RE: The distribution-monetary rewards tradeoff and a proposal to accelerate the disruption of incumbent social networks by eeks

View this thread on: hive.blog | peakd.com | ecency.com

Viewing a response to: @ntomaino/the-distribution-monetary-rewards-tradeoff-and-a-proposal-to-accelerate-disruption-of-incumbent-social-networks

steemit · @eeks · Aug 4 '16

$1.59

This is better for growth but worse for long-term ecosystem health imo.  People should be valued based on what they do on Steem and how effective it is just on Steem.  Such influencers can already get outsized rewards by onboarding people, people who will then vote for them, etc.  I feel like the incentives are already there and don't need to be further juiced in this direction.

👍 eeks, alexc, killerstorm, demotruk, freedomengineer, ntomaino, shaka, biophil, mughat, serejandmyself, desmonid, jumpman, tad-auker, leprechaun, jsteck, mada, ulfa, meteor78, steemuwe, din, cryptolicious
👎 steemit4000

`author`	eeks
`permlink`	re-ntomaino-the-distribution-monetary-rewards-tradeoff-and-a-proposal-to-accelerate-disruption-of-incumbent-social-networks-20160804t170844752z
`category`	steemit
`json_metadata`	{"tags":["steemit"]}
`created`	2016-08-04 17:08:48
`last_update`	2016-08-04 17:08:48
`depth`	1
`children`	7
`last_payout`	2016-09-04 05:31:18
`cashout_time`	1969-12-31 23:59:59
`total_payout_value`	1.484 HBD
`curator_payout_value`	0.105 HBD
`pending_payout_value`	0.000 HBD
`promoted`	0.000 HBD
`body_length`	381
`author_reputation`	21,536,775,583,000
`root_title`	"The distribution-monetary rewards tradeoff and a proposal to accelerate the disruption of incumbent social networks"
`beneficiaries`	`[]`
`max_accepted_payout`	1,000,000.000 HBD
`percent_hbd`	10,000
`post_id`	605,622
`net_rshares`	1,208,676,996,129
`author_curate_reward`	""

properties (23)vote details (22)

voter	rshares	pct
steemit4000	-16,972,343,445	-100%
eeks	636,218,409,372	100%
tad-auker	932,571,074	100%
mughat	19,192,127,452	100%
leprechaun	908,741,343	100%
killerstorm	154,543,650,223	100%
alexc	200,565,473,482	100%
freedomengineer	53,777,056,833	100%
biophil	30,775,829,415	100%
ntomaino	32,468,664,733	100%
demotruk	56,998,002,851	100%
jsteck	772,218,684	100%
desmonid	1,583,840,412	100%
meteor78	150,709,097	100%
steemuwe	138,479,557	100%
jumpman	1,003,655,899	100%
shaka	30,850,534,550	100%
ulfa	198,316,612	100%
serejandmyself	4,126,789,524	100%
mada	325,758,339	100%
din	64,216,108	100%
cryptolicious	54,294,014	100%

@capitalism · Aug 4 '16

$0.78

I had the same thought about the idea of "steemit buttons" that could implemented outside of Steemit on websites to give Steem to the creators. That would bring no benefit to the Steemit platform. The quality content should come to Steemit.

👍 eeks, biophil, capitalism, jumpman, fishborne, steemuwe

`author`	capitalism
`permlink`	re-eeks-re-ntomaino-the-distribution-monetary-rewards-tradeoff-and-a-proposal-to-accelerate-disruption-of-incumbent-social-networks-20160804t171942182z
`category`	steemit
`json_metadata`	{"tags":["steemit"]}
`created`	2016-08-04 17:19:42
`last_update`	2016-08-04 17:19:42
`depth`	2
`children`	0
`last_payout`	2016-09-04 05:31:18
`cashout_time`	1969-12-31 23:59:59
`total_payout_value`	0.588 HBD
`curator_payout_value`	0.189 HBD
`pending_payout_value`	0.000 HBD
`promoted`	0.000 HBD
`body_length`	240
`author_reputation`	6,879,410,733,479
`root_title`	"The distribution-monetary rewards tradeoff and a proposal to accelerate the disruption of incumbent social networks"
`beneficiaries`	`[]`
`max_accepted_payout`	1,000,000.000 HBD
`percent_hbd`	10,000
`post_id`	605,854
`net_rshares`	660,461,569,299
`author_curate_reward`	""

properties (23)vote details (6)

voter	rshares	pct
eeks	622,681,847,471	100%
biophil	30,160,312,827	100%
fishborne	941,740,083	100%
steemuwe	135,764,272	100%
jumpman	1,044,621,446	100%
capitalism	5,497,283,200	100%

@freedomengineer · Aug 5 '16

I agree with @eeks here.

properties (22)

`author`	freedomengineer
`permlink`	re-eeks-re-ntomaino-the-distribution-monetary-rewards-tradeoff-and-a-proposal-to-accelerate-disruption-of-incumbent-social-networks-20160805t031206814z
`category`	steemit
`json_metadata`	{"tags":["steemit"],"users":["eeks"]}
`created`	2016-08-05 03:12:09
`last_update`	2016-08-05 03:12:09
`depth`	2
`children`	0
`last_payout`	2016-09-04 05:31:18
`cashout_time`	1969-12-31 23:59:59
`total_payout_value`	0.000 HBD
`curator_payout_value`	0.000 HBD
`pending_payout_value`	0.000 HBD
`promoted`	0.000 HBD
`body_length`	24
`author_reputation`	5,979,020,815,385
`root_title`	"The distribution-monetary rewards tradeoff and a proposal to accelerate the disruption of incumbent social networks"
`beneficiaries`	`[]`
`max_accepted_payout`	1,000,000.000 HBD
`percent_hbd`	10,000
`post_id`	615,799
`net_rshares`	0

@knircky · Aug 5 '16

Agree

properties (22)

`author`	knircky
`permlink`	re-eeks-re-ntomaino-the-distribution-monetary-rewards-tradeoff-and-a-proposal-to-accelerate-disruption-of-incumbent-social-networks-20160805t021054373z
`category`	steemit
`json_metadata`	{"tags":["steemit"]}
`created`	2016-08-05 02:10:54
`last_update`	2016-08-05 02:10:54
`depth`	2
`children`	0
`last_payout`	2016-09-04 05:31:18
`cashout_time`	1969-12-31 23:59:59
`total_payout_value`	0.000 HBD
`curator_payout_value`	0.000 HBD
`pending_payout_value`	0.000 HBD
`promoted`	0.000 HBD
`body_length`	5
`author_reputation`	212,905,587,244,262
`root_title`	"The distribution-monetary rewards tradeoff and a proposal to accelerate the disruption of incumbent social networks"
`beneficiaries`	`[]`
`max_accepted_payout`	1,000,000.000 HBD
`percent_hbd`	10,000
`post_id`	615,005
`net_rshares`	0

@ntomaino · Aug 4 '16 (edited)

$1.24

"People should be valued based on what they do on Steem and how effective it is just on Steem."

This seems to me like a philosophical belief rather than a practical one. Steem is not it's own planet and the reality is that lots of external forces are going to need to change for Steem to really sustain itself long-term. This distrubtion-monetary rewards tradeoff could be the one that prevents Steem from growing past the crypto-loving early adopters. Maybe my proposal isn't the best approach, but the platform needs to find ways to address this imo.

👍 eeks, blakemiles84, biophil, jumpman, jaysanz, leprechaun

`author`	ntomaino
`permlink`	re-eeks-re-ntomaino-the-distribution-monetary-rewards-tradeoff-and-a-proposal-to-accelerate-disruption-of-incumbent-social-networks-20160804t171422068z
`category`	steemit
`json_metadata`	{"tags":["steemit"]}
`created`	2016-08-04 17:14:21
`last_update`	2016-08-04 17:15:36
`depth`	2
`children`	3
`last_payout`	2016-09-04 05:31:18
`cashout_time`	1969-12-31 23:59:59
`total_payout_value`	0.934 HBD
`curator_payout_value`	0.304 HBD
`pending_payout_value`	0.000 HBD
`promoted`	0.000 HBD
`body_length`	553
`author_reputation`	19,085,142,785,364
`root_title`	"The distribution-monetary rewards tradeoff and a proposal to accelerate the disruption of incumbent social networks"
`beneficiaries`	`[]`
`max_accepted_payout`	1,000,000.000 HBD
`percent_hbd`	10,000
`post_id`	605,724
`net_rshares`	984,346,570,042
`author_curate_reward`	""

properties (23)vote details (6)

voter	rshares	pct
eeks	622,681,847,471	100%
blakemiles84	329,813,504,833	100%
leprechaun	18,545,741	0%
jaysanz	648,220,497	100%
biophil	30,160,312,827	100%
jumpman	1,024,138,673	100%

@eeks · Aug 4 '16 (edited)

$0.77

It's the philosophy of pragmatism.  :) 

I really just think this design would effectively be an exploit that would consolidate value and rewards to a select few, which already happens on Steem for other reasons.  And I am personally more interested in Steem being its own thing and seeing where the incentives evolve us.

Also in general, the bigger and more inclusive Steem, the better imo, so I'd rather everyone have a stake and see rewards.

👍 eeks, ntomaino, biophil, jumpman, leprechaun
👎 steemit4000

`author`	eeks
`permlink`	re-ntomaino-re-eeks-re-ntomaino-the-distribution-monetary-rewards-tradeoff-and-a-proposal-to-accelerate-disruption-of-incumbent-social-networks-20160804t181941922z
`category`	steemit
`json_metadata`	{"tags":["steemit"]}
`created`	2016-08-04 18:19:48
`last_update`	2016-08-04 18:21:57
`depth`	3
`children`	1
`last_payout`	2016-09-04 05:31:18
`cashout_time`	1969-12-31 23:59:59
`total_payout_value`	0.752 HBD
`curator_payout_value`	0.018 HBD
`pending_payout_value`	0.000 HBD
`promoted`	0.000 HBD
`body_length`	445
`author_reputation`	21,536,775,583,000
`root_title`	"The distribution-monetary rewards tradeoff and a proposal to accelerate the disruption of incumbent social networks"
`beneficiaries`	`[]`
`max_accepted_payout`	1,000,000.000 HBD
`percent_hbd`	10,000
`post_id`	606,946
`net_rshares`	655,750,381,658
`author_curate_reward`	""

properties (23)vote details (6)

voter	rshares	pct
steemit4000	-17,325,933,933	-100%
eeks	609,145,285,569	100%
leprechaun	927,287,084	100%
biophil	30,160,312,827	100%
ntomaino	31,819,291,438	100%
jumpman	1,024,138,673	100%

@ntomaino · Aug 4 '16

The idea wouldn't be to take away rewards from people that don't have big followings elsewhere and I don't think that would happen --there'd still be plenty of opportunities for good content creators who don't have followings elsewhere to rise to the top. The tradeoff for those people is different though; less distribution elsewhere means a lower break-even point to use Steemit (and lower rewards necessary to keep them as a result). 

The idea is just to incentivize different types of users differently -- I think Steemit has done a great job so far aligning incentives but always room for improvement (if goal is to make this thing as big as possible).

👍 jumpman

`author`	ntomaino
`permlink`	re-eeks-re-ntomaino-re-eeks-re-ntomaino-the-distribution-monetary-rewards-tradeoff-and-a-proposal-to-accelerate-disruption-of-incumbent-social-networks-20160804t184849632z
`category`	steemit
`json_metadata`	{"tags":["steemit"]}
`created`	2016-08-04 18:48:51
`last_update`	2016-08-04 18:48:51
`depth`	4
`children`	0
`last_payout`	2016-09-04 05:31:18
`cashout_time`	1969-12-31 23:59:59
`total_payout_value`	0.000 HBD
`curator_payout_value`	0.000 HBD
`pending_payout_value`	0.000 HBD
`promoted`	0.000 HBD
`body_length`	658
`author_reputation`	19,085,142,785,364
`root_title`	"The distribution-monetary rewards tradeoff and a proposal to accelerate the disruption of incumbent social networks"
`beneficiaries`	`[]`
`max_accepted_payout`	1,000,000.000 HBD
`percent_hbd`	10,000
`post_id`	607,447
`net_rshares`	1,024,138,673
`author_curate_reward`	""

properties (23)vote details (1)

voter	weight	wgt%	rshares	pct	time
jumpman	0 B		1,024,138,673	100%

@ulfa · Aug 4 '16 (edited)

$0.03

I strongly agree with @eeks
because we have to appreciate the traffic based on other people.

👍 shaka, ulfa

`author`	ulfa
`permlink`	re-ntomaino-re-eeks-re-ntomaino-the-distribution-monetary-rewards-tradeoff-and-a-proposal-to-accelerate-disruption-of-incumbent-social-networks-20160804t171621288z
`category`	steemit
`json_metadata`	{"tags":["steemit"],"users":["eeks"]}
`created`	2016-08-04 17:17:06
`last_update`	2016-08-04 17:17:42
`depth`	3
`children`	0
`last_payout`	2016-09-04 05:31:18
`cashout_time`	1969-12-31 23:59:59
`total_payout_value`	0.026 HBD
`curator_payout_value`	0.004 HBD
`pending_payout_value`	0.000 HBD
`promoted`	0.000 HBD
`body_length`	92
`author_reputation`	282,361,401,107
`root_title`	"The distribution-monetary rewards tradeoff and a proposal to accelerate the disruption of incumbent social networks"
`beneficiaries`	`[]`
`max_accepted_payout`	1,000,000.000 HBD
`percent_hbd`	10,000
`post_id`	605,802
`net_rshares`	31,040,756,607
`author_curate_reward`	""

properties (23)vote details (2)

voter	weight	wgt%	rshares	pct	time
shaka	0 B		30,850,534,550	100%
ulfa	0 B		190,222,057	100%