead of nothing (see Facebook, Reddit, Instagram).
They are Steem users (Steem Power holders) who decide who gets paid more or less for their effort.
Think of Steem as decentralized publisher that splits their profit among all authors (well, that's exactly how it is), where authors are also members of the board.
Now we need to make sure that our Steem can generate profit and pay for good content.
HF21 is an attempt to solve some of issues that we have here.

Steemit introducing free flagging, and letting people take for free what others worked hard for is like a gut punch.

Downvoting is an integral part of a post value eSTEEMation.
Without free (relatively small) downvote pool, people had to sacrifice their potential rewards from upvoting in order to fight abuse.
Retaliation downvotes and downvotes from trolls & psychopaths would happen regardless of separate downvote pool.

They, for free, can take away the steem power it has taken so long for me to gather, in a single click.

No. Nobody can take away your Steem Power. All that downvote can do is affect your potential payout for post, and - in edge cases - reputation (if you was downvoted way below zero AND your reputation is lower than downvoter's)

IMHO using name "flag" for downvotes was a mistake. That created feeling that flag is something special.
It really isn't. In as same way as you are receiving random upvote from random user, you could receive random downvote from other random user who disagree with previous.

steemit are asking their users to police the platform for them, and shrugging off the responsibility for managing the platform onto their users.

Steemit is not Steem. Steemit is just part of it. Steem is our platform. Users. It's us who decide.

I am confident the bidbots will adapt

Agree. But they would have to adapt with behavior that's more in line with what's good for the platform.

Seriously, I need a survival guide, I don’t know how to continue to share content.

Don't worry, @timcliff's post mentioned above could serve that purpose :-)

a 50:50 split encourages curation at the top because you can earn so much more from it so it follows why waste curation on smaller users when you will get more back from upvoting someone big
quality is not reflected by post value at all

Not really. If all knows that alice produce original, high quality content, they can be lazy and vote for that instead of searching for more, but to really get good curation rewards they would have to vote earlier and earlier (before others that wants to do the same) that will make them enter 5-minute window and burn parts of their rewards, until it became more profitable to go and search for undiscovered content.

flagging with no singular guide for users isn't good for the platform

As you said, that's subjective, but there are some guidelines on what's a good or bad reason for downvote.

the average post doesn't come near 20 STEEM, only the top few percent will benefit, at the expense of everyone else

That's out of context, all will have reduced author rewards, above is just estimate where curve shape will start to have more/less impact
in the end it's for the sake of the whole platform

Posting is scary when you can lose everything you have built up with no warning just because someone didn't like your story, didn't like you personally, or doesn't think it is worth what it has compared to what their
own post got

HF21 doesn't change much here. Disagreement on rewards was always one of the examples of valid reasons for downvotes.

we shouldn't be turning on each other with flags

Stop treating them personal. Most of them are not, only a very, very, small portion of them are (and downvotes are really very, very rare in nature)

flagging other users shouldn't be explained as a way to earn more on your own posts

reducing the payout for the average user whilst increasing the cut for curation takes from the user base and feeds the top

Gives incentive to Steem Power holders to actually... hold the Steem Power and vote
Otherwise, who you'd expect to vote for posts?

23.08.2019 22:55
29

Props for a very thoughtful response.

IMHO using name "flag" for downvotes was a mistake. That created feeling that flag is something special.

We're gonna have to agree to disagree right there. That change seemed to be about connotations and I don't really care about that. I look at flags in a very endearing way as I understood their utility not too long from my entrance here.

Anyways

I understand the logic behind some of the changes. Actually, the theory around the convergent curve makes sense as it makes abuse a bit more apparent.

The problem I have is abuse has already been apparent. I see flagging it and such is due commendation but so many do not care. That's why I harp on culture over protocol.

The few like wolf saintish flaggers are not going to solve the problem of chbartistes and his clones. We need coordination. We need StInc stepping up to the plate and having moral fortitude to make decisions as to what is good or not.

The laissez faire stance is understandable but I don't think it's what Steem needs. There is gold here but it's buried deep. I mean in the concept that Steem ushered in.

We don't want a visionary taking it and dashing for the nearest exit. We need to build the vision here and now.

That's all I got. Thanks again

23.08.2019 23:53
15

Thank you

That's why I harp on culture over protocol.

IMHO both protocol and culture are required,
but neither of them by itself is enough to make a difference.

It's up to us in the end :-)

24.08.2019 09:16
8

Delete all the other BS you said and keep this ;-)
lol

24.08.2019 12:44
4

Spot ON AD2!

I've basically said F.O. STEEMIT … and Embracing STEEM even more.

We've waited forever for SMT's and then dedicated, self made Whales have came out with Steem-Engine tokenization for the masses. STINC needs to stick to STEEM and leave the social media to someone else... FWIW.
@ned JUST RUN STEEM and Let Steemit die on the vine, it already STINCs to hi-heaven

🙄

24.08.2019 12:41
4

I agree with all of the response here as it is written. But I can still totally see how it creates an unpleasant user experience, and that most don't want to participate in a curation game with up and downvotes and the need to please stakeholders, but instead just want simple guidelines for what it takes to earn rewards and make useful contributions to grow Steem.

At the end of the day, it will all come down to whether or not Steem Power holders allocates their upvotes and downvotes to create and foster a more attractive platform for users to join and become a part of. Let's make the most of the opportunity to do so.

24.08.2019 00:13
13

I feel that interest is being diverted towards retribution, forgetting that we enter here because of the possibility of contributing through our content, contributed according to what I want to say and not to what others want to read.
We will end up castrating the creator and promoting the critic without generating content

24.08.2019 06:19
6

I like what you wrote. My favorite part is the comparison between Steem and the ghetto tech cartel Hell-Holes, place like Facebook, empires that earn billions of dollars annually and they're not sharing a single penny of that as we are the product(s) that they trade. Steem is an example of an alternative. We also have Minds, etc.

24.08.2019 00:19
4

Change is always necessary for growth to occur. The HF21 is a very fantastic idea.

24.08.2019 03:44
1

Certainly it was not his most lucid moment to comment.
Many of his comments are only defenses of the status quo and not explanations as such of what HF21 means

Perhaps he is not very lucid either; but it seems that in the practice you promote, the curator is privileged above the author

24.08.2019 06:08
0

Authors (good ones) are important for Steem, but curators are important for authors.

24.08.2019 09:38
2

Maybe it's two different and opposite points of view.
According to my vision of this platform (not necessarily correct) the authors are important for curators, because without content they would do? ... criticize each other?
Now, without authors or content, only the whales would remain.
Could it be that they decided to stay alone? ... are they creating an elite with some intention that we don't know?

25.08.2019 13:58
1

Those are not two different or opposite points of view.
It's how this ecosystem works. As mentioned - pretty much same as any other producer-consumer relation.

25.08.2019 14:23
1

You have read the comments? ... there are different points of view, some of them opposite each other.
This platform is NOT a producer and consumer relationship because the good that is distributed in the interactions is limited and prefixed by distribution criteria and not transactions. In addition, an exchange eon is managed whose value is NOT the same for all producers or all consumers.

25.08.2019 19:19
0

$0.37 your comment (post) here is worth and that is what 1-2 steem lol and you think that they are wrong? Your post value is going to plummet if you don't have friends who are insiders/whales in steem after this! This is reverse robin hood! Steal from the poor to give more to the rich! I wrote about this the past year ever since HF20 destroyed the platform. Funny most of the big players have powered down a LOT and/or sold out and/or left the platform! I think this is nothing more than a way to get the few big players (about 100 people) the last scraps at the expense of those who actually work hard!

24.08.2019 08:43
14

You would never earn a penny if you don't have someone who would like to vote on your content. That's the way how Steem works. Actually that's the way how every producer-consumer relation works.

24.08.2019 09:37
1

You would never earn a penny if you don't have someone who would like to vote on your content.

Too bad that currently "someone" means someone with a lot of power, which in turn realistically means a bot, because otherwise we're back to not a single penny.

But for original, high quality content there's a better chance to lure voters because it increase probability that ... it will lure even more voters.

Technically yes, in practice high quality alone is orders of magnitude not enough to matter. Votes of "common" people are literally meaningless, you would require dozens of them to cross the payout threshold (and I assume that after HF it will be even more). Literally the only chance at getting literally anything is to be somehow noticed by someone powerful or to get an upvote from a bot. So far the latter is infinitely more probable and usually absolutely independent of quality.

So yes, once you get that, high quality might help in propelling you even further, but without a random boost there's absolutely nothing in there for you. If you want any sort of gains then if you have to choose between focusing on getting bots' attention and doing high quality stuff, the former is the obvious choice.

All in all a casual user has nothing to do here - either scroll some Hot/Promoted, where first and foremost promoted stuff is, quality being only secondary, thus not really attractive in general, or scrape the rusty bottom of the barrel in New, which is pretty much entirely uncurated, because why would anyone bother, there is literally nothing to gain here and the quality is mediocre 99% of the time.

If you ask me why I'm here in the first place, well I gave up any hope for Steem as a content/social platform and now I'm just curious to see a how this failed experiment is going. Even though it's failed, it's still interesting to see how it fails.

24.08.2019 12:32
7

Votes of "common" people are literally meaningless

You mean votes of people that didn't care to be vested in the platform.
Yes, those are meaningless by design :-)

There's no such thing as bots attention.
True, you need to be noticed by someone with SP to get rewarded.
HF21 is improving that chance by bringing more incentive to those.

True, votes from bots are independent of quality because they are bought.
That is also being mitigated by upcoming EIP included in HF21.

quality is mediocre 99% of the time

Because 1% of the platform are content creators. Others are just greedy, eager to grab author rewards. HF21 makes that situation better.

Yes, Steem is an experiment, and I'm around because of curiosity too, but I disagree that it's failed. IMHO it's not. It added and still ads a lot of value to whole industry.

24.08.2019 13:41
4

This platform is no longer about content creators. That concept died roughly 18 months ago. At present, and I believe that what HF21 is about .... Is 'How do we ensure we can pillage the rest of the Steem?' ....

24.08.2019 17:39
5

Any pointers to relevant information on HF20 (I assume that's what you refer to by "roughly 18 months ago")? I mean sure, I could try to backtrack through steemitblog and find something, but I have a vague feeling I'll spend an unreasonable time doing that while someone better versed in getting around here will be able to find that in a few clicks. Also I'm interested in not only the dry technical specification, but also discussions like this one.

24.08.2019 22:23
0

You guys turn against whales, not realizing that people who hold and buy SP are the ones who give any money to people who just want to cash out...

If it weren't "the rich", the small guys would have no one to dump their rewards to and you'd get 100% of nothing.

25.08.2019 18:16
0

And all the little guys like us have buggered off - it's a real shame, we had something great going back in 2017, but the place sucks these days, and I really do think all the wankers who like to spank off and flag posts and going to get this place to themselves...

26.08.2019 08:45
3

Playground bullies ....


Image Credit

28.08.2019 17:10
1

You mean votes of people that didn't care to be vested in the platform.
Yes, those are meaningless by design :-)

Ok, I have to admit I wasn't aware of this. Too bad that so many of those more invested in the platform are "greedy, eager to grab author rewards".

Why would a new content creator bother at all with joining here, only to drown in the cesspool, virtually undiscoverable? Why would a new user with a few hours to spend every other week bother with sifting through trash and casting votes that won't matter anyway? It seems very all-or-nothing, with 100% nothing being the most probable option.

It doesn't look like you could contribute some ok stuff every now and then or skim through new, upvoting good, undiscovered posts and gradually build yourself some reasonable power. If you're lucky to randomly get someone's attention you'll be getting maybe 0.1SP a week on average, which means it will take about 150 weeks = 3 years to amass anything above those 15SP you get by default via delegation, which is still virtually nothing.

By the way, it would feel much nicer if the delegation was not dropping at exactly the rate of you getting SP. It is a bit disheartening to know that no matter what you do, you will always have 15SP until you surpass that. It would be much more encouraging if it was for example still inverse proportional but at half the rate: 15SP delegated when you have 0 (15 total), 7.5 delegated when you have 15 (22.5 total), down to 0 delegated when you have 30 (30 total).

There's no such thing as bots attention.

Most (really most, like 80-90%) of my account's value comes from a few upvotes from a bot I didn't ask for (or at least not knowingly). It claims to do this automatically. I thought it was more common here (i.e. that bots are not only pay to get a vote or join some sort of a community by using a particular tag and/or delegating some power or similar).

24.08.2019 22:03
3

Too bad that so many of those more invested in the platform are "greedy, eager to grab author rewards".

Unfortunately that's true, but they are harming themselves the most. HF21 is a step forward as it's much less effective now to be such a greedy bastard.

Why would a new content creator bother at all with joining here

Because with all that flaws and issues we are facing, it's still something vs nothing, compared to Facebook etc.

By the way, it would feel much nicer if the delegation was not dropping at exactly the rate of you getting SP.

I can also agree here. That's ridiculous and I was pointing that out to Steemit.
Plus - lack of gamification. Gamification is IMHO the key. Too bad that I'm far away with my skills from frontend related subjects. I'm still hoping that others can deal with that.

upvotes from a bot I didn't ask for

Smart bots that are fighting for curation rewards might chose to upvote content that "looks" promising in terms of getting more votes.

25.08.2019 11:27
3

I'm not sure whether dragging author rewards down for low value posts will help much, but we'll see.

But more importantly, that's quite a false dichotomy with "something vs nothing". Some people are fine with just the exposure and flow of likes on Facebook, Twitter or Instagram. Ego fodder has its value too, after all. On Youtube, deviantArt, Bitchute or Twitch you can actually make money quite directly. Add Patreon and its clones to the mix and suddenly getting 0.10$ worth in an exotic cryptocurrency does not sound as appealing as you seem to think, especially given that only the first week matters. Steem is far from being a God's gift at monetisation, sadly.

25.08.2019 19:02
1

Seems like I agree with most of what you are writing, maybe except that I still think that we have a chance to make a difference here :-)

25.08.2019 19:21
0

Well, go ahead then and good luck to you, not like I have much power to decide here anyway. I'll just drop by every now and then as usual.

25.08.2019 22:41
0

Why would a new content creator bother at all with joining here, only to drown in the cesspool, virtually undiscoverable

HF21 is trying to improve discovery. So wait and see.

Does this guarantee that every valuable contribution will be discovered? No, but it improves the odds.

Making Steem better step by step is a step in the right direction.

25.08.2019 23:26
0

You guys turn against whales, not realizing that people who hold and buy SP are the ones who give any money to people who just want to cash out...

If it weren't "the rich", the small guys would have no one to dump their rewards to and you'd get 100% of nothing.

25.08.2019 18:18
0

By "you" you meant me? Because it's me who you are replying to :-)

25.08.2019 18:26
1

I suck at replies in busy posts... hence why I posted on multiple places on this chain :D

25.08.2019 20:39
0

ROFL I have a fuck ton more votes than most people and I have been saying this since LAST YEAR when NED fucked shit up at HF20 ;) OH Right he DOWNVOTED ME and then I reposted it w/o tagging him ;) and earned a shit ton more than his POWERING DOWN BS account is worth now! I OWN more steem than him across my accounts and run far more shit than him... You might be a whale but you just prove how you and ONLY people who are whales matter! THAT IS WHY WE ALL LEFT! Why y'all didn't solve mass adoption and signup issues is BEYOND ME! I offered to help! I got flagged instead! So I powered down and hid my assets here so y'all can't FUCK ME OVER anymore! LOL keep talking! All it is!

27.08.2019 06:11
4

I agree 100%

24.08.2019 10:27
5

Yup @ned and @gtg and the NEW moron in charge wanna silence me! BRING IT! I got more SP than all them combined rn! They sold us out last year and are "laughing" and now we own the platform! FUCK THEM!

27.08.2019 06:49
0

Ya fuck em!! Lol

29.08.2019 05:57
1

Agreed, when I read this I thought 'made for the elite to benefit the elite' ....

24.08.2019 17:35
4

Yup @ned and @gtg and the NEW moron in charge wanna silence me! BRING IT! I got more SP than all them combined rn! They sold us out last year and are "laughing" and now we own the platform! FUCK THEM!

27.08.2019 06:49
0

Exactly right

24.08.2019 19:40
2

Yup @ned and @gtg and the NEW moron in charge wanna silence me! BRING IT! I got more SP than all them combined rn! They sold us out last year and are "laughing" and now we own the platform! FUCK THEM!

27.08.2019 06:49
0

Well explained response here. It helped me to understand a little more how rewards works and will work in the future.

24.08.2019 16:00
0

Gives incentive to Steem Power holders to actually... hold the Steem Power and vote

Do we really think a 50/50 split is nearly enough to encourage people to hold more Steem Power? People are capturing 100% of their vote right now via self voting and that hasn't been enough to stem the slide in prices.

24.08.2019 16:48
7

IMHO it's one of good steps forward.

24.08.2019 17:04
1

By itself 50/50 would certainly not be enough. Downvotes and the curve and probably cultural changes also have to play a role.

25.08.2019 23:24
0

you want to encourage better content and hold steem longer make the payouts after a month!

Curation should be 10% dividend.

Downvotes most be attached to a TOS violation.

a TOS VIOLATION LIST PUBLISHED AND REFERENCED ON EVERY PAGE

Write real curation system which makes people classify articles (not just upvote them)

Then have a catalog and search system based on the curation

So that we have a structured interconnected environment environment which allows bookmarking, feeds, nesgroups, plug-ins and dynamic content.

Where authors/creators useful and interesting content is found and promoted not by straight self voting but by the fact that they are on correlation with similar content people are exploring......

but of course instead you guys keep acting like the band playing on the deck of the titanic as it's sinking....

HEY WAKEUP THERE'S AN ICEBERG THERE AND YOUR HEADING TOWARDS IT!!!!!

26.08.2019 00:47
4

No, you and your shitty zero effort memes and circle jerk crew are heading to the iceberg. Its greedy shitposters like yourself that denigrate this platform. You're only pissed because your profitable botting days are numbered.
Bye bye, wrap up warm.

26.08.2019 17:32
1

No, I don't mean enough to make a change. I mean is that enough to encourage people to buy steem and power it up? I think for that to really happen you need to go to like an 80/20 curation split, 50/50 doesn't seem 'enough', don't you think?

26.08.2019 16:21
5

I think for that to really happen you need to go to like an 80/20 curation split, 50/50 doesn't seem 'enough', don't you think?

Possibly. That exact question has been debated by stakeholders, witnesses and devs. We're trying 50/50 + 25% downvotes + a curve for now. If that doesn't work then we'll need to iterate in some manner.

26.08.2019 21:07
0

Thank you for taking the time to write such a detailed replied, especially so late :)

I feel that steemit doesn't promote serious quality content, and these changes could end up mainly feeding the pretty closed eco system we have here. If you look at the stats, most of the users left are already curators, not authors, but that isn't the experience most people have. Most people we cross paths with seem to be primarily creators, which makes me wonder if the curation figures are skewed by it counting inactive users who left their steem auto running. I know more curation needs to be encouraged but when new or smaller users will really struggle to hit the part of the curve explained as earning more, and will actually land in the earning less, that doesn't encourage curation of those smaller posts. It encourages curation betting for those with plenty to earn back from it, upvoting things that are from other big users who are likely to do well or joining curation trails. It is already something that happens now. Widening the gap between smaller users and the top isn't going to encourage new or smaller users. My point isn't complaining that quality content doesn't get rewarded, but pointing out that it doesn't, so the responses to people to work or try harder show a lack of understanding.

I never said steemit should pay people like a full time job for blogging or writing. For me any earnings are a bonus, but I want the platform to do well, and for that to happen new and smaller users need to feel like they stand a chance.

I did think flags hurt your steem power so thank you for that explanation. I am glad they don't but even still it is so easy to destroy someone's reputation which in so many cases ends their use of the platform.

I can't think of steem like that, with us as authors splitting the profit, because that isn't a true representation. If that was the case, for a start I am pretty certain we wouldn't have dump flooded the market with so much steem in one go and crashed the price again and again.

Flagging is a decent proportion of the abuse people have been fighting though. There is another side to steem and you may not have seen it. Nearly all the flags I have witnessed have been personal, which is why people take them personally. I have only ever been flagged for personal reasons, and so many legitimate flags trigger a backlash of personal ones. Saying it isn't personal and the rarest of cases isn't true in my experience of the platform. It is a reality that needs addressing and as long as we ignore it, it's going to get worse. Especially with the comparisons being encouraged, some people think they are better than others, but hypothetically, does that mean it's okay for them to flag something that earnt more than they did (which because they think their post was better, makes the other post overvalued, regardless of what others thought) and take away from the earnings of that post, and hurt the reputation of the other user? I am sure you wouldn't think like that but some people on here do, just like some people engage in retaliation flagging and flagging people who support someone they are essentially in a dispute with. Only the dispute gets 'won' by the user with the most steem power, regardless of what it is or what the truth might be.

This is supposed to be for the good of steem but I am saying I don't think the flagging culture we have is good, and I don't think it encourages users to buy in and increase the value of the currency. Quite the opposite.

There should be a proper and separate way to deal with abuse. Imagine if any other platform expected the users to band together and down vote genuinely abusive people to stop them pushing users off the platform instead of just intervening. It can take a long time for people to try and stop abuse the way it is now. Plenty of platforms have these separated so abuse can be dealt with properly. If the abuse element is dealt with separately then there is no reason at all to make it free. I upvote something, it cost me from my upvote pool. If you disagree, surely it should cost you the same to cancel that out.

Thank you for the links. I didn't know there had been guides added, but I think given the way most people seem to flag, they don't know that either. People get flagged for copying the behaviour of big users they see doing well, but those users are untouchable for the mid level users who are actively trying to address the spam/shit posting. I am not just trying to be critical. I want the platform to do well and this doesn't feel good for smaller users. I am not critising you, or anyone individually here because in theory yes, flagging is fine, but I left this comment because that isn't the full reality of how it is currently being used.

The curve hitting the smaller users hardest feels like an issue to me, and I am not taking this out of context. It does say the users who earn more than 20 steem will earn more and those who earn less will earn less.

HF21 does change it, flagging is a problem here as it is, giving them away and telling people to use them in the way explained isn't going to encourage responsible use.

Personally, my posts, no body. I don't expect anyone to, if they want to that's wonderful but I don't expect it, at this point I worry about earning more than I should. I don't think encouraging people to turn on each other is going to lead to more positive engagement which is what leads to more natural curation. I get that isn't the point of your question, equally I don't feel sincere engagement is too much to expect. It worked on steem for a long time, and people would read people's posts and upvote them because they thought the post was good. The issue is wider with the currency losing value and people leaving the platform, alongside new users finding it hard to get established. Big users might need to be incentivised to vote, but I don't think most users do.

Thank you for your response, having to answer on my phone so hopefully didn't miss too much. I am not sure I have been throughly convinced this will be a good thing but you told me a few things I didn't know and raised some good points. Thank you.

24.08.2019 17:33
16

"In Internet culture, the 1% rule is a rule of thumb pertaining to participation in an internet community, stating that only 1% of the users of a website actively create new content, while the other 99% of the participants only lurk."

- Wikipedia
"Similar rules are known in information science, such as the 80/20 rule known as the Pareto principle, that 20 percent of a group will produce 80 percent of the activity, however the activity may be defined."

- Wikipedia

It's OK that new/small users earn small, because that should encourage to build up their presence, vest more and earn more.

I wouldn't be worried about current reputation system at all. It was meant as a simple placeholder to get rid of some obvious spam/abuse.
Currently, mostly due to excessive use of bid bots, reputation levels are riddiculous. I'm still at 68, same as for example @nwu - a user who was posting during one month, total 25 posts, which is more than number of his followers. ZERO comments. I was flagging each post once I noticed that, but at some point I had even lower reputation level...

I don't think the flagging culture we have is good

That's why we are trying to change that.

Imagine if any other platform expected the users to band together and down vote genuinely abusive people to stop them pushing users off the platform instead of just intervening

That's the point. There's no other platform like Steem.
Steem is decentralized. There's no way to "just intervening" because we all are users and shareholders in one. It is all in our hands.

I upvote something, it cost me from my upvote pool. If you disagree, surely it should cost you the same to cancel that out.

That's not symetric, because for all upvotes you make, you get curation rewards, so if alice upvotes abuse and bob fights the abuse cancelling those votes, it can only cancel 25% without sacrificing own curation rewards, and alice will still have 75. In pre-HF21 rules, and user that I mentioned above, I've actually sacrificed over $50 of rewards to fight that single case of abuse.

I am not sure I have been throughly convinced this will be a good thing but you told me a few things I didn't know and raised some good points. Thank you.

HF21 gives us just tools to use and make Steem better, whether it will be the case is up to us. We will see. We will adjust and improve again and again.
If you have any questions feel free to contact me directly on steem.chat, as Gandalf.

24.08.2019 19:23
5

Come check us out instead! We forked Steem at HF 19 and created a mobile review platform for iOS/Android where users earn crypto for reviews of restaurants, hotels, movies, video games, coins, exchanges, dApps and more! All 100% free!

Earn like you used to earn!

If you reply with your username, i'll even kick you 10 additional BRAVO!

23.08.2019 23:42
3

Username: HowWeRoll i just started.

24.08.2019 06:23
0

Steem could be policed from a central committee of moderators like Facebook does. We have that with the tech cartels. Steem could be policed, however, through a decentralized Wild Wild West. Downvoting is flagging. You can leave a comment stating why you flagged something.
#

Downvote Pool

As people downvote, will their downvote power and weight increase and will this second pool grow and grow, is my question. I'm guessing that if people are paid money to downvote, and if that secondary pool is not just merely Resource Credit (RC) manna, and if the downvote grows and grows, then that is potential flaw in Steem. But if this second pool is fixed, then that might be less dangerous.
#

Downvoting

I don't downvote. So, I don't promote that. So, you're right that we shouldn't be flagging each other like you said. Yes, decreasing author rewards down to 50% is dangerous. It might promote more interaction, engagement. However, it is risky. It is dangerous. I'm hoping things improve. I'm crossing my fingers. Hard Fork 22 might be undoing some of these things. If these things don't really work, we should revert some of these back to HF20.
#

Free Market

I believe in the free market. Specifically, the market can be crazy. Some people have a lot of money. Some people may be very poor. I believe in the system, generally speaking. I believe in freedoms. So, I believe in letting run around wild doing good and bad. So, we see a wide variety of content with variations of quality and quantity. Generally, quality can be measured subjectively, generally speaking. Of course, objectivity is real. But too often, people are judging quality from a point irrationality, because humans are full of bias, preference, perspectives, paradigms, beliefs, feelings, as we are not perfect. Now, hypothetically, if we were perfect, if we knew everything, then we would be able to rate the level of quality objectively. I believe in freedom over safety. I believe in smaller government. Have a lovely day. Oatmeal.

23.08.2019 23:59
4

Free Market...

Yup. That's what it's all about. And if the reward bar is set too high for new users, the new users will simply not be here.

What's the point in posting on Steemit for $0.02 a week (maybe... if one is friends with a large wallet...) when someone can post of Facebook and have a much larger audience?

From what I've seen so far, most of the top payouts are handed over to plagiarists who have purchased most of the votes and the rewards on the post as well. This particular practice is mystifying to me, as it seems like chasing a tiny profit margin using a ton of cash... but whatever.

There should really be a Gaussian voting power curve... with the highest vote power set at a few thousand SP. That would ensure the best quality content over all... because the mid level users are the ones most likely to be engaged in actively reading content and making the platform better. This would also fix the problem noted in other threads regarding the VP of the bidbots.

But... maybe someday there will suddenly appear a BAT tip jar next to Steemit postings. And the whole discussion of platform generated rewards will slide into oblivion.

24.08.2019 00:43
3

One of the purpose is to protect content from being banned from tech cartels. Money is secondary issue. I'm here to save my work because I've lost thousands of videos, pictures, etc, on YouTube, Facebook, Twitter, etc. I've lost dozens of accounts, etc, in the 2010's, in the USA, in Vietnam. Millions of people are running into these issues. As the dollar dies, Bitcoin, Steem, and other cryptocurrencies will continue to rise.

24.08.2019 05:00
1

Well, there are many, many other ways to keep your digital stuff afloat, on the internet or offline, private or public...

24.08.2019 22:38
0

Good.

25.08.2019 10:24
0

Spoken with great wisdom, especially the part when you said, "Oatmeal." It was deeply touching...

Even commercials can be awesome when designed to be hilarious. The problem with content is often that people don't care enough to do something well. The problem with making it difficult for Steemians to earn without a huge following is that they won't have the incentive.

Wouldn't it be cool if Steem could reward authors well enough that they wrote their books on here? But they can't, because the 7 day reward system does not make it profitable. Steem wants to be a long-form content machine, but it is not capable of paying people long-form rewards. On Youtube, a good video can earn you money for years.

I think we are making a big mistake by allowing for a culture on Steem that says what can and can't be on Steem. We should let everything legal be on Steem and let the curation decide the reward.

24.08.2019 00:51
3

I've often wondered what it would be like if you had settings that would allow you to choose how long the post stays active? Like regular daily posts stay open for 7 days, while big posts you spend a week making, have an option of earning for a month, with changed rewards.

24.08.2019 02:09
3

Great idea.

24.08.2019 04:56
1

Yeah, I think allowing people to decide the payout time is a very cool idea.

There would be advantages and disadvantages to extending the payout time, for example, some people might upvote shorter payout times so that they get their curation rewards sooner. But there could be incentives for patient voters that are willing to wait for payouts.

25.08.2019 15:23
1

I would also think it would make sense for a long post to give an increased amount to curators, in exchange for the longer exposure.
Guess we'll see how this fork goes, and if it has issues, we make this suggestion.

25.08.2019 18:25
1

Does Dlive have evergreen content (videos) that can earn past seven days which, like you said, Steem has that limit currently? I thought maybe Dlive, which left Steem, was talking about that. But regardless, perhaps we should launch a competing blockchain network that allows for evergreen content, that is content creators and content creators.

24.08.2019 04:56
0

We are moving towards a platform that promotes self-censorship, because the first ones to be marked could be those that generate rubbish or offensive content.
But, when these are finished or diminished, those who remain will have the capacity to eliminate those who are below their reputation.
The whales that promote this HF21 have considered that they could be left alone? ... or is that what they really want?

24.08.2019 06:53
0

@galatas I thought the same thing... I think there are many bad side effects of this update. They may not be shown at first but they will appear and grow bigger every time.

24.08.2019 10:44
0

I really feel steemit should handle abuse, separately to down votes. Plenty of innocent people fell victim to misguided justice and plenty of criminals got away with in the Wild West 😉

The problem with leaving it to users is that isn't possible for people to successfully flag some abusers out of action, the persistent ones create more and more accounts and it becomes and endless game. Others are too big to be stopped.

It didn't occur to me it might grow, that is scarier. I hope not, fixed is definitely at least better than not.

I don't downvote either. Woo yeah. But people do and I don't like seeing it promoted. Cutting the author rewards does risk pushing authors off, I'm not here for the money so much, and would say at this point quite a lot aren't, so I don't know how much that aspect will kill creators, but it is a big cut to give up. Thank you, I am going to hope you are right ☺️

That is really well put. I totally support a free market, and the madness that comes with it. Steemit isn't quite a free market, although it is very comparable to what we also call a free market out in the wider world, complete with corruption to boot.

Thank you, kind of had a sleepless night after I saw I had a response and couldn't delete this comment and dreading what might show up. But thank you, very much appreciated ❤️

24.08.2019 18:01
2

Other Places:

The good news is that there are other websites that are similar to Steem that you can also copy and paste posts to. I'm not talking about Busy which is an app or a platform of Steem. Also, Steemit is also an app of Steem.

Competition:

There are other blockchain social networks that I post to that is similar to Steemit. There are probably more out there. They include:

Bearshares
Dream Real
Serey
Smoke
Weku

Another one that is slightly different is Cent. And there are probably more out there that may come and go.

That's the competition and if Steem fails too much, then some people or a lot of people will continue only posting to some of these other websites. So, if Steem wants to continue to be on top, they will try to listen to their own users. When I say Steem, I mean the Steem Witnesses who coordinate hard forks, annually or whenever.

24.08.2019 18:58
2

agreed, it looks like it's completely gonna suck m** as for the small fry :) ... we shall see, barelyh any post ever gets to 20 steem without putting money into it and the extra downvotes certainly wont help lose the policing culture ... or maybe rat-culture now, get paid to flag lol ... never mind and fuck it , the steem price will show what its worth in the end

24.08.2019 02:35
3

I can relate to how the 50:50 reward split is gonna be a big issue for smaller users like me. I create art based content, and each one takes about 4-6 hours minimum. I get average of 2.0$ per post, which turns to 1.5$ after curation. After the update its going to be 1$, am i really that bad of an artist? Why would i spend 4 hours to get 1$ worth of votes..... Thats insane

24.08.2019 02:51
1

The point is that it will encourage more people to vote, especially big accounts. Hopefully this will mean more rewards and equal or greater payouts. We will see how it works.

25.08.2019 14:09
0

I'm scared too, but let see what will happen.

24.08.2019 02:52
1

I agree with you 100% have said this for over a year since ned offered us the BS of HF20 and RC/Mana and all the frauds that created.. Funny I hear he powered down and left steem after I called him out over 12 months ago for doing just that! (he flagged me with his insane power just to spite me for mentioning his name negatively)... Funny what you say is EXACTLY what I predicted over a year ago! Flagging should NOT EXIST! After getting rid of flagging we should not be creating a situation where if you do not know whales and/or have insane SP and self up vote that you are punished with lower rewards... It should be linear... You get 200SP in voting power at 100% it should be 1/10th if you got 2000SP in voting power up voted on your post at 100%... THAT IS A FAIR VOTING SYSTEM! Skewing rewards based on how much a post gets ONLY favors the big pay for up vote bots and adding a FREE downvote ensures people can just create lots and lots of fake bs accounts to flag you and destroy your reason for being here! These people who claim you are wrong... ARE THE EXACT people who flagged me and tried to say RC was a good thing and proved AGAIN AND AGAIN they are not into a free good platform but rather protecting self interest.

Witnesses should have been expanded to over 500 and frankly SCALE with active userbase... This is how electoral college works in America for the very said reason of protecting the individuals from a mob rule (democracy)...

Your comment is very insightful I recommend you contact me and discuss more privately as I have a lot to say and I know by reading your comment you do as well!

24.08.2019 08:50
4

Some people earn very little. It DOES NOT MEAN that their content is WORTH less and NOT AS GOOD as someone who earns more. I am totally with you on that concern. I am trying not to let this dictate my internal state of being, but it's very difficult right now. Steemit is basically saying that those of us who earn less than 20 Steem, our content isn't good. Some of the stuff I share, like the fanfic or videos, HOURS of work, WEEKS of work, MONTHS of work.

It's as though they are trying to get rid of us.

Steemit is going to give more to people who earn more and give less to people who earn less. Not fair. Why not give equal. Not more to some and not less to others. Why should someone else gain more and someone else gain less? Just have it be they earn what they earn.

Hot take: The Whales want the minnows gone, but they are too much of COWARDS to actually tell us to GTFO.

I am going to monitor closely how my posts do after this fork, but if this relationship becomes unhealthy for me, then I am out. Never thought I'd say it because I had a lot of hope for Steemit.

Time to look for a replacement platform. This sucks.

24.08.2019 09:10
5

I agree. Steemit is just trying to run us off.

24.08.2019 18:36
0

.

24.08.2019 20:23
1

Thanks for the insight. There is a lot to keep in mind for me. If I do leave, I have to assess the impact it will have on the communities I am delegating to. I would wish for us to as a group jump together somewhere else. I might continue to delegate to some cuz I don't want to leave them high and dry, but I also will have to do what's best for me.

24.08.2019 20:55
0

Really reasonable concerns there. But i do believe when content is flaged, the administration goes through the post before attributing a reward or reducing points. How ever, if the whole system is automatic then we have a big problem there.

24.08.2019 09:31
0

"Steemit have defended it saying it will help support the quality content, and the good posts currently earn over 20 steem so they will earn more." Sure. I mean, I've been writing pretty long very informative blogs, spent 2-3 hours and (mostly) got less than 1 steem. So I don't really know what they are talking about. Maybe they mean that we should not write what we like, but what most people like - to get upvotes :D And that's very childish thinking

24.08.2019 10:38
0

I left steemi for awhile... Because unless you have massive support it hard to make anything, now we will make even less...lol I have been posting and making $1.50 or so a post some times less. It's been hard on here because I often post erotic art and nude art that is NSFW. But some of my images take hours of work, as well as other people. I just can't see posting it for even less. When I can actually sell access to it on other sites.

I had hoped steemit would be great for artist and creators, but it's really has not been and then dealing with flag attacks politics, etc...

Regardless of my position I think this is mistake for Steemit and will cost them a lot of content creators.

24.08.2019 12:20
5

Steem cleaners harrased me once. I was just posting my YT videos and they kept spamming on my posts and had to spam on an irrelevant tweet saying I need to confirm that the content is mine. My face was visiable on a post they comment on and that wasn't a clue it's my content?

24.08.2019 19:01
2

I agree absolutely.
HF21 sounds like a pro-whale update at the expense of everybody else. Basically it sounds like the centralised government structures that we know and hate - and WHICH CRYPTO SHOULD BE TAKING DOWN, not mimicking!

24.08.2019 12:55
2

I totally agree with you.
I already found out long ago quality posts are not rewarded at all.
I am a mobile user only and write quality content.
What people are looking for and are rewarding is for sure not quality content.

It is a post of a few lines or a link or a single picture that is nothing special. Mainly those who are rich/famous.

Many communities and Steemians give newbies and great content attention. Try to stimulate great content but Steemit is the only one who lets them down.

I got the feeling it all was just a marketing technique (it was) to get people over here and make Steem grow. Now it came that far they can drop dead.

I asked it many times and still have no answer: Why should anyone join Steem at all? If you start here you can not even post and connect to others in a normal way. With normal I mean: social media.
☹🤔💕

24.08.2019 14:27
3

As a newbie to steem, I have to say that you make some very valid points.

24.08.2019 15:57
1

It's a change of the whales, by the whales and for the whales. :3

24.08.2019 16:34
0

I agree with you. As to what you said about having to pick why you're flagging someone. I made a post about that and Bernie Sanders flagged it and I lost everything. He probably did that because if Steemit took my criticism, he couldn't flag people for the hell of it because he will have to pick why the post should be flagged with a legit reason. The down vote pool is a horrible idea and people will abuse it.

24.08.2019 17:35
0

Have a

!BEER

24.08.2019 21:07
0

The Beerlover bot doesn't work at the moment due to maintenance.

26.08.2019 03:32
2

no

!BEER

😭

26.08.2019 05:15
0

I like this girl :))

24.08.2019 22:46
1

25.08.2019 02:31
2

You guys turn against whales, not realizing that people who hold and buy SP are the ones who give any money to people who just want to cash out...

If it weren't "the rich", the small guys would have no one to dump their rewards to and you'd get 100% of nothing.

25.08.2019 18:18
0

I would argue that the free flags are an imperfect but improved solution for policing bad content. Spammers, plagiarists, and trolls need to be countered without preventing curation.

But this does seem like another way to reward the whales even more.

25.08.2019 18:24
0

On point ✔

25.08.2019 19:13
0

I'm against downvoting because it is mostly abused... however, I like your idea that downvotin should include a "reason stated" for each downvote.

Since downvoting is not going away though, I would like to see vote power COMPLETELY removed from it's use. There is more justice in a completely free market than their is in a falsely monopolized one... the whales would never allow it, but the ideal situation would be that EVERYONE regardless of steem power has the same downvote power as everyone else. It would equalize the playing field for fighting ACTUAL of abuse and it would help the dumber whales to actually act in their own (and the blockchain's) LONG TERM best interest rather than in the short sighted manner they currently mostly bumble around in.

25.08.2019 20:41
1

So very true - I've been here more than three years, but have gone from obsessed to disinterested as the platform has gone backwards, and for me this latest hardfork with more flagging bullshit is the final straw...

26.08.2019 08:35
4

Totally agree. Bad changes for this poor economy. I will most likely leave this project due to very few becoming even fewer rewards for the 100% original content I am sharing.

26.08.2019 09:30
1

Yes, I earn an average of 20 cents for my posts that is some of the best literature around, and now I'm going to earn less?

26.08.2019 10:26
1

Flagged because you're oblivious to the intent of Steem/Steemit and this sounds like nothing but a bunch of whining from someone who doesn't care to build up their own Steem Power.

26.08.2019 13:07
12

That's one way to go about discussion I guess.

If you don't mind me asking, when you say intent of Steem/Steemit. What does that mean?

I ask that because Steemit Inc is a corporate entity and as business I would their intent is profit.

As for Steem, we both know it's a blockchain with a variety of users and variety of intentions for use. Some may be concerned only profit while others relish in social interaction or the conveyance of ideas, art, humor or other things under the sun.

It's reasonable to desire users to be fair in their appraisals of value to the network so I believe that idea is articulated in some sense in @calluna's comment. It was thoughtful but you don't have to agree with everything she said which obviously you don't.

But did really have to go an zero it completely? She took the time to engage the community in an intelligible way. May I ask you to remove the downvotes and, if you wish, place them on me.

You post about Steem being like a desert yet you seem to lack self-awareness of how you contribute to that.

Do you want a network of Yes-Men repeating only ideas that are palatable to your wordview or do you want to be challenged?

Debate and discussion is good for the platform but you are quelling with opinion flags.

Hope, my contrary opinion is well received. Have a good day.

26.08.2019 14:23
6

No.

26.08.2019 14:33
11

The author behind @berniesanders is also the @kingdong / @nextgencrypto / @ngc group of accounts who claims to own the top twenty witness line up. He is also loves to boast that he holds thousands of accounts.
He uses these accounts for:
Self Voting mainly.
Voting witnesses.
Flagging content which is not supported by main stream media
Flagging random accounts (usually small accounts) as a cover for his more earnest censorship work.
He takes great delight in tormenting random small accounts and those who want to make the world a better place, plus it’s a great cover for his real work of censorship and fucking up the platform.
These abuses are all conducted with the FULL SUPPORT of the top 20 Witness @themarkymark
The markymark (Malcom) seems like a nice guy on the surface, but he is corrupt to the core and cares not one jot about bullshitting you, right to your face. Just another politician.
These two individuals have become like a gangrenous limb which needs to be amputated in order to save the body.
It’s time for us to grow up and take responsibility for our own environments people.
The latest HF is designed for the sole purpose of enriching this group of accounts. Notice that we will have free flags soon. Being the largest holders of Steem every flag returns something to the reward pool which will increase his daily rewards substantially.

He has thousands of votes to give witnesses because he has thousands of accounts.
PS he is also the largest SELF VOTER here. sad isnt it?

26.08.2019 15:15
0

Downvoting is as valid as upvoting as a way to set the rewards. A vote is not just about expressing approval as it has a monetary value too. Adjusting rewards is the only reason I downvote. It is definitely not up to Steemit. They just created the platform and in time they may step back from being the main front end as others take over by doing a better job. For now they hold a lot of Steem, but they have said they will reduce that over time.

A lot of the big bot abusers are well aware of what they are doing and they exploit the system for maximum profit rather than trying to be part of the community. If nobody shows real interest in a post by commenting then why should it be worth $20 or more? The value is up to the community. Unfortunately some people get away with abuse by using bullying tactics, as you have seen. He's hit me too. Maybe the free downvotes will be used by the big silent accounts to address this. We shall see.

26.08.2019 14:23
1

I agree with @calluna. This will be very bad for people without money for buying promotion, bots or
steem power. People just like me will be working a lot for people that does not create new and original content. I think it is a terrible situation for a lot of little content creators. May be they should create new platforms based on contents and let Steemit just for programers and blockchane creators. Artists and writers like me does not have much opportunitties here. May be we should migrate.

27.08.2019 14:58
0

Enjoy your dead account. Bad move on your part, moron.

27.08.2019 15:15
11

This is a beautiful development for the entire blockchain. With these, we are expecting more investors as curators would have a better probability for ROI. Thanks to the Steemit Team and our witnesses for considering this.

Better days are ahead surely!

23.08.2019 15:15
1

23.08.2019 16:20
0

This is a SICK JOKE being employed by the "haves" here against the "have nots." You can not spin it any other way. Consider your own words:

"The rewards curve is changing. We expect posts that would make more than 20 STEEM under the old rules to earn more after the changes. Those posts that would have made less than 20 STEEM under the old rules will receive less after the changes."

How does THAT encourage the vast majority of users to try harder to provide good content? This is a bald-faced additional way for Steemit to keep empowering the already powerful here at the expensive of those in the 99% of the pyramid below the 1% who already don't need any more rewards.

And, this is just as bad:

"A downvote mana pool is being added, which will allow you to make a few downvotes each day without impacting your ability to earn curation rewards from upvotes."

The most pernicious of Steemit's traits is thus being EXTENDED and made easier for those who engage in malicious downvoting without even, now, paying any penalty for their ANTI-DEMOCRATIC CENSORSHIP of those whose world views (or hair style, or age, or gender, or whatever...) they don't like.

Steemit once had a chance to be a truly egalitarian tool for good in this world. This Hardfork pisses on that idea, destroys any hope for the future of success of the platform, and proves that the top 1% here are as corrupt and greedy as the top 1% in the general population.

23.08.2019 16:42
0

It could work like a funnel which could give content creators even more money potentially.

24.08.2019 03:22
0

I prefer to look at what they've done in the past, and trust in human nature being what God says it is--since the fall.

24.08.2019 11:28
1

True.

25.08.2019 10:32
0

Steemit once had a chance to be a truly egalitarian<
When once? It just becomes more the way it had been designed from the start (without any6 reference to the corrupt and greedy 1%ers which is your personal viewpoint )

24.08.2019 23:18
0

R.I.P.

HARDFORK21.gif
23.08.2019 18:01
2

Wow I still can't believe at one point we were fighting for Ethereum for the #2 spot on coinmarketcap!!
https://cointelegraph.com/news/steem-chasing-ether-in-market-cap

23.08.2019 18:09
4

That is amazing, just over three years ago. Now we know how much the altcoin market can change in just three years. The other top coins are still there though. Steem is the one that has lost its position majorly.

26.08.2019 16:54
0

So, i can choose if i want the new "update" on August 27th?
And the old model runs parallel with the new one?
Doesn't this policy create a whole lotta >20Steem content
"ass lickers" (excuse my language), instead of "pushing"
the small accounts to create for themselves?
Like this you don't reward content quality automatically,
like this you reward big accounts...
Hmmm..? I don't know...

23.08.2019 18:36
1

The old model will not run in parallel unless someone decides to fork the blockchain and run the old code. All top witnesses have signaled they plan to run the new code.

23.08.2019 19:54
2

I think i will remove Witness votes then

23.08.2019 22:04
0

Use @tcpolymath as your witness proxy if you oppose hf21

25.08.2019 14:46
0

Will do thx for info

26.08.2019 10:09
0

Ok, got it.
Could you please have a look at this:
https://goldvoice.club/steem/@luca1777/blocktrades-is-this-request-consent-normal
This happened the last time i wanted to buy SP...
Attack?

24.08.2019 20:13
1

Sure, I replied on the post.

24.08.2019 21:59
1

Thank you, if everything is fixed now i will
try it soon.

25.08.2019 10:10
0

Personally I believe it is just a matter of when a forking of the blockchain will happen. I am a firm believer in folks doing whatever they want with their stake in STEEM even if they take it and run. Not too long ago there were veiled threats along these lines by a number of witnesses.

The elephant in the room is ethical behavior. I have been on this platform for two years now. I base my views on the behavior of those on this platform. Like many, I have opinions which change from time to time based on the more I learn. I have seen extortion, bribery, and just plain nastiness.

Why people do what they do? I don't know, yet I have seen some very bad actors on this platform from Whales down to Redfish. Some may see me as a bad actor as well, it is all about perception.

No one on this platform has all the answers. I have seen those that cry, Reward Pool Rape and yet their behavior does exactly that, through self-upvotes on their own comments and such. @jerrybanfield actually made an educational video some time back exactly how to effectively rape the reward pool through the use of sockpuppet accounts.

Decentralized? Technically, yes. In practice no. This has never been a decentralized platform in the truest sense. It is an oligarchy (like the majority of social constructs), period. Not a democracy.

Their will be a fork in the near future. I am sure of it. The foundations are being laid as we comment here. Do I have an answer? No, as I am just an imperfect person with limited intellect. I do have some suggestions though...

  • Mute spammers
  • Boycott bidbots
  • Stake Steem
  • Pay attention to witnesses and vote
  • Align with those that share our sense of ethical behavior

We shall see what this HF brings. There are other options out there and many of us have gone there (remember the Exodus to WEKU during HF20?).

Maybe the impending fork will be called STEEM Cash. 🤣

26.08.2019 14:54
3

Amen! 👍

27.08.2019 22:09
3

I don't like the free downvotes addition. However, I can understand the strategy behind the 20 STEEM change. If you think about Youtube, before you can earn any profit from their built-in ad revenue system you have to build up a large enough following first, and if a particular video is interesting to a wide audience it will go viral.

In essence, they are trying to re-engineer the mechanics of Steem to reward viral content. Once something catches on enough to hit that 20 STEEM point there should be a snowball effect that drives it well beyond 20 STEEM. It is an interesting idea, but it is also an experiment. This could go very well or very poorly.

The free downvotes feature does have some interesting effects as well. If enough people truly do hate bidbots, they could theoretically downvote them out of the market. This new change will force bidbots to obtain more of their earnings from curation rewards rather than from upvote fees. So, while in the current state bidbotted content getting a downvote is a loss only for the buyer and not the bot service, now the bidbot service and the content producer will have more aligned interests with regard to downvotes. A potential side-effect might be bidbots utilizing their free votes to retaliate against downvoters on their customers. So, really, we have no idea what will happen here...

23.08.2019 21:54
0

However, I can understand the strategy behind the 20 STEEM change. If you think about Youtube, before you can earn any profit

The bar is too high to reach unless you've already bought into the system. Posting a random essay on Steemit will get maybe 20 upvotes and 2.5 STEEM from random people if the content is exceptional. And probably 1 or 2 upvotes for moderate to poor content.

The only way to reach 20 STEEM is to already have the upvotes lined up before posting. I've watched this happen in real time on the Steem Blockchain. A user sends off payments to voting bots, then posts. The votes come in, the post pulls in a 20 to 50 STEEM.

However, in many cases, that 20 to 50 STEEM reward was purchased with about 20 to 50 STEEM. So, what's the point?

Just remove the bid bots and curation timing rewards from the code. Problem solved. The good content will get upvoted by actual humans reading and upvoting.

24.08.2019 03:28
1

I agree. Like e.g. 5 Steem would have been enough.
Steemit Inc. and everybody working there, plus all the witnesses
should only check one result:
0,16 €
These are the fruits of your labor. It is what it is.
I entered March/April 2018 with 1 Steem= 2,12 €
...thinking that was low, when i heard about the
"golden days" with 1 Steem over 5.-€
Dan Larimers philosophy was "non-violence" in any form.
Are we still on track..?
We will see...

24.08.2019 19:52
1

Pretty much hate all changes in this hf

All changes will hurt user experience. With users I mean those that create value by creating content.

  • As an author you will simply earn less overall. So creating valuable content makes even less sense now.
  • bots will have a field day, by simply upvoting popular content at the perfect time.

What steem needs is content creators to get rewarded for producing content people consume and enjoy. This goes against all of this.

Why not just pay all rewards to SP holders at least that would be straight forward instead of gradually destroying the value rop for content creators

The HF of course is amazing if you run a site for bots or any vote automation where you do not hold your own SP.s

23.08.2019 18:47
20

Rewards
The rewards curve is changing. We expect posts that would make more than 20 STEEM under the old rules to earn more after the changes. Those posts that would have made less than 20 STEEM under the old rules will receive less after the changes.

What does this even mean? Very confusing

So basically is it saying... if you dont make at least 20 steem on your posts, expect to start making less? LOL ok... if youre going to give more rewards to the people with more SP just fucking say it, nothing wrong with rewarding success. @mughat called it "ProofofProfit" and honestly you should reward people who get more rewards...

(Reply is to @steemitblog not you @knircky )

71 recognize another 71 my equal rep nigga

23.08.2019 19:42
4

Yea this is horrible

23.08.2019 19:44
3

I couldn't agree more.

24.08.2019 05:00
0

It's important to note that it is unknown how much of the new available downvote pool will be used, and that it will also change whether good creators earn more. Thus it's hard to state exactly at what level people will earn more versus less after the fork.

But it is a fair concern that this will harm small communities and things like positive curation on comments.

23.08.2019 19:58
3

But it is a fair concern that this will harm small communities and things like positive curation on comments.

This is precisely my concern with SFR but guess I can't really expect a group focused on our kind of values to be large. Think our prospect in particular is bleak unless we make some drastic adjustments.

23.08.2019 20:41
3

It's important to note that it is unknown how much of the new available downvote pool will be used

...and where do you see, within this page, which is supposed to be an open debate (debate means all points of view should have the opportunity to argue their beliefs) comments that deserve downvoting?

Since it has happened, it means we are supposed to feel intimidated and shut up?

That is the new steemit?

23.08.2019 20:58
0

There are plenty of comments that may deserve downvoting to remove rewards. Especially when it is low effort trolling, or just plain negativity. Then I think any stakeholder who cares for the platform and experience of the users who add value to Steem should downvote it to remove rewards and make sure it is instead returned to those to bring value.

That being said, I'm completely against big stakeholders being able to hide comments through downvotes, and think that part of steemit is not doing any good. Lastly, I don't know why people would be afraid to comment because of downvotes. It is not like not earning anything on a comment makes you lose something?

23.08.2019 21:06
0

I asked you specifically about comments here, in this discussion.
As for calling it trolling or negative...isn't that a matter of opinion? If I disagree with you, I am being negative or am trolling? Even if a number of other posters consider the points made valid and they reward the poster?

It sounds to me like a disrespect of others, since you are indirectly claiming that only your own opinion is valid and deserving of being upvoted.

23.08.2019 21:15
6

It's indeed all subjective and downvotes are not meant to be anything other than the opposite of an upvote where token holders express their opinion on what deserves more attention versus less.

It doesn't have to be trolling or negative. For instance, when @knircky just gave a full downvote to my comment I'm sure it mostly reflects his desire to see criticism of the fork get more attention and rewards, and thus downvote anything else above it that he disagrees with. That is fine, and how the curation system is intended to work.

I don't know if he's aware of the fact that I completely agree with his concerns though, and that my positive comment was not there to speak in favor of the fork, but rather to state that regardless of it we need more stake being used to vote good content and retain users, and that the changed rules whether you like them or hate them is a chance to reset bad habits and try to do things better.

23.08.2019 21:31
0

For instance, when @knircky just gave a full downvote to my comment I'm sure it mostly reflects his desire to see criticism of the fork get more attention and rewards

Yes... but then you Upvoted your own post .... after the downvote to Protect your investment in your post as well as your Rewards on your own Post.

While also writing this:

...the main use for downvotes will be the many self voters

24.08.2019 02:16
0

I see several comments which are over-rewarded mostly due to self-voting (I already downvoted one at my own expense since there are no free downvots yet, and I may downvote others if I see them too). It isn't that the comments are bad necessarily, but when everyone sees the reward pool as a personal feeding trough the result is that everyone suffers from it.

24.08.2019 07:09
0

It basically sais: If you are smaller than an orca,

23.08.2019 21:31
3

nahhh no no steem has to reward the whales orcas etc, they will bring the price higher

let them have flag wars they will be forced to buy more steem to fight each other, EVENTUALLY two political parties at opposing ends of a spectrum will get into a war on steem where each will go to their fundraising elements on each side back and forth untill we basically have the RNC and DNC both on steem :D Or maybe Indian or European political parties or West African might end up in a battle with SP on steem when we end up with people who may end up with millions to spend on marketing or campaigns... I am telling you, all it takes is that right investor and steem can spread like wild fire... some wealthy people REALLY enjoy crypto and the whole key thing is just more fun for them!

24.08.2019 03:21
1

Your comment was put forward by many of us when we were first asked about these changes. Those who make the decisions wasted our time, since they had no interest in listening to what the majority wish is; they married the naivety of coders to that of socialists and insisted curators (only) provide value, not the creators. As a matter of fact, if you can access those older posts, you will see discussions about the 50/50 not being fair to curators, but they cannot do it in one change as too many people will leave - so in the next HF they can change it to what it should be: 80% curators and 20% creators.

What is insulting is that we are told we , the creators, will earn more money because we are receiving a smaller slice of the pie. Listening to them, I felt like I was listening to the supremos of illogical logic, like certain leftist politicians in the USA.

I'll be honest, I've never drawn a cent to use outside Steemit; only drawn some smallish amounts to help Steemit charities and needy newcomers who could not post because of no SP. So I am not one of those who has been milking the system (which mostly the big accounts are doing, and that includes witnesses). Yet, because I do not agree with them, I am the enemy and they have already started flagging - not because of content, or scamming or plagiarising. No, just because I disagreed with them. That is a very strong signal and I cannot ignore it.

As a final point: We will become rich because our sP will become worth more, if Steem appreciates, not because of our SP growing in Steem size. So, if someone has 100 SP, they will become whales because Steem may become worth $8 each, but the SP will only stay at 100 or, if it grows, it will grow so slowly that we'll all be dead before we can enjoy the huge wealth it is supposed we will accumulate.

Nobody seems to have noticed that at least half or more of steemians are now on other Steem related platforms and as things get worse for them here, they will concentrate on using the ones where they are still able to express an opinion without being flagged, while also earning money.

23.08.2019 20:40
8

As a matter of fact, if you can access those older posts

Oh no @arthur.grafo. You actually can access and read a good deal of those older posts and discussions summarized just doing click here. :)

23.08.2019 22:22
0

I have no problem accessing them, I use SteemWorld - but thanks.

Anyway, I would not want summarised copy - creating a summary means someone judges what should be shown and what can be thrown out. I prefer to see the original and make those decisions myself.

23.08.2019 23:39
4

I prefer to see the original and make those decisions myself.

erm... by chance, did you even dare to click on the link offered to find out that all the 'originals' already comes inside?

23.08.2019 23:49
0

Then why tell me they are summaries? Summaries are NEVER the original, they are just what someone understood or his way of sorting out what they like or dislike.

As for daring...what the hell has that got to do with anything? My reason for not examining them is very clear - and you pretending it is not so, shows you are playing a game of your own, because facing the truth is not something you like to do.

PLUS, I mentioned a specific message exchanged between two people and my comment was meant to indicate I hope that person is able to find the old messages so as to see that I was not making it up, that it was actually said - so again, since I am claiming a certain something was said and suggesting that anyone who doubts it, that they return to read those messages...for some unintelligable reason, you immediately think you can play a power game by making me look ineffective and not daring to go view the message I spoke of?

All I can find in your messages is a certain large blank gap in your intellectual abilities - and it is such a pity you did not have the common sense to keep your mouth shut so that you do not expose your deficiency to the entire world.

24.08.2019 21:50
0

Ah! ¡Yummy! ...finally a tasty debate. 😎

Then why tell me they are summaries? Summaries are NEVER the original, they are just what someone understood or his way of sorting out what they like or dislike.

Agreed! and that's the whole point.
I said:

You actually can access and read a good deal of those older posts and discussions summarized just doing click here. :)

And if you had simply dared to click on the link as I had suggested, you would have realized that I was just supporting the argument of what you had already said in your previous long comment. And I was simply adding that in that post in the link you could already find a compilation of all those old posts and discussions that you were referring to. Compilations, Summaries or whatevah. :p

As for daring...what the hell has that got to do with anything?

If you didn't dare to click on the damn link, evidently you'll never know what the hell has that got to do with anything!! Obviously!

My reason for not examining them is very clear

Yeah! as clear as your presumptions full of confirmation bias without first verify what the hell I was talking about due to your inexistent curiosity.

and you pretending it is not so, shows you are playing a game of your own,

Pretending what? My only pretense was that you clicked on the damn link to find said old posts & discussions you were talking about.

because facing the truth is not something you like to do.

Facing the truth? ¿What fucking truth? I always stumble upon all the truths simply because I'm always willing to actually click, read, consume & digest every shit that gets in my way. ¡Holy crap! Yeah! because I always dare you know?

PLUS, I mentioned a specific message exchanged between two people and my comment was meant to indicate I hope that person is able to find the old messages so as to see that I was not making it up, that it was actually said

There were more than two people in this exchange of opinions. And yeah, I'm well aware about what was what you meant with your comment. Hence, my contribution to find quicker all those darn "old messages" for you and everyone else.

for some unintelligable reason, you immediately think you can play a power game by making me look ineffective and not daring to go view the message I spoke of?

I just wonder how the fuck you won't find everything in your life 'unintelligable' if you simply don't dare!!
You are not ineffective bro, you are just drowning yourself within your own inactive assumptions.

All I can find in your messages is a certain large blank gap in your intellectual abilities - and it is such a pity you did not have the common sense to keep your mouth shut so that you do not expose your deficiency to the entire world.

Ah! C'mon! Just shut up. Dare for once in your lifetime, click on the damn link and find out for once who the hell here is exposing his deficiency to the entire world.

25.08.2019 00:02
0

I stand by everything I said, but, I do so BECAUSE I clicked and saw the post you were alluding to as a 'Summary"

If you had said that you have also written a post about the sam subject, I would have read it and maybe even learnt something form it. But, you wanted to play your games, for some reason, and described it as a summary of the debate in question, knowing I would not click.

If I come from a riverside and walking two blocks I meet someone who is looking for a river and I tell him how to get to it, why would I think I have something to learn from returning to the river...to see it is there? It is something like that you are asking of me, except you make it sound like I do not need to go to the river itself, there is a side stream from it closer at hand. I was not in need of water (the info I was trying to pass on), so I did not go - and you think that makes me stupid.

Fine, let me be the stupid one, it does not bother me, but at least I now know that even if a see a post from you that I agree with, I must stay away, for you do not debate or argue honestly. I do not like playing your kind of games.

Finis

25.08.2019 00:19
0

I do not like playing your kind of games.

Finis

Haha don't worry mate. Everything is fine. I am not and I won't ever be 'that' explicit in any of my interventions. Yeah, that's my game. And in this barn, it is my way to instantly "separate the wheat from the chaff"

I basically like those who actually DARE!! };)

25.08.2019 00:53
0

After writing my last reply, I took a look at your home page. I then 'recognised' you as I had seen a few posts (at New, I never look at Feed), so I calmed down and realised you had played me, just as you say you will in your header.

So, I'm amused that I let it happen - and you'll probably catch me out again, as I have a terrible memory.

25.08.2019 01:06
1

Hahahaha, I am also amused with our brief debate. And certainly I'm glad of having served as a strengthening and restorative pill for your bad memory. Beware of premature alzheimer, buddy. No one here would want to miss out a good debate once in a while with you in the near future. :)

25.08.2019 01:26
0

Creating content does not create value.

There is already a shit ton of content on this blockchain and how much value has been created?

In fact the value has rather declined by 99% and with it the ability to pay rewards to anyone regardless of whether or not these changes are made.

It is vital the we start directing rewards better toward realizable value creation. Not self-voting, and not content for content's sake. This hard fork is a step to aid the system in that direction, but cultural and behavioural changes are needed too.

24.08.2019 07:05
0

An empty blockchain is a clean and efficient blockchain!
Maybe next HF, they could completely remove all content-creation? Just to keep the place free of spam, of course.

26.08.2019 18:58
0

Better, value-adding content > no content.

26.08.2019 21:00
0

Hilarious.

I've never been less convinced by a proposal or more irritated. It's all a bunch of rhetoric and dreamy time assertions and wishes. The Devs have never presented any evidence that any of these changes is going to work as predicted but what is concrete is that now the creators get their rewards reduced along with a shiny new tax to force us to pay for their projects (DAO).

23.08.2019 18:48
0

Of course the mathematics doesn't work as stated! One huge clue: Vandeberg never published his third deep dive on the 50% curation rewards - he never will, of course.

25.08.2019 12:26
0

Is this sarcasm? I honestly can’t tell.

Posted using Partiko iOS

25.08.2019 16:25
0

Please correct me if I am wrong. If I buy an upvote post hardfork, I will be paying curators 50% instead of 25%? I believe this will put the nail in the coffin of buying votes as a means to earn.

23.08.2019 18:52
3

I’m thinking some will still survive by increasing Roi to buyers from their curation. Some will probably adapt to a token as a means of paying back value. Who knows! 😂

Or curation trails might be the way to go just like it did couple years ago. 🤷🏼‍♂️

23.08.2019 19:08
0

Actually, it will do the oposite. Everything about HF21 is hardwired to promote growth of the bidbot economy within the main STEEM ecosystem.

23.08.2019 22:07
2

correct. the changes needed are minimal and, let's not forget, the value of any paid vote is relative to the value of one's upvote (of an upvote in general).

25.08.2019 12:24
0

The price of bought votes will likely decline. Whatever other changes might also happen due to freer use of downvotes, differences in voting behaviour, etc. is more speculative and more difficult to predict.

24.08.2019 07:44
1

"We expect posts that would make more than 20 STEEM under the old rules to earn more after the changes. Those posts that would have made less than 20 STEEM under the old rules will receive less after the changes." --- well that is a turn off...

23.08.2019 18:57
5

Essentially... it sounds like a way to expand the wealth gap between whales and newcomers.

Posted using Partiko iOS

23.08.2019 19:48
2

Exactly! 20 Steem on a post is a lot. Let's not forget that right now, some people push their blog posts to that level with bots, only to get downvoted by some whale because "the post is not worth that much".

24.08.2019 00:41
1

I'm liking the changes I'm seeing here. Curation has always been a problem, there's no motivation to use up voting power on other people's content without selling it, so giving more to the curator may change my behavior, and hopefully many others. The big whales with piles of steem are killing the platform with upvote bots, and it's such a mess that I use them too and use smartsteem/minnowbooster to keep up with the Joneses because I would be wasting my steem power otherwise.

The downvote pool is a long time coming, for the same reasons as above.

There will be people who power down and leave the ecosystem because of this, and I hope they do because a social media platform doesn't work too well if everyone is gaming the system, which we all are because again, there's been no other option, and it's also killing the price of steem as big whales continuously rake in steem and sell to the bottom.

Let them all get upset and leave, Steem needs some spring cleaning and its nice to see changes that will bring that cleaning. Whether these changes are positive long-term will require time, not angry speculation and mind-reading from people that like Steem as-is. It works for a few, doesn't work for most, and hopefully that changes soon.

23.08.2019 19:05
4

And you have reached your conclusions because you know that it is in human nature that the whales/investors and witnesses are scheming to destroy their own money grabbing habits and opportunities so that us poor creators can now spend our time curating, so that we make money, and they start crying and run away, looking for some other fields to plunder.

Dream on.

23.08.2019 20:52
0

I'm liking the changes I'm seeing here.

The big whales with piles of steem are killing the platform with upvote bots, and it's such a mess that I use them too and use smartsteem/minnowbooster to keep up with the Joneses because I would be wasting my steem power otherwise.

Really @briggsy? Are you even an active content creator/contributor? A passive investor? A visionary Dev? An opportunist gambler? or just one of those blind & weak c-u-r-e-i-t-o-r-s that allows be dragged along by the general current?

23.08.2019 22:57
0

What will happen to users like me? I have never had publications with 20 steem. I work very hard to make quality publications that I present them from time to time but that does not mean that this publication is well voted. I make many manual votes because it is the way to discover interesting users who make magnificent publications. So how do I stay on steemit?

23.08.2019 19:11
5

There are no answers from the team.

26.08.2019 20:18
0

And tomorrow is the big change...

26.08.2019 23:39
0

How about taking away the opportunity to delegate steem power? Let everyone manage his own power. This will block the ability to generate a large number of tokens to accounts accumulating a lot of power.

23.08.2019 19:14
0

Those gloomy characters, those who believe themselves to be gods but who really are nobody outside, they will have their black oasis here, they are so so anxious to put those negative votes, they urgently need to express their arrogance, this is like putting a bandage on the mouth to the masses. Great breakthrough founders! I hope steemit doesn't stay deserted again.

23.08.2019 19:22
1

"..posts that would make more than 20 STEEM under the old rules to earn more after the changes. Those posts that would have made less than 20 STEEM under the old rules will receive less.."

23.08.2019 19:26
0

Alot of SP, therefore curating powers are lying fallow in dormant accounts.

This fork ought to incorporate the use of these fallow stock , to the advantage of the entire steemit community!!

23.08.2019 19:37
0

best way to make Steemit more and more worthless imao :-(

(trend for 2 years now is only down......... next step !)

23.08.2019 19:46
0

fuck this shit

23.08.2019 19:56
1

I am afraid that if the authors earn less than $ 20 per post, they will multiply the witness team by zero with their flags))

23.08.2019 19:56
0

Good plan! I think I will do that. Might make a blog post to promote this :)

23.08.2019 23:52
1

WTF!?

We expect posts that would make more than 20 STEEM under the old rules to earn more after the changes. Those posts that would have made less than 20 STEEM under the old rules will receive less after the changes.

Are you just kicking out all the creators with little money that could contribute so much to the platform, but don't get too much attention?!

Are you aware that every creator that receives now less than 20 STEEM per post will have no reason to stay here and contribute?

This seems a hard fork made for the richest.

23.08.2019 19:57
1

I don't like the rule of a lower reward for what we get votes that don't generate 20 STEEM, I think it should be equitable for everyone and more for newcomers or for those of us who struggle to make quality articles in Spanish, as you may know we have few curators who can have a great voting power to generate a reward of more than 20 STEEM, I know this will mean leaving our comfort zone and looking for another way to generate more votes, but I think if you want new people to use steemit, then this rule does not seem to me to be the best.

23.08.2019 19:57
1

Thats great as long it doesnt affect market price negatively .

23.08.2019 20:02
1

It already did. The markets aren't sleeping. The current price, one third of the price prior to Steemit's announcement of EIP inclusion in HF21 is a clear rejection of HF21 by the markets.

23.08.2019 21:52
1

Selam steemit türkç dilede çevrilse memnun oluruz iyi akşamlar

23.08.2019 20:03
1

Wow

The rewards curve is changing. We expect posts that would make more than 20 STEEM under the old rules to earn more after the changes. Those posts that would have made less than 20 STEEM under the old rules will receive less after the changes.

So the people that are earning scraps will now earn nearly nothing. While the big earners will be earning even more. Great way of atracting new users.

23.08.2019 20:32
6

Shouldn't our main priority be to grow the user base, the price would then take care of itself?

These changes seem to most likely do the opposite of that, do they not?

23.08.2019 20:42
8

The changes are made to make investors rich. You better be an investor. This way you earn and do not need to write/post/comment.

24.08.2019 14:28
0

But without new users your investment is going down the drain. Slaughtering the goose that lays golden eggs.

24.08.2019 21:15
0

On point

25.08.2019 19:58
0

Yes, this change will indeed deter new users. Create an account. Play a bit around, never get above the dust value, abandon account.

24.08.2019 21:16
1

Hopefully all of this happens seamlessly and you don't notice much of anything at all.

Uhm, well, I hope we can actually notice something at least. };)

The rewards curve is changing. We expect posts that would make more than 20 STEEM under the old rules to earn more after the changes. Those posts that would have made less than 20 STEEM under the old rules will receive less after the changes.

¿Huh? Oh yeah, I could see that coming!!

Reward funding is being changed from the 75/25 split that currently exists, to a 50/50 split between author and curator. That means you will be rewarded significantly more for curating content after the fork.

eerm... I suspect you forgot to say we'll be also rewarded significantly & substantially LESS for creating content after the fork.

If you would like to learn more about the changes included in HF21, please read this post.

Yeah! and maybe this other post and many more too. I mean, well, if you really would like to learn more about the changes included in HF21. ;)

23.08.2019 20:44
0

It's not a Hard Fork but rather a Hard Fuck.

God save the Queen

23.08.2019 21:23
3

"Rewards

The rewards curve is changing. We expect posts that would make more than 20 STEEM under the old rules to earn more after the changes. Those posts that would have made less than 20 STEEM under the old rules will receive less after the changes."

WTF seriously. 20 Steem?

23.08.2019 21:33
1

Yes exiting times indeed.
Especially for the @nextgenecrypto / @ngc / @berniessanders group of accounts. Wow he has just been given another huge slice of the reward pool for nothing ! Imagine that.

Question: How instrumental were his thousands of accounts, in creating this hard fork?

If you have enough accounts,
you can create the top twenty witnesses line up,
that you want.

There is a solution to the problem WE are facing. If you want this place to thrive.
This hard fork is not part of that solution

23.08.2019 21:35
0

If you have enough accounts,
you can create the top twenty witnesses line up,
that you want.

Only SP matters when voting for witnesses. Number of accounts are moot. Running 20 witness servers is just a dumb cost to eat up.

23.08.2019 23:49
2

What are you talking about?

25.08.2019 01:26
0

I enjoyed seeing an explanation of a hardfork, and a more newbie-friendly post overall. Contrast this to previous news pieces that were full of acronyms and no explanation for the lay person. Big improvement. Thank you.

23.08.2019 21:42
0

The big unanswered question:

Did you guys fix the dust-level treshold for the HF?

23.08.2019 21:49
1

Great question - made me laugh, though.

One of the biggest consequences of Hf21 that the chainlords have forgotten to mention is that comments work just like posts... therefore voting on comments is a guaranteed waste of voting power. So much for "social".

25.08.2019 12:15
1

Oops, just threw away an other $0.03 vote, that used to be a $0.06 vote before the market rejection of HF21 by the markets, and will be a $0.00 vote ;-)

Before Steemit Inc anounced the EIP was to be part of HF21, you needed a bit over 1k SP at 100% to reward a comment above the dust treshold. After all of HF21 comes together, you will possibly need closer to 10k SP if earlier claims about the chosen curve turn out to be correct.

I hope, despite zero communication on the subject, they fixed the dust treshold for HF21. If they didn't, I think moving more stake (and social interaction) to #creativecoin will be my best option.

If more below 10k SP accounts will do similar, this little oversight by Steemit Inc might turn out to be the cause of an even lower value for STEEM. So, maybe if the social argument doesn't make a lot of difference to the chainlords, maybe minnows and dolphins voting with their feet and moving stake to scot tribes will.

26.08.2019 08:11
0

HF 20: "I was the worst thing the developers of STEEM could do to fuck up the experience of using Steemit."

HF 21: "Hold my beer."

I mean, first of all, the reward curve change is an absolutely undisguised way for whales to get richer while everyone else struggles harder to make less. The explanation of "boosting quality content" is absolutely laughable because it takes a special kind of fool to think the number of votes you get on this site is based on the quality of your work. It's the amount of sycophants you have following you around in hopes of getting a curator reward. And speaking of that, you are ENCOURAGING this behavior by increasing the curator reward at the expense of the one who actually creates the content!

Congratulations on managing to decimate everything that ever gave this platform a God-damned snowball's prayer in Hell of ever being useful.

23.08.2019 21:51
1

This update may discourage many smaller users from contributing to the platform.
Especially with regards to in-depth, niche subjects, and quality posts.

I am lucky if I get 20 votes on a post let alone 20 steem per post, some of my 'science' or foreign aid posts can take months to compile. For example, here's a video that I had commissioned for a conference
6 months of work, dozens of fo people involved. Several tens of thousand views and likes on other platforms but only 7 votes here in Steemit:We must Return: Building the Moon Base. https://goldvoice.club/steem/@epicdave/4858lgu0fgw
Same goes for news related text posts "The A.I Medical Revolution?💻: https://goldvoice.club/steem/@epicdave/the-ai-medical-revolution-jg3cambh

No way in Hell are both posts combined close to 20 steem.

It's difficult to grow here on Steem as it is, but these new changes are going to make it next to impossible. It seems like the whales are the priority with this update.

I wonder if these changes will cripple community projects like @actifit ?

Steem has done a lot to empower people from developing nations, those who a few dollars will go a long way in helping. I fear this update will cripple such users and further reward 'whales' ...

23.08.2019 21:55
3

I think nothing will change except author rewards will be cut.

23.08.2019 22:00
0

Or it may increase if you get more votes.

24.08.2019 03:23
0

En resumen , las ballenas ganaran aun mas con este nuevo Hardfork y los peces pequeños ganaremos aun menos , felicidades steemit , las has cagado de nuevo...

23.08.2019 22:09
0

@steemitblog,

I hope I am proven wrong but HardFork 21 strikes me as being STEEM/Steemit's Funeral Pyre.

The person in the world who should be most delighted by it is @dan as EOS 1.8 will launch on September 23 ... and Voice shortly thereafter. On that day, we shall finally find out who needs who more ... the Whales/Dev's or the Content Creators.

Earlier today I wrote in a comment:

@thekittygirl,

Late last night, I responded to @blockurator's comment without reading your post. This morning I read it and wanted to add a few insights.

You are a pro. So am I and so is Block. As such, we have standards to which we hold ourselves. We WILL NOT produce crap just because we are massively under-compensated for creating quality.

And we are not alone. There are many others who wish to do the same. We believe that Merit, not Manipulation, ought to be the metric that determines a post's success or failure and are willing to accept the collective judgement of our respective audiences as the arbiter of whether such standard has been achieved.

That is our Game.

To others, STEEM/Steemit is just a big cash cow to be milked in any way they can dream up. Quality of Content is of no relevance whatsoever. So long as people keep posting, a necessary facade is maintained and coins keep getting produced ... coins which accumulate in their pockets despite their having done nothing to earn them. So long as the enablers keep enabling, who cares if they're miserable?

This is their Game.

The two games cannot peaceably co-exist. Sooner or later, the former group will rebel. First will come contempt, then disgust. A some point they will reach a tipping point, a critical mass. And that's when the wheels will come off the bus.

I have written endlessly warning about the consequences of the endless cheating and self-dealing. I will write no more.

In the end, all this comes down to one simple dynamic: A bunch of self-aggrandizing Millennials refused to listen to old men about how to wage war, and to old woman about how to keep the peace. The sociability that underpins social networks is older than Man. It is subject to Rules and one of the most important among them is that salutes are not purchased, they're earned. What the kids could not, and cannot, grasp is that our collective endeavor was never about computer code ...it was about genetic code.

HardFork 21 will be STEEM/Steemit's Funeral Pyre, the final conflagration of the dead (or nearly so).

Perhaps poetically, the Whales will become Minnows. Us Minnows will lick our wounds ... and re-form somewhere else. Sooner or later, a Meritocracy will develop and the Rules than govern human conduct will re-assert themselves. And perhaps more poetically still, the children will take their rightful place in the pecking order ... working FOR those with gray hair.

Quill

https://goldvoice.club/steem/@thekittygirl/how-i-write-a-steem-post#@quillfire/pwp9su

23.08.2019 22:20
3

Interesting post. It'll be interesting to see how the new curve, where posts that would normally earn less than 20 Steem are going to earn even less, impacts new users and bringing new users to the platform.

23.08.2019 22:21
0

Nothing in here will help new users want to come here, which is the crux of the problem. They are trying to fix the wrong things. Instead of figuring out how to get and keep more people here, they are trying to plug the "abuse" holes. Which will likely actually end up driving more people away.

23.08.2019 22:35
1

I apprpreciate the heads-up before these changes go into effect, but I am deeply concerned that these reward changes may just incentivise more bid bot abuse. Hopefully the free flags will help counteract that.

23.08.2019 23:03
0

Did the custom json collision semi-solution make it into the fork? I've seen vague mentions of that but it doesn't seem to be in any of your posts.

At this point that's much more important to the future of user experience than the entire voting system.

sbi-skip

23.08.2019 23:07
1

If you mean increasing the number of allowed custom_json ops per block, yes - that has been bumped to 5 per block from 1.

The complete release notes are here

24.08.2019 14:27
0

¿Alguien sabe si el HF21 se trasladará hacia las tribus?

23.08.2019 23:08
1

Super-Majority:

I can talk for days. I like how forks seem to work if there is a super majority, a consensus between the witnesses.

Steemit Republic

Instead of being merely mob-ruling democracy, the Steem Witness Systems appears to be like an electronic constitutional (blockchain) republic to some extent I'm hoping which I prefer and we do better as we try to go that direction as humans.

Western Civilization

I promote free markets and I promote walls, borders, countries. Family First. Community First. Country First. Having two Steem pools might be better. I'm skeptical but it may help a little. The 50-50 reward balance between content curators and authors may encourage increased engagement, activity, where people may curate more and may share (resteem) or retweet more. So, long story short, some things might be improving with Hard Fork 21 (HF21). I love the way that Hard Fork is explained here in this article on Steemit. I'm Oatmeal. Good work.

23.08.2019 23:30
0

Come over to BravoCoin! We forked Steem at HF19 and created a mobile review platform for iOS/Android where users earn coins for their reviews of restaurants, hotels, movies, video games, coins, exchanges, dApps and more! Many refer to us as "Crypto Yelp"!

100% free to join, come experience the #BRAVOLUTION

Reply with your BRAVO username and i'll send you 10 additional BRAVO!

23.08.2019 23:39
1

I may as well leave steemit then:

We expect posts that would make more than 20 STEEM under the old rules to earn more after the changes. Those posts that would have made less than 20 STEEM under the old rules will receive less after the changes.

NONE of my posts make more than a few cents each, unless eSteem
Or some generous person upvotes me.
It took me almost 2 yrs to get enough steem to make a cash out
Worthwhile, so I could FINALLY SAY I had made some
REAL HARD USD for posting online. Since then I've been
Slowly building my bank back up.
This is so very very discouraging to me. I may as well give up.

23.08.2019 23:44
1

"The rich getting richer."

Aun que intenta disimular que esto es lo contrario en el trasfondo se puede entender como tal ya que como ellos dicen el que gane por encima de 20 steem ganara más y el que gane menos de 20 steem ganara menos en pocas palabra le das más a los ricos y menos a los pobre las ballenas serán más poderosas y cada vez con más poder en cambio los nuevos cada vez serán más pequeño al punto de la extincion me parece una propuesta que podría llevar a la caída de la plataforma como tal por que no se trata de que todos creen contenido de calidad porque si ese fuera el caso todos tuviéramos algo de poder de voto y no tuviéramos que buscar trails y grupos con tal de poder conseguir un simple voto hay personas en esta plataforma que producen contenido increíble y no por eso son tomados en cuenta.


He visto publicaciones admirables y las he votado y mi voto a la final no beneficia en nada al autor ya que su valor es igual a cero y si con estas nuevas reglas los pequeños seremos mas pequeños significa que de nada sirve que cree contenido por que igual la plataforma buscara destruirme en cambio los grandes que invierten y tiene poder ahora seran mucho mas poderosos!. entonces donde esta la ayuda a los pequeños o a los nuevos??


Si tanto quieren ayudar a los creadores de contenido deberian crear reglas que ayuden y no que destruyan lo que puedo observar con esto es que si no gastas dolares para invertir y obtener poder y llegar al nivel de una ballena entonces moriras asi de simple....


En todo lo que he leido aun no he visto algo que aliente a los nuevos o a los pequeños solo se puede leer que que si eres grande seras mas fuerte! quiero hacer una pregunta! Si un usuario realiza contenido de calida quien se encargara de votarlo??? ya de por si hay usuarios esforzandose y si no pertences a un trail y no te publicas en 1000 grupos en el discord no consigues voto! asi de facil. y aun asi tengo publicaciones con 600 votos y solo llego a 0.05 steem y ahora con esto me imagino quedare en 0.00!

24.08.2019 00:00
4

THIS IS HOW I READ “Hardfork 21 is HAPPENING. What will change?”

“The rewards curve is changing. We expect posts that would make more than 20 STEEM under the old rules to earn more after the changes. Those posts that would have made less than 20 STEEM under the old rules will receive less after the changes.” Means: do not waste your time in dealing with the posts of minnows, just concentrate on the post of whales. It is obvious that the poor minnows will not be able to bribe bots or delegate power to auto upvote accounts, so their posts will be under 20 Steem, which will give insignificant currations reward. As a poor plankton or minnow, instead of reading, commenting, upvoting, resteeming each others’ post, contributing the wealth of the wealthy is more profitable. The ramnants of the dinner of whales are much more than you can find in the garbages in the streets”
“Reward funding is being changed from the 75/25 split that currently exists, to a 50/50 split between author and curator. That means you will be rewarded significantly more for curating content after the fork.” Means: Stay where you are. Do not even try to move up to a higher class. You can not move either. All your fellows are serving the richest, and feeding from the junks of their tables. If you don’t, you will starve. There are no food left in the garbages at the street. If you are stubborn and continue to struggle we have to remind you that the change of 75/25 to 50/50 split also involves downvotes. We have strict rules here. We have downvote bots here that will blacklist you and downvote your content before you will have time to learn the rules. We do not have to bother ourselves to downvote you personally, delegating a small percentage of our SP then voting their repplies are enough. From then on they will downvote every of your post even you create the best content in the history of the platform. If you want to get rid of being in the blacklist you have to beg them in the discord. It serves two puposes: 1. We entertain from your humiliation. 2. You must get used to be humiliated in order to know your place. You see we took all precautions to prevent you from climbing the ledder. As we climbed earlier we are now pushing the ledder back. Still not enough? Check this:
“A downvote mana pool is being added, which will allow you –actually we- to make a few downvotes each day without impacting your –actually our- ability to earn curation rewards from upvotes.”
CONCLUSION AND MY COMMENT
Being an early adopter of any cryptocurrency, including Steem is highly advantageous, and those early adopters hundred percent deserve all those advanteges because of their high vision. I even think that all the people dealing with cryptocurrencies today are even not early adopters, but innovators. When at least 5% of the world population start to to deal with cryptocurrencies, the one in the 4th or 5th will be early adoptors. We are innovators today.
I am sincerely in favour of getting richer of every innovator here, and getting more richer of earlier innovators (whales) of Steem. They deserve it for having high vision. However, the road of getting richer of innovators or early adopters is in just one direction: MASS ADOPTION. Otherwise everyone of us here would mint a coin, hold 100% of it in our hands and wait for being rich one day.  If we move in the direction of mass adoption, the value of Steem will increase, and everyone will win. If the platform moves in the wrong direction, we will see drowning whales in a small pool. They will hold all of the Steem themselves but the price of Steem will be wortless.
Power be with you Steemians, and I am sorry if there are spelling and grammer mistakes in my repply. I am not a native English speaker.

24.08.2019 01:07
2

I feel this HF time to serve the bigger fish than for the community. What we need is the dispersion of Steem instead of concentration. But with what happens next, maybe the network will be more focused.

  • The 50/50 bonus may not encourage newcomers to join the network and does not encourage content creation.
  • More than 20 STEEM will receive more incentive to use BOT => to benefit bigger fish.

I'm really disappointed about this HF time!

24.08.2019 01:12
0

other social media giving 0 reward although users are increasing. so that mean 50/50 bonus will nenver effect for true content creators. check out top 20 coins in the market , those coins are available easy to earn? only steem you can earn easily. And this is the reason that steem coin is cheap But you people never deserve this opportunity. shame on you who protesting hard fork and blaming steem team.

24.08.2019 03:04
0

You have heard about social networks for example: fanbox, kwai, minds, xenzuu ..? These are social networks that pay users, not just Steemit. But what is more important than I hope is decentralization for platform.

24.08.2019 03:39
2

Sir, i was talking about top 20

27.08.2019 03:05
0

OH. Actually I don't know about that, and now we have dropped too far from the top 20. :)
I'm sure I have the same hope as you! :)

27.08.2019 13:38
0

Unless you are at least a dolphin steem isn't paying out as well. You just stay below the dust value and get 0 as well.

But other social media give you real engagement. Something you don't get here either — unless you are at least a dolphin.

24.08.2019 21:38
3

This HF is the worst. The rewards. It says posts under 20 Steem get less rewards. This is going to HURT users who can't earn 20 Steem on their posts.

Next, people can flag without draining their VP. This will give flag bullies a reason to flag innocent people taking away hard working creator's hard-earned money.

24.08.2019 02:31
3

other social media giving 0 reward although users are increasing. so that mean 50/50 bonus will nenver effect for true content creators. check out top 20 coins in the market , those coins are available easy to earn? only steem you can earn easily. And this is the reason that steem coin is cheap But you people never deserve this opportunity. shame on you who protesting hard fork and blaming steem team.

50/50 is one of the best decision and this is the only way to survive in this bear market. thanks steemit team for this change.

24.08.2019 03:07
0

Where does the 20 STEEM pivot point for posts come from?

I mean, show me the maths in the code, not more obfuscating words.

@vandeberg's old deep dive on the new reward curve shows parameters that have pivot points of 4 or 6 STEEM.

I assume the reward curve parameter is 2e11, or has that been tweaked to make everyone so much happier?

24.08.2019 03:11
0

We expect posts that would make more than 20 STEEM under the old rules to earn more after the changes. Those posts that would have made less than 20 STEEM under the old rules will receive less after the changes.

So basically the small user will earn less than the big whales that can auto upvote then self?

24.08.2019 03:19
0

This will be the hardfork where everything goes well and nothing fucks up
Just kidding we are all going to die

24.08.2019 04:03
0

Not sure what you talking about but

  1. We invested half BTC a year ago in steem.
  2. Daily making 4 posts, that means working 8 hours daily for Steemit.
  3. Our current value is 0.07 BTC

Please tell
How much loss we have?
Anyway this hardfork going to help us?

24.08.2019 04:20
3

Don't worry. You're the not the only one who has lost so much for holding alts instead of bitcoin! This hard fork in my opinion should generally help the ecosystem overall, but alts might continue to suffer as long as bitcoin continues to dominate the space.

24.08.2019 10:55
2

Tragedy is that we are also working for fourteen months and daily posting in steemit.

Calculate the labour we have done in these fourteen months period.

We have seven times loss in terms of bitcoin.
We have three times loss in terms of USD.

Plus loss of labour costs of fourteen months.

Please guide if any way this hard fork going to help us ?

25.08.2019 06:37
2

You shouldn't be posting here for money imo. Just as people who post on Twitter or Facebook have never posted there for money. Being able to make some $$$ for your posts here should be seen as just a fun and positive aspect advantage over other platforms but you should never keep posting just for money. That's one of the problems many people have here and why there's so much spam. And the loss in BTC and USD as I said is not just with steem. All altcoins have suffered and continue to suffer. If you had bought anything, whether Litecoin or Dogecoin or really anything else, you would be in the same loss or even more. This fork will leverage curators by doubling their rewards. I think curators should be rewarded even more imo because technically 100% of the rewards belongs to them. They can just upvote themselves instead of your posts and take 100% of the rewards themselves which is what some have been doing. This fork will make things better for curators but still won't be enough imo. I would like to see something like 75% curators vs. 25% authors. And I think that might as well happen further down the road.

25.08.2019 07:06
0

"you shouldn't post here for money"
Notice that the front page of Steemit invites new users with "get paid for posting"?
And you're telling people they shouldn't expect money for their work here, heh.

25.08.2019 07:55
0

I didn't say that. Read again. I said just for money. You conveniently removed just from my sentence to make me look like an idiot. If a platform wants to pay you for simply posting, that would be a pretty stupid platform that would invite nothing but spam.

25.08.2019 08:13
0

You tried to make him feel like he's unreasonable to expect to be paid.
He's not.

25.08.2019 08:31
0

It's unreasonable to post JUST for money. That's called spamming. And there's no platform for it. Money doesn't grow on trees. You need to convince others to pay you for your service. That's why it's called Proof-of-Brain mining.

25.08.2019 09:02
0

I am in the same boat. I invested 0.2 Bitcoin 18 months ago, and have worked full time (with my wife and others), only to be reduced to 0.05 BTC in value.
Why have I paid SO much, to work SO hard, and produce SO much content for this blockchain, to lose SO much of my purchasing power?
While the insiders are giving themselves another raise?

25.08.2019 07:58
7

Hope this FH would make Steemit a better place.

24.08.2019 04:57
0

@steemitblog
I choose to Live positive work positive and stay positive. Thank you for your article, gracias amigo.

24.08.2019 07:00
1

...which is exactly the kind of attitude that allows tyrants to do as they please! I choose to complain bitterly and to fight injustice tooth and claw!

24.08.2019 12:59
3

Well said! altho the name cosmophobia is hardly positive. looks like a template comment anyway.

25.08.2019 12:08
1

We expect posts that would make more than 20 STEEM under the old rules to earn more after the changes.

That's really weird!

When I look at the graph for the convergent linear curve... I don't see it ever going above the old linear curve... why then would a post earn more after the fork?

->  

If I take that into a graph calculator I don't see this go above the old figures anywhere. Are you expecting claims to be worth more STEEM after the fork so that the same amount (slightly less actually) would be worth more STEEM in rewards than before?

I guess that could make sense as the globally distributed claims get less under the same number of rshares being generated through voting. Adding in some more of those free flags to the pool of votes, the same amount of claims might be worth even more in actual rewards... did I just answer my own question?

24.08.2019 07:16
5

Some content will earn more from the pool simply because the pool is a zero-sum game in the short term. The absolute value of the curve doesn't matter, only the relative value. Whatever is reduced the least (which in practice is the higher end) will actually be an increase in practice.

24.08.2019 07:40
3

Linear does not mean proportional. Your blue line is slightly wrong, it should not go through (0,0), there is a small SP gap that is deducted from each upvote - about 3 SP if I recall.
Look at the graphs in the old reward curve post - then factor in the general loss of author rewards.

25.08.2019 08:12
0

Linear does not mean proportional.

And what is that supposed to mean???

I know... since HF20 50 million rshares are always deducted from every vote... that's more like 1.5SP I think... you wouldn't even see that in the image of the graph unless zooming in very very very close. But yes, I did not include it in the graph, it's totally irrelevant to my initial question.

Look at the graphs in the old reward curve post - then factor in the general loss of author rewards.

I still don't get what you are trying to tell me.

25.08.2019 08:30
3

will they add a collections feature like what used to be on G+ ??

24.08.2019 07:42
1

This is why we can’t have nice things

24.08.2019 08:19
0

So we are getting LESS rewards, PLUS they will be split for LESS. Thus many of us will receive close to nothing now.
/slow clap

So people who make less than 20 steem on a post will receive less. HOW IS THAT FAIR?

You are PUNISHING Minnows who make very little already on this platform.

ARE YOU TRYING TO KICK US OUT.

GOSH!

I keep giving Steemit chance after chance because of what it represents.

You are making it VERY difficult for me to continue this relationship with you, Steemit.

24.08.2019 09:00
2

Not to mention the plankton. I have seen so many abandon there accounts already.

24.08.2019 21:32
3

Seems like HF20 killed the plankton, now HF 21 is about killing off the fish. Dolphins are on notice.

25.08.2019 07:51
0

Exactly. That is on the cards, I believe.

I warned about HF21 a long time ago and few bothered to listen. Instead I built tokens such as MAXUV and MAPXV to increase author rewards and help balance the effects,

25.08.2019 08:21
0

You want Steemit to become better than it ever was??? Revert it back to the time when I had my spine surgery where everybody was optimistic, caring and generous and bidbots did not exist!!!

'Nuff said...

24.08.2019 09:38
0

LOL! Good old days! If I remember correctly, your post had less than 1K USD when I upvoted and resteemed it. But by day 7, it was over 21K USD! Or am I wrong? :P You also received a bunch of liquid donations. What a blessing it was :D To be fair though, I think these changes are good. Incentivizing curators more than the authors will be even better because stakeholders can then make more by simply curating good content than trying to sell upvotes or self-upvote!

24.08.2019 10:24
1

Well, it was 17K USD, not 21K USD. I still can't believe it happened. I hope you are right about the new Hardfork. Too many forks can spoil the crypto broth.

24.08.2019 13:14
0

it needs a wash clean the gutter plz

lmmaund

me that human spirit that wants a clean life for everyone......everyone
love light peace & beautiful prayers

24.08.2019 10:54
0

It's so amazing, five star rating for this post
🌟 🌟 🌟 🌟 🌟

24.08.2019 12:23
0

Oh for crying out loud! POST QUALITY is not measured by the amount of the POST PAYOUT! All that measures is populist behaviour between whales!

This is a death sentence to already impoverished minnows like myself, who churn out quality content by the bucketload, but can never hope to compete with the circular-upvoting strategies of the whales:

" We expect posts that would make more than 20 STEEM under the old rules to earn more after the changes. Those posts that would have made less than 20 STEEM under the old rules will receive less after the changes."

Do you guys even know the first thing about the principles upon which crypto is built? How the HELL does "make the rich richer and the poor poorer" sound like a good idea to you? I might as well stick to bloody fiat!

SHOCKINGLY POOR DECISION!

24.08.2019 12:53
3

Yes, a poor decision. I have to wonder how The platform as a whole expects to benefit ??

24.08.2019 13:04
1

When things like this happen, I am reminded of how my (highly corrupt) government works. They claim to serve "the people", yet serve only themselves. This does NOT bode well for STEEM! Busy dumping my liquid STEEM as we speak.

24.08.2019 13:23
1

Putting the central back into decentral; the next step is already being planned, I believe.

Do people ever voice their concerns during the propaganda period? Always too late for something that could be figured out mathematically.

The last part not aimed at you in particular, just airing the disappointment of people reacting too late - as always.

25.08.2019 08:31
1

The problem with the propaganda period is always that the voices of reason are shouted down by the voices of the manipulated masses.

"There was no point in seeking to convert the intellectuals. For intellectuals would never be converted and would anyway always yield to the stronger, and this will always be "the man in the street." Arguments must therefore be crude, clear and forcible, and appeal to emotions and instincts, not the intellect. Truth was unimportant and entirely subordinate to tactics and psychology." ~ Joseph Goebbels

25.08.2019 15:27
0

My biggest worry is the entry for users. I have already seen @thejimmydoreshow @ronplacone @jordanchariton and many other quality posters leave for not getting enough views and upvotes to stay. Giving more back to those with huge upvoting power only lets the power stay there with their little voting circles. Just don’t see how this will help grow @Steem in users or quality. I’ve seen two pictures getting 20 plus steem.

24.08.2019 13:00
1

It's simply disappointing. Rich gets richer. Poor get poorer. The power is distributed among riches, and you still call it "decentralized". It is centralized in riches.

Amazon was praised sometimes because of its long tail strategy that allows books with high quality but not common, accessible to people.
Such books don't bring many sales each, but on the whole, bring a lot.
And now Amazon is so big.
It is not only a matter of sales but also the idealism of promoting "good books" and the variety of books.

I think the change will de-promote the variety of posts, and only the posts talking about bitcoins or whatever popular topics will remain.

24.08.2019 13:49
1

You have a "nice" way of bringing the "good news" and fooling people. I like the inyriduction, explaining the hardcore etc.
I am not afraid it won't work smoothly or some problems will show up. If that happens I will blog somewhere else till it is solved.

What to expect.. The new rewarding a

  1. Many, no matter how good their content is, how much they engage and invest in Steem their blogs will never make $20. This means they earn even less and the question rises: Is there a reason for them to invest in Steem? What makes it attractive to invest over 12 hours a day?
  2. Reward split...
    You bring the news again as if this is something great a big WIN.
    Fact is it is not, it only is for you and the whales.
    Again I ask: what makes it interesting for the biggest, most active group to stay here and invest in Steem?

Also I hope you can answer this question:

What is a good reason to join Steem at all?
And please not the side of the investor but all of those who decided to give Steemit a chance, made it possible to grow and made publicity for it. Here, via Twitter, Facebook, etc etc.

Thank you in advance for your answer.
💕

Posted using Partiko Android

24.08.2019 14:18
3

Agree with you, but gotta point out that it's 20 steem, not $20. So, like $4.

25.08.2019 14:43
0

Okay well the S$.. Still a lot to many most of my posts do not even reach q which means I have the worse content here

25.08.2019 15:35
0

Absolutely think it's a problem!

Essentially, they're changing the platform to discourage the content I like in favor or rewarding the content that bores me.

25.08.2019 16:14
0

I already figured that out too. If I see what is according to @steemitblog good content it is the kind I am not interested in.

If there is a better place I like to hear it.
💕

25.08.2019 19:24
0

I'm somewhat new to steem but I thought this change sounded good until I read the comment below from calluna. I don't understand all this yet but I have a basic understanding of how it all works. Being one who is just starting and learning how things work, it scares me that now I have to learn the new stuff and so soon after starting. I hope it doesn't make to big of a difference to what I have learned so dar in the last couple of months.

24.08.2019 15:54
0

"The rewards curve is changing. We expect posts that would make more than 20 STEEM under the old rules to earn more after the changes. Those posts that would have made less than 20 STEEM under the old rules will receive less after the changes."

20 Steem per post!? Most of the people could not even made 2 Steem with their posts. Many people can't even make 1 Steem with most of their posts.
The few rich gets richer, the poor majority gets poorer.
I was hopeful and optimistic about the HardFork 21 so far, but after the above quoted expectations, I have different feelings and opinions about HardFork 21.

24.08.2019 18:05
2

Why were you optimistic? This was obvious. Look around at those very few people left who attempt to write honestly about this blockchain.

25.08.2019 08:26
0

To be honest, I expected something from HardFork 21 to reduce the number of content creators, and increase the number of curators, but not this way/not like this. This will be good probably only for the whales, and maybe for the dolphins. By doing this, they will probably reduce both the number of content creators and the number of curators as well. Basically the number of active users, which is already low and getting lower and lower nowadays almost every day.

25.08.2019 08:52
0

Yes, I think they are being encouraged to move into tribes/communities. So long as their voting activity remains in rshares/steem and is not wholly in tokens, then that may not be so bad, but I don't see many tribe-tokens able to fully hold on to their value.

And yes, blockchain activity as measured by the reward pool has been dropping quite sharply for the last 2 weeks.

25.08.2019 10:32
0

Would you guys consider publishing some kind of rankings related to the amount of value posts bring to steemit (ie. backlinks, traffic from social media and search engines, etc)? This might allow bidbots to be more selective and only upvote authors who create content that grows the platform.

24.08.2019 20:46
2

We expect posts that would make more than 20 STEEM under the old rules to earn more after the changes. Those posts that would have made less than 20 STEEM under the old rules will receive less after the changes.

That is the opposite of which is needed. This just horrible. Worth then I imagined.

I'm lost for word to explain my disappointing. Yet another hard fork to kick the small users in the gut.

I can't with good conscience suggest to anyone to create an account. I now know understand why Steem is down to €0.169.

You just pander to the whales and hate new users. But you know what: With that HF you finally slaughter the goose that lays the golden eggs.

I'll expect steem to now fall faster in value than new steem is created.

24.08.2019 21:04
2

This gives a hidden message "Steem is Dead"

24.08.2019 21:34
1

I honestly love articles like this, hardforks are just one more thing that can be done with the blockchain that many veterans know all about, but whenever these pop up I'm reminded of all the new people that's joining the space and need to learn all of these, sparks joy within, that's all!

24.08.2019 23:26
0

I wonder if this 50/50 split will actually result in higher author payouts despite the 25% loss, considering more people will be incentivized to power up.

24.08.2019 23:54
0

Some of this sounds good and some of it doesn't. One thing that doesn't sound good is making posts that earn less than 20 steem be worth even less. YouTube is terrible for supporting small creators; Steem hasn't been. If you make the smaller people's posts worth less you are taking away one of the biggest advantages of Steem over other platforms - that is supports the little guys better than places like YouTube do.

I've personally made posts that earn more than 20 Steem, and I've made posts that have earned less than 20 steem. The ones the earned less weren't on average, lower effort or lower quality. I know this would be true for other people too. I'm not sure if this is an effort to discourage non-content and spam etc, but the fact is, things aren't upvoted / rewarded in proportion to effort or quality and this move will do little to discourage non-content and spam but will be detrimental to small creators. Steem is still a shittonne better than YouTube is in this regard, but being better than YouTube shouldn't be the standard to aim for, as that still sets the bar for being good to and rewarding small creators pretty damn low. This move is still a move in the wrong direction for a platform that is overall pretty decent to small creators.

25.08.2019 02:28
1

That curve is just terrible for my community. I can count on one hand the number of non-botted posts I've seen get more than 20 steem. I thought this HF was supposed to help curb bot usage, not make it a necessary evil.

25.08.2019 05:18
1

But this was announced weeks ago and it just took a bit of analysis to figure that the reality was never going to match the propaganda.

25.08.2019 08:24
0

Yes. I've been trying to get witnesses who oppose it in the top twenty for all of those weeks. It's still not too late. (I mean it's not going to work, but it isn't too late) @tcpolymath is a good witness-voting proxy for anyone who wants to oppose hf21

25.08.2019 14:42
0

Perhaps somebody will start a "top up to twenty" service or bot, upvoting posts to the 20 STEEM level so they don't get shafted, for a fee?
I'd never use it, since I don't believe in buying/selling votes, but I'm sure it would be popular around here. All my posts are high quality, but very few ever get near 20 STEEM. Maaaaaybe 2.

25.08.2019 07:40
0

Ivan čečura has Joined UHive, you should too, Early Joiners rewards available now, Download the App here:
https://www.uhive.com/invite?c=F3W75Q
Use this code: F3W75Q u hive is future steem history

Posted using Partiko Android

25.08.2019 09:32
0

why dont you just write the code to eliminate the use of bots and problem solved bots are what fucked this whole space up and drove many users away

25.08.2019 12:33
0

Maybe it's two different and opposite points of view.
According to my vision of this platform (not necessarily correct) the authors are important for curators, because without content they would do? ... criticize each other?
Now, without authors or content, only the whales would remain.
Could it be that they decided to stay alone? ... are they creating an elite with some intention that we don't know?

25.08.2019 13:58
0

Im not satisfied with that propositions. You are helping paid bots and trolls and users which are morally fair will be fucked. It seems like other crypto want to destroy STEEM.

25.08.2019 14:24
1

I am sorry but that is too high and too complex for me. To be honest, I see no benefit to me as a small fish.

25.08.2019 14:57
2

I've been -- with the exception of a few visits from time to time -- not all that active in the Steemit scene.

The reason for this isn't anything personal -- in fact, it has been my goal to become a lot more active and to have done it sooner -- but, instead, just having too much on my plate at one time.

Long-story-short...

I'm, obviously, even behind on changes that have been taking place here even before this latest posting.

Therefore, I'm just going to take it from here and try to figure it out.

Will be asking questions as well -- just as soon as I can figure out what to ask.

25.08.2019 15:32
0

let's see what will happen after HF21..... nywys 'm excited to try something new...😄

Posted using Partiko Android

25.08.2019 16:05
0

You forgot to mention SPS !

25.08.2019 16:30
1

Sounds good, lets see how it goes. This might attract more users to the Steem network :)

25.08.2019 20:19
0

This seems like a catastrophically bad idea, for the reasons Calluna mentioned.

26.08.2019 01:59
1

Steemit is not a platform for free speech, ergo no one should care what happens to it.

26.08.2019 02:01
1

Nobody wants this, but it doesn't matter what people want. It's going through anyways.

26.08.2019 02:41
1

No point to stay here since then. Thanks and goodbye!

26.08.2019 09:30
2

I'm an ambassador for the HoboDAO project (@hobo.media) to support high quality contend on steem. Many of you are writing about the high quality content on steem with is not seen or is not upvoted sufficient at least. Please reply here and name some accounts with more or less continuously 'high-quality' content. I can propose them for HobDAO. Thank you.

26.08.2019 10:56
0

@karamazov00 leggi qui.

26.08.2019 12:16
0
26.08.2019 12:35
1

So its coming tomorrow! Fine , Im so happy . I love blockchain technology

26.08.2019 14:18
0

I love cars. I don't like being ran over by them. You fucking moron.

28.08.2019 05:40
4

Thanks for that great explanation! Not sure I like the 20 Steem rule though. I spend a lot of time on my posts which are 100% my own including the photography. I struggle as it is relying only on the Upvotes of others and not bidbots. Also, reducing the author’s share from 75% hardly seems fair given the long hours that go into many posts. Not sure if I’m liking the changes at all if I am understanding them correctly.

26.08.2019 14:54
2

So, essentially 99% of people will earn less now. That's one hell of an update.

26.08.2019 17:59
2

Also, these ads look like you have come to a spam website. User experience much...

26.08.2019 18:01
2

Animal Farm!

Steem has become a centralized, for-profit, blockchain experiment that charges users to post, comment, and vote. Steem is now the opposite of what it claimed it would be.

26.08.2019 19:10
7

Exactly, reminds me of this quote from Animal Farm. “All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others.”

26.08.2019 22:55
1

So the whale circle jerk will increase.

27.08.2019 02:32
2

The ads, the mess of FH20, the crashing currency price, the rich getting richer, the bots, the user unfriendliness, this is a freakin' MESS!
Which is really sad, because it was so close to amazing!!!

27.08.2019 05:56
4

"Reward funding is being changed from the 75/25 split that currently exists, to a 50/50 split between author and curator."
It takes much more time to author something than just to upvote it. That is why I believe the change above is not fair to the people who create content, which is a prerequisite for the curators. No content creators = no work for the curators as well.

27.08.2019 08:10
2

Who the hell writes posts that make over 20 STEEM? Certainly not the majority of us.

27.08.2019 11:29
2

1 question pleaase. We will lose all voting power?

27.08.2019 12:31
1

There must be NO downwotes at all, not more of this censorship shit

27.08.2019 12:46
6

I'm just waiting for a change in steem prices. semoag will also have a positive impact

28.08.2019 02:13
0