Viewing a response to: @theoretical/improving-the-steem-platform-for-long-term-content
I think that I can't come up with a way to sort out how to reward the fresh new content AND keep up rewards for relevant reference style content at the same time. I am, of course, not the knower and sayer of all, so perhaps someone else can come up with a way. It might require a second platform entirely.
| author | erroneous-logic |
|---|---|
| permlink | re-theoretical-improving-the-steem-platform-for-long-term-content-20160818t173713933z |
| category | theoretical |
| json_metadata | {"tags":["theoretical"]} |
| created | 2016-08-18 17:37:12 |
| last_update | 2016-08-18 17:37:12 |
| depth | 1 |
| children | 2 |
| last_payout | 2016-09-18 19:36:51 |
| 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 | 305 |
| author_reputation | 316,498,867,746 |
| root_title | "Improving the Steem platform for long-term content" |
| beneficiaries | [] |
| max_accepted_payout | 1,000,000.000 HBD |
| percent_hbd | 10,000 |
| post_id | 874,332 |
| net_rshares | 0 |
Older content would only get eyeballs if someone took it upon themselves to share it. The current platform only provides a 12 hour window and again at 30 days. So that means outside sharing, new traffic and new users, since there is no way to upvote without creating an account.
| author | markrmorrisjr |
|---|---|
| permlink | re-erroneous-logic-re-theoretical-improving-the-steem-platform-for-long-term-content-20160818t190732939z |
| category | theoretical |
| json_metadata | {"tags":["theoretical"]} |
| created | 2016-08-18 19:08:36 |
| last_update | 2016-08-18 19:08:36 |
| depth | 2 |
| children | 1 |
| last_payout | 2016-09-18 19:36:51 |
| 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 | 279 |
| author_reputation | 118,896,685,049,569 |
| root_title | "Improving the Steem platform for long-term content" |
| beneficiaries | [] |
| max_accepted_payout | 1,000,000.000 HBD |
| percent_hbd | 10,000 |
| post_id | 875,879 |
| net_rshares | 0 |
As I understand it there are two use general cases by which old content would be upvoted. 1. The author links back to their previous posts and self promotes. 2. A user discovers an author and want to look over their old content to find gems they missed when it was new. I imagine the passive influx of random users would be pretty minimal and that any substantial amount of voting would come from one of these two sources. Just trying to understand what you think authors are missing out on by using Steemit so that I can thoroughly think through the problem.
| author | proskynneo |
|---|---|
| permlink | re-markrmorrisjr-re-erroneous-logic-re-theoretical-improving-the-steem-platform-for-long-term-content-20160818t201845483z |
| category | theoretical |
| json_metadata | {"tags":["theoretical"]} |
| created | 2016-08-18 20:18:45 |
| last_update | 2016-08-18 20:18:45 |
| depth | 3 |
| children | 0 |
| last_payout | 2016-09-18 19:36:51 |
| 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 | 562 |
| author_reputation | 4,454,785,474,512 |
| root_title | "Improving the Steem platform for long-term content" |
| beneficiaries | [] |
| max_accepted_payout | 1,000,000.000 HBD |
| percent_hbd | 10,000 |
| post_id | 877,055 |
| net_rshares | 0 |
hiveblocks