create account

A case for eliminating curation rewards by snowflake

View this thread on: hive.blogpeakd.comecency.com
· @snowflake ·
$6.38
A case for eliminating curation rewards
![sfondo_ipad_mini_retina_display_117.jpeg](https://steemitimages.com/DQmRBvfJ1J7jWhaft5yuzQMfaLbQscZ15f8rhySp8854Hwn/sfondo_ipad_mini_retina_display_117.jpeg)

I know this topic has already been discussed at length in the past couple weeks but I want to revive the debate as **I firmly believe that eliminating curation rewards is essential** for steem to move forward.

Let's see how these curation rewards negatively impact the platform.

### Curation rewards create a lot of complexity and confusion for new users

These are the kind of questions newbies ask themselves: Why do all the votes on my post come up at the 30 min mark ? How can my post have 4 views and 70 votes? Why do most comments have no rewards?

### Curation rewards only benefit a small numbers of users

The vast majority of curation rewards are earned by a tiny minority. These rewards are also based on a specific algorithm. The algorithm defines the rules of the game. Most users have no idea how the rules work and the average joe won't care enough to learn them.

### Curation reward discourage whales to spread their upvotes

Because of the reward curve whales are encouraged to vote at 100% weight to earn the max curation rewards, so posts either gets a few pennies or tens of dollars. 

### Curation rewards creates centralization pressure

Guilds were meant to spread the rewards around but because of curation rewards they ended up doing the opposite. Guilds owner are encouraged to not spread their vote because if they do they will lose out on curation rewards.

### Curation rewards have turned the site into a fake system run by bots and driven by money

No businesses is going to touch steem in its current form.

### Curation rewards have forced users to change their voting behaviors

Recently I noticed something very telling is that everyone was voting at 1% on my posts. So I looked into it further and concluded that these were not bots, they were real individuals voting because vote were all made at seperate times. 
I'll be the first to admit that I often vote at 1% especially on comments. These are the signs of a broken system.


The argument for keeping curation rewards is that investors won't have any incentives to buy steem power if we remove them.
This **assumption is incorrect**, it is based on the idea that investors care about growing the number of their steem more than growing the value of steem. There is a very vocal minority in this community who are very **self centered** and believe that growing the number of steem in their wallet is the end goal. It was the same group of people that were bragging about HF16 because they wouldn't receive their inflation anymore. These individuals don't seem to understand that 1 000 000 steem is worth as much as 1 steem when the price is zero.

Another argument for keeping them is that steemit's model is based on rewarding people who contribute to the platform and curating is a form of contribution. I don't disagree with this however **curating doesn't solve a real world problem, good content naturally rises to the top.** To me the major innovation of steem is that it creates **a new model** that rewards content creator without directly relying on advertisement.
There are also a few individuals that have been very vocal against removing these rewards, these people so happens to be among the small minority that benefits a lot from curation rewards. There is definetely a conflict of interest going on there.

If we want steem to reach its **full potential**we will have to get past this and think how something can benefit the platform as a whole, not just a few persons.

Here is a quote from @denmarkguy which describes perfectly the current situation 

>Steemit is reaching that tricky stage where early adopters become resistant to change in service of "protecting their existing benefits" while also being aware that continued growth depends on making changes in such ways that the community becomes attractive to newcomers.

**The value of the platform will be a lot higher in the eyes of investors if curation rewards are removed**, no more bots, quality content, fairer distribution, less greed mentality, more appealing for other website to integrate, more comment voting, less confusing for newbies, more engagement,etc..all of these will make the platform a lot more valuable than it is now.

Eliminating curation reward will also **improve** one major issue which is **power concentration.**  Without curation rewards whales will be upvoting a lot less and will spread their vote a lot more which is essential for retention.They will also be a lot more likely to delegate their voting power because doing so will be a win win, they won't lose out on curation anymore and will finally be able to focus on growing the value of steem. 
It will also **increase engagement** a lot because active users will have a lot more stake to vote with since bots won't be voting anymore. 
Votes will be a lot more meaningfull and users's reputation will be on the line when they vote for something.


The **comment pool** will be totally unnecessary,  if curation rewards are eliminated comments will be rewarded a LOT more.
I have been very vocal about this comment pool because i think it is a terrible idea, it is not KISS at all and do not solve the underlying issue. 
I thought it was pretty bad without curation rewards but now they want to make it with curation rewards, this is even worse basically it will replicate the exact same broken system in the comment section, you will see comments worth $30 and other comments worth a few pennies, you will see whales downvote a lot and people whining even more, all this pool is going to achieve is **increase infighting** and **unfair** sentiment within the community.

Eliminating curation rewards is a much cleaner and elegant way to deal with this problem.

Here is an interesting read from @timcliff about eliminating curation rewards 
https://steemit.com/curation/@timcliff/elimination-of-curation-rewards

You can go check it out, I am going to address here only the arguments for keeping them

   _Curation rewards are currently one of the only reasons to power up / remain powered up._

From the perspective of growing your steem it is a good reason, however the **goal should be to grow the value of steem.** If the platform becomes **more valuable**, more businesses will be interested and investors will come. With curation you are targeting a very small group of investors. The majority of investors are not interested about setting up bots or curating a few hours a day, **they want passive income.** 

 _There are a huge amount of users that are actively involved in the platform through curation activities (developing bots, curation trails, guilds, manual curation, etc.)._

 Users involved in these activities are **wasting their time** because they are not adding **real value** to the platform. Bots are actually undermining the credibility of the whole site and guilds are increasing centralization. Imagine if all these users were working on productive things to **increase the value of steem.**

_Curation rewards provides a financial incentive for users to spend a very significant amount of their time discovering good content._

This is completely **unnecessary,** users will upvote good content regardless of the incentives.  Also due to curation rewards 'good content' as turned into 'content with high payouts' so you end up having people voting for garbage content just so they can pocket a lot of curation rewards.

   _The goal of the platform is to reward users for their contributions for the platform, and curating is a form of contributing.Lots of users find earning curation rewards fun._

The majority of users earn **very very little from curation rewards**. There are only a **tiny minority** who makes decent amount from curation. I don't think many users find it fun because almost everyone is subscribed to bots. And many don't have a clue about the voting algorithm. 


I am convinced that eliminating curation rewards will be a **big positive for steem**, I am myself earning a lot of these rewards every week but i can see the bigger picture and want to grow the **value of steem**. I know there is a lot of support in the community for eliminating them, Dan the creator of steem himself is in favor so let's do this guys!!
https://s15.postimg.org/sag7ibpuz/Screen_Shot_2017_03_04_at_23_46_09.png
👍  , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , and 135 others
properties (23)
authorsnowflake
permlinka-case-for-eliminating-curation-rewards
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem","steemit","busy"],"users":["denmarkguy","timcliff"],"image":["https://steemitimages.com/DQmRBvfJ1J7jWhaft5yuzQMfaLbQscZ15f8rhySp8854Hwn/sfondo_ipad_mini_retina_display_117.jpeg","https://s15.postimg.org/sag7ibpuz/Screen_Shot_2017_03_04_at_23_46_09.png"],"links":["https://steemit.com/curation/@timcliff/elimination-of-curation-rewards"],"app":"steemit/0.1","format":"markdown"}
created2017-03-05 01:05:15
last_update2017-03-05 01:05:15
depth0
children234
last_payout2017-04-06 03:28:54
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value5.370 HBD
curator_payout_value1.009 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted1.045 HBD
body_length8,462
author_reputation33,312,252,512,655
root_title"A case for eliminating curation rewards"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd0
post_id2,646,525
net_rshares31,340,523,271,791
author_curate_reward""
vote details (199)
@abh12345 ·
Well i was looking down the list of your posts and thought this one was suitable.

First of all, an apology for any 'bad-mouthing' you may have seen from myself.  I received this comment on this post that made me think i'd been too harsh - although I have tried my best to keep to data and facts.

https://steemit.com/steemit/@diabolika/how-to-live-off-poor-steemians-and-help-the-rich-get-richer-full-guide-and-128526#@valued-customer/re-abh12345-re-valued-customer-re-abh12345-re-diabolika-how-to-live-off-poor-steemians-and-help-the-rich-get-richer-full-guide-and-128526-20171113t184713258z

Ok, now that's out of the way. Business.

If the recent delegation project you've undertaken isn't proving suitable for you, would you consider an experiment...

Basically, you delegate me your SP, you take my curation rewards. 

I'm thinking with your SP, I'd be aiming for 280 SP a week.  This is a rough estimate, based on the price of Steem at .85$

As you may (or may not have read) I'd like to throw most of this at the newer accounts, try and spot the potential longer termers.  However, this may not be most profitable so i'll need to balance it out to make the rewards up.

I'm on discord/steemit.chat if you want to discuss further details.

Or you can just say, not interested!

Cheers
👍  
properties (23)
authorabh12345
permlinkre-snowflake-a-case-for-eliminating-curation-rewards-20171113t221646740z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"links":["https://steemit.com/steemit/@diabolika/how-to-live-off-poor-steemians-and-help-the-rich-get-richer-full-guide-and-128526#@valued-customer/re-abh12345-re-valued-customer-re-abh12345-re-diabolika-how-to-live-off-poor-steemians-and-help-the-rich-get-richer-full-guide-and-128526-20171113t184713258z"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2017-11-13 22:16:45
last_update2017-11-13 22:16:45
depth1
children0
last_payout2017-11-20 22:16:45
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length1,291
author_reputation1,408,615,966,842,648
root_title"A case for eliminating curation rewards"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id20,297,131
net_rshares299,946,457
author_curate_reward""
vote details (1)
@ats-david ·
$5.44
Here's what I haven't figured out yet:

If you and other users are so adamantly against voting incentives/rewards, then why aren't you declining payout on your posts? Surely, you don't want to be contributing to the greed of voters who will earn ~12% of the total rewards allocated to your posts, right?

And if the argument continues to be that voting is done on other platforms without voting rewards, then let's also get rid of posting rewards - since posting on the most popular social media sites occurs millions and millions of times per day without rewards for doing so. Let's remain consistent here, shall we?

And if we're going to remain consistent and be opposed to rewards, why are we here? Why don't we have @dan rewrite the code and make this a free platform like all the others? I suppose Steemit would then just have to attract a larger user base with only its fantastic UI functions and design.

Has the "revolution" already ended? Did I miss it?
👍  , , , , ,
properties (23)
authorats-david
permlinkre-snowflake-a-case-for-eliminating-curation-rewards-20170306t005107523z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"users":["dan"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2017-03-06 00:51:06
last_update2017-03-06 00:51:06
depth1
children20
last_payout2017-04-06 03:28:54
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value4.081 HBD
curator_payout_value1.359 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length963
author_reputation324,017,334,201,433
root_title"A case for eliminating curation rewards"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id2,653,755
net_rshares28,126,893,453,630
author_curate_reward""
vote details (6)
@abit ·
lol
properties (22)
authorabit
permlinkre-ats-david-re-snowflake-a-case-for-eliminating-curation-rewards-20170306t014524566z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2017-03-06 01:46:12
last_update2017-03-06 01:46:12
depth2
children0
last_payout2017-04-06 03:28:54
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length3
author_reputation141,171,499,037,785
root_title"A case for eliminating curation rewards"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id2,654,073
net_rshares0
@cmp2020 ·
Lol, I'm crying
properties (22)
authorcmp2020
permlinkre-ats-david-re-snowflake-a-case-for-eliminating-curation-rewards-20170306t012046632z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2017-03-06 01:20:54
last_update2017-03-06 01:20:54
depth2
children0
last_payout2017-04-06 03:28:54
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length15
author_reputation65,599,003,109,574
root_title"A case for eliminating curation rewards"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id2,653,946
net_rshares0
@ocrdu ·
Many debating tricks and very little reasoning in what you write here, and I suspect you know that. Very un-gentlemanlike, I'm used to better from you.
properties (22)
authorocrdu
permlinkre-ats-david-re-snowflake-a-case-for-eliminating-curation-rewards-20170306t144409605z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2017-03-06 14:44:15
last_update2017-03-06 14:44:15
depth2
children2
last_payout2017-04-06 03:28:54
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length151
author_reputation140,931,335,327,250
root_title"A case for eliminating curation rewards"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id2,657,715
net_rshares0
@ats-david ·
>Very un-gentlemanlike...

That's impossible. My profile specifically states that I am indeed a gentleman.
👍  
properties (23)
authorats-david
permlinkre-ocrdu-re-ats-david-re-snowflake-a-case-for-eliminating-curation-rewards-20170306t153059844z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2017-03-06 15:31:00
last_update2017-03-06 15:31:00
depth3
children1
last_payout2017-04-06 03:28:54
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length106
author_reputation324,017,334,201,433
root_title"A case for eliminating curation rewards"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id2,658,001
net_rshares4,134,419,337
author_curate_reward""
vote details (1)
@snowflake · (edited)
$0.36
>Surely, you don't want to be contributing to the greed of voters who will earn ~12% of the total rewards allocated to your posts, right?

To be honest I don't care about the money from post, I never think about this when I post, i think of the comment response. If you look at my history you will see that I hardly ever post compared to people who posts everyday. 

Also you fail to understand that I am not against curators personally, I didn't create this posts because I wanted to eliminate their gains. I created this post to improve the system and increase the value of steem.

>And if the argument continues to be that voting is done on other platforms without voting rewards, then let's also get rid of posting rewards - since posting on the most popular social media sites occurs millions and millions of times per day without rewards for doing so. Let's remain consistent here, shall we?

This is not the argument actually. This is a response to a stupid argument which is that people will stop voting if curation rewards are eliminated.

>then let's also get rid of posting rewards -

Posting rewards do not harm the system in any way, they actually bring value to the site  unlike curation rewards.
Your argument would be valid only if posts had the same bad incentives that curation rewards have which is not the case. 

>And if we're going to remain consistent and be opposed to rewards, why are we here?

There is only a tiny amount of people who actually make any significant money from curation. 
Curations rewards are not the same has authors rewards, please don't take things out of context.
👍  , ,
properties (23)
authorsnowflake
permlinkre-ats-david-re-snowflake-a-case-for-eliminating-curation-rewards-20170306t014935000z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2017-03-06 01:49:36
last_update2017-03-06 01:51:24
depth2
children10
last_payout2017-04-06 03:28:54
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.273 HBD
curator_payout_value0.091 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length1,610
author_reputation33,312,252,512,655
root_title"A case for eliminating curation rewards"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id2,654,084
net_rshares6,037,425,984,457
author_curate_reward""
vote details (3)
@ats-david · (edited)
>Also you fail to understand that I am not against curators personally, I didn't create this posts because I wanted to eliminate their gains. I created this post to improve the system and increase the value of steem.

Yes, and your plan to "increase the value of steem" is by eliminating the incentives for curators - to "eliminate their gains." 

>This is not the argument actually. This is a response to a stupid argument which is that people will stop voting if curation rewards are eliminated.

No, that was a response to the notion that "rewards aren't necessary because people will vote anyway." You have argued this point repeatedly - that users don't need monetary incentives to vote for content. The exact same is true for people who post online and do it without monetary incentives. There is no difference at all in the two arguments. Since *this* system is based on incentives for both content creators and content consumers, because they both perform necessary tasks of creation and evaluation, the reward incentives are for both types of users. If you eliminate one or heavily favor one over the other, then the incentive structure becomes imbalanced and the results become skewed, as we have observed. 

>Posting rewards do not harm the system in any way, they actually bring value to the site unlike curation rewards.

What is your proof that the existence of curation rewards "harms" the system? And why do you believe that posting rewards do not? And are you not aware of the spam, plagiarism, and sybil attempts to game the system? I don't see how you can simply say that one incentive is bad and the other is good when both *can* be gamed, both *are* gamed, and both were designed to achieve specific results for the platform. But for all of the gaming that occurs (and was known *would* occur), the incentive structure has been proven to work for both creation and curation.

>Your argument would be valid only if posts had the same bad incentives that curation rewards have which is not the case.

My argument is valid because people do post and do vote on other sites without monetary incentives. This is a fact. Let's not pretend that voting is done on other sites for free, therefore, we don't need to incentivize it. And let's not pretend that only voters are driven by the desire to earn. This isn't why curation is incentivized on Steemit. It's incentivized because this platform was created explicitly for the purposes of rewarding social media users for their social media activities.  

>There is only a tiny amount of people who actually make any significant money from curation.

This is irrelevant. The average user isn't supposed to be making "significant money" from upvoting posts in the first place. And I would argue that the average user isn't supposed to be making "significant money" from posting either. But users do have the *opportunity* to earn *some* money from being active on the platform. This isn't a job and this isn't supposed to be a UBI. It's simply an onboarding mechanism for a cryptocurrency. That's one of very few things that this site actually does well, in my opinion. 

>Curations rewards are not the same has authors rewards, please don't take things out of context.

Nothing was taken "out of context." I was simply applying the arguments to posting rewards.
👍  
properties (23)
authorats-david
permlinkre-snowflake-re-ats-david-re-snowflake-a-case-for-eliminating-curation-rewards-20170306t152601227z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2017-03-06 15:26:03
last_update2017-03-06 16:01:00
depth3
children4
last_payout2017-04-06 03:28:54
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length3,323
author_reputation324,017,334,201,433
root_title"A case for eliminating curation rewards"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id2,657,971
net_rshares14,414,499,826
author_curate_reward""
vote details (1)
@clayop ·
I want to add more. If one posts garbage, it can be downvoted and ones reputation will be harmed. There is both positive/negative feedback system on posting reward. However, there is no feedback on one's voting itself, and there is no costs from voting.

Equating no curation reward with no posting reward does not make sense IMO, and I agree that badly designed (mis-aligned) incentives is the target here.
properties (22)
authorclayop
permlinkre-snowflake-re-ats-david-re-snowflake-a-case-for-eliminating-curation-rewards-20170306t062102391z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2017-03-06 06:21:03
last_update2017-03-06 06:21:03
depth3
children4
last_payout2017-04-06 03:28:54
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length407
author_reputation270,845,899,918,618
root_title"A case for eliminating curation rewards"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id2,655,081
net_rshares0
@snowflake ·
>Surely, you don't want to be contributing to the greed of voters who will earn ~12% 

This is the saddest part actually, people are fighting for crumbs and they want these crumbs so badly that they can't see the enormous value that would come from removing these crumbs.
properties (22)
authorsnowflake
permlinkre-ats-david-re-snowflake-a-case-for-eliminating-curation-rewards-20170306t020857800z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2017-03-06 02:08:57
last_update2017-03-06 02:08:57
depth2
children3
last_payout2017-04-06 03:28:54
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length271
author_reputation33,312,252,512,655
root_title"A case for eliminating curation rewards"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id2,654,157
net_rshares0
@ats-david ·
$5.88
>This is the saddest part actually...

No, the saddest part is that the rewards are *only* 12% because they have been reduced from 50% to 25%, minus the reverse auction. This is the reason why you're seeing more automation for voting. It has to do with that whole *incentive* thing. When the rewards for spending time/energy on a specific task are reduced, you tend to get less of it or a lower quality, or both. Or you get automation, which can result in the same outcome.
👍  , , ,
properties (23)
authorats-david
permlinkre-snowflake-re-ats-david-re-snowflake-a-case-for-eliminating-curation-rewards-20170306t152944530z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2017-03-06 15:29:45
last_update2017-03-06 15:29:45
depth3
children2
last_payout2017-04-06 03:28:54
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value4.411 HBD
curator_payout_value1.470 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length473
author_reputation324,017,334,201,433
root_title"A case for eliminating curation rewards"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id2,657,993
net_rshares29,319,444,289,622
author_curate_reward""
vote details (4)
@benjojo ·
Excellent....let's remove these unwholesome curation rewards! There is so much potential within the Steem economy, the curation rewards won't be missed in the end. If dan is in favour and clearly many others, let's get on with it...
👍  
properties (23)
authorbenjojo
permlinkre-snowflake-a-case-for-eliminating-curation-rewards-20170305t074613257z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2017-03-05 07:46:12
last_update2017-03-05 07:46:12
depth1
children0
last_payout2017-04-06 03:28:54
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length232
author_reputation120,749,050,383,122
root_title"A case for eliminating curation rewards"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id2,648,057
net_rshares34,351,453,914
author_curate_reward""
vote details (1)
@clayop ·
As one argued this thing 12 days ago in [this post](https://steemit.com/steem/@clayop/revisiting-curation-reward-hot-coffee-cold-coffee-and-lukewarm-coffee), I agree with you.
Voting is using power on reward allocation, and it can give psychological satisfaction. Arguments saying "No incentives on voting leads no votes" is very narrow understanding of human behaviors from the perspectives of both economics and psychology. People are already voting without any incentives, and even paying for being influential (Some streaming services have this business model).

For me, the only concern is reducing incentives to hold SP from the perspective of investors, since curation reward is now a way to to earn profits (which is totally wrongly aligned with the original goal of "curation"). Inactive reward can  be one more option, or we can increase SP rewards.

**Voting should not be free lunch**
properties (22)
authorclayop
permlinkre-snowflake-a-case-for-eliminating-curation-rewards-20170305t030655406z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"links":["https://steemit.com/steem/@clayop/revisiting-curation-reward-hot-coffee-cold-coffee-and-lukewarm-coffee"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2017-03-05 03:06:57
last_update2017-03-05 03:06:57
depth1
children13
last_payout2017-04-06 03:28:54
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length896
author_reputation270,845,899,918,618
root_title"A case for eliminating curation rewards"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id2,647,032
net_rshares0
@smooth ·
> Arguments saying "No incentives on voting leads no votes" is very narrow understanding of human behaviors from the perspectives of both economics and psychology.

In an extreme sense yes, but voter apathy is widely observed too.
properties (22)
authorsmooth
permlinkre-clayop-re-snowflake-a-case-for-eliminating-curation-rewards-20170306t071732700z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2017-03-06 07:17:33
last_update2017-03-06 07:17:33
depth2
children1
last_payout2017-04-06 03:28:54
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length230
author_reputation253,602,537,834,068
root_title"A case for eliminating curation rewards"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id2,655,288
net_rshares0
@clayop ·
Less vote is an obvious result, but voter apathy is not necessarily true. And kind of apathy seems rather good than wrongly incentivized votes.
properties (22)
authorclayop
permlinkre-smooth-re-clayop-re-snowflake-a-case-for-eliminating-curation-rewards-20170306t081208713z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2017-03-06 08:12:09
last_update2017-03-06 08:12:09
depth3
children0
last_payout2017-04-06 03:28:54
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length143
author_reputation270,845,899,918,618
root_title"A case for eliminating curation rewards"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id2,655,526
net_rshares0
@snowflake · (edited)
>For me, the only concern is reducing incentives to hold SP from the perspective of investors, since curation reward is now a way to to earn profits (which is totally wrongly aligned with the original goal of "curation"). Inactive reward can be one more option, or we can increase SP rewards.

The incentives to hold SP will not be reduced because eliminating curation rewards will make the platform a lot more valuable, it will improve power concentration a lot and would make it a lot more appealing for business to integrate because of this very reason. You say curation rewards is a way to make profit, can you tell me one single investors who earned profit from curation reward? There are none because the value of steem has only gone down.  

>Inactive reward can be one more option, or we can increase SP rewards.

I think that inflation can be used to incentivize people to buy steem, I actually created a post about it.
So yeah I think using a portion of the reward pool to distribute to stake holder is a good idea and I also liked the idea of only rewarding inactive users.
I  think steem power should be removed entirely, many in the community agree with this. It would be a lot less confusing for newbies to have 2 currencies instead of 3.  Basically your voting power would be the steem in your wallet and users would be able to vote with steem that is at least 7 days old to prevent double voting.
properties (22)
authorsnowflake
permlinkre-clayop-re-snowflake-a-case-for-eliminating-curation-rewards-20170305t034247600z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2017-03-05 03:42:48
last_update2017-03-05 03:45:30
depth2
children10
last_payout2017-04-06 03:28:54
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length1,412
author_reputation33,312,252,512,655
root_title"A case for eliminating curation rewards"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id2,647,221
net_rshares0
@clayop ·
$6.35
I intentionally used "make profit" to make it easier, but actually it's compensate loss from inflation. SP holders who don't curate are losing about 8% annually, but if they curate, it will decrease to around 4~6%.
Meanwhile, STEEM holders are losing 9.5% a year, since they don't get 15% of inflation reward. Merely removing curation reward keeps the difference (15%) same, but if we change curation reward to inflation reward, the difference will become around 33%.

Details can differ, but I think the core idea is the same, as I mentioned in my last sentence. Voting is not free lunch.
👍  , ,
properties (23)
authorclayop
permlinkre-snowflake-re-clayop-re-snowflake-a-case-for-eliminating-curation-rewards-20170305t042830709z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2017-03-05 04:28:30
last_update2017-03-05 04:28:30
depth3
children4
last_payout2017-04-06 03:28:54
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value4.765 HBD
curator_payout_value1.588 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length589
author_reputation270,845,899,918,618
root_title"A case for eliminating curation rewards"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id2,647,404
net_rshares30,547,823,123,189
author_curate_reward""
vote details (3)
@sigmajin ·
>I think steem power should be removed entirely, many in the community agree with this.

this isn't a bad idea.... 

>I think that inflation can be used to incentivize people to buy steem, I actually created a post about it.

This is lol-bad.  Lets print money and give it away for free... that will increase its value.   Spoiler alert -- it won't.
👍  
properties (23)
authorsigmajin
permlinkre-snowflake-re-clayop-re-snowflake-a-case-for-eliminating-curation-rewards-20170306t195410723z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2017-03-06 19:54:09
last_update2017-03-06 19:54:09
depth3
children4
last_payout2017-04-06 03:28:54
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length348
author_reputation35,847,511,233,614
root_title"A case for eliminating curation rewards"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id2,659,691
net_rshares11,831,723,674
author_curate_reward""
vote details (1)
@cmp2020 · (edited)
I'm a musician, how 'bout while we're at it, we say "No more rewards for anything but music!"? Just because you don't use curation rewards to make an income doesn't mean other people don't. People are not going to vote here unless they're paid to do it. They can already do that on Facebook or Instagram, where the website (app) is actually aesthetically pleasing, and doesn't look like a fricken word document with a blue header (and a crappy editor). Eliminating curation rewards would send away not only curators, but also authors who are rational and realize that the platform can't sustain itself anymore and decide to get out while they can. I am deeply frightened that you people are bringing this back to the table. Read this when you get a chance: http://www.investopedia.com/university/economics/
👍  
properties (23)
authorcmp2020
permlinkre-snowflake-a-case-for-eliminating-curation-rewards-20170305t150051031z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"links":["http://www.investopedia.com/university/economics/"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2017-03-05 15:00:57
last_update2017-03-05 15:02:45
depth1
children12
last_payout2017-04-06 03:28:54
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length806
author_reputation65,599,003,109,574
root_title"A case for eliminating curation rewards"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id2,649,978
net_rshares15,636,628,558
author_curate_reward""
vote details (1)
@ocrdu · (edited)
> People are not going to vote here unless they're paid to do it.

Opinion found in some economic theories, not fact. People are motivated by other things than money as well.

And kindly stop referring to economics 1.01, it doesn't prove your point, and there are many economic theories to choose from, most of which are flawed. Also, it doesn't make you look knowledgable, it makes you look arrogant and condescending, and it is as close to an ad hominem as makes no difference.
👍  ,
properties (23)
authorocrdu
permlinkre-cmp2020-re-snowflake-a-case-for-eliminating-curation-rewards-20170307t001939045z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2017-03-07 00:19:39
last_update2017-03-07 01:14:48
depth2
children0
last_payout2017-04-06 03:28:54
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length479
author_reputation140,931,335,327,250
root_title"A case for eliminating curation rewards"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id2,661,536
net_rshares55,298,965,001
author_curate_reward""
vote details (2)
@snowflake ·
>I'm a musician, how 'bout while we're at it, we say "No more rewards for anything but music!"? Just because you don't use curation rewards to make an income doesn't mean other people don't.

It's not about who earns money on the platform, you need to get rid of this mindset of " how you are going to profit from steem" and instead think of how " to increase the value of the platform"
Curation ( 80-90% of which is done by bots) bring absolutely no value to the platform, a post whether its music, art or photo will bring value to the platform.

>People are not going to vote here unless they're paid to do it.

They are not voting today already, 90% of votes is done by bots.

>Eliminating curation rewards would send away not only curators, but also authors who are rational and realize that the platform can't sustain itself anymore and decide to get out while they can

How eliminating curation rewards will send authors away from the site? Why would the platform be any less sustainable?   I don't follow   The platform will be a lot more sustainable, users will have more influence which will incentivize them to buy more steem power and the site will be a lot more valuable in the eyes of investors. Do you really expect businesses to integrate a content reward system run by 90% bots? It's not going to happen.
properties (22)
authorsnowflake
permlinkre-cmp2020-re-snowflake-a-case-for-eliminating-curation-rewards-20170305t193157500z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2017-03-05 19:31:57
last_update2017-03-05 19:31:57
depth2
children10
last_payout2017-04-06 03:28:54
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length1,320
author_reputation33,312,252,512,655
root_title"A case for eliminating curation rewards"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id2,651,920
net_rshares0
@cmp2020 ·
$6.12
> how you are going to profit from steem" and instead think of how " to increase the value of the platform"

New users don't care about increasing the value of the platform. Like it or not, they're in it to make profit (as are most voters and authors) (I.E. you're being paid for this article therefore you are making profit)
>They are not voting today already, 90% of votes is done by bots

That means 90 percent of author rewards are also currently given out (diversified) by bots

>How eliminating curation rewards will send authors away from the site?

I and many others would leave

>Why would the platform be any less sustainable?

Because most of the voters that give the platform its value would leave. The loss of voters would cause demand for steem to leave, and the value of steem to plummet.
>users will have more influence which will incentivize them to buy more steem power and the site will be a lot more valuable in the eyes of investors.

No, it will alienate many people who are voting to get curation rewards (causing them to leave and leave only authors) and steemit to look unattractive to investors.

>Do you really expect businesses to integrate a content reward system run by 90% bots? 

Yes, Google uses bots yet many businesses depend on their search engine.
Again, I'd recommend you read this article:
http://www.investopedia.com/university/economics/

As well as this article:
http://www.investopedia.com/university/economics/economics3.asp
👍  , , ,
properties (23)
authorcmp2020
permlinkre-snowflake-re-cmp2020-re-snowflake-a-case-for-eliminating-curation-rewards-20170305t194902567z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"links":["http://www.investopedia.com/university/economics/","http://www.investopedia.com/university/economics/economics3.asp"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2017-03-05 19:49:09
last_update2017-03-05 19:49:09
depth3
children5
last_payout2017-04-06 03:28:54
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value4.595 HBD
curator_payout_value1.523 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length1,468
author_reputation65,599,003,109,574
root_title"A case for eliminating curation rewards"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id2,652,046
net_rshares29,940,445,996,828
author_curate_reward""
vote details (4)
@smooth ·
> Curation ( 80-90% of which is done by bots

You've repeated this figure many times in this thread but it is wrong. Only about 20-30% of _vote power_ comes from bots (vote count is meaningless in a stake-weighted system) and even that probably understates the human influence because a lot of that voting may be _performed_ by a bot but is _decided_ by a human primarily for influence and not profit-maximizing reasons (for example deciding on their favorite posters or types of posts they want to support, or in some cases as a delegated vote decided by another human).
properties (22)
authorsmooth
permlinkre-snowflake-re-cmp2020-re-snowflake-a-case-for-eliminating-curation-rewards-20170306t065648900z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2017-03-06 06:56:48
last_update2017-03-06 06:56:48
depth3
children3
last_payout2017-04-06 03:28:54
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length571
author_reputation253,602,537,834,068
root_title"A case for eliminating curation rewards"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id2,655,175
net_rshares0
@cmp2020 · (edited)
[Nesting]
No, I've invested something more valuable to me than money, my music (I spent months writing my symphony). I also invested money I earned that I had in bitcoin. I also kept the money I earned here on the platform ($800). I am a high school kid with no reliable income to invest. (Thanks for trying to make this personal).
properties (22)
authorcmp2020
permlinkre-snowflake-a-case-for-eliminating-curation-rewards-20170306t011402661z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2017-03-06 01:14:06
last_update2017-03-06 01:32:09
depth1
children1
last_payout2017-04-06 03:28:54
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length331
author_reputation65,599,003,109,574
root_title"A case for eliminating curation rewards"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id2,653,903
net_rshares0
@snowflake ·
Sorry if you took this personal I am not trying to say that not investing real money is bad, it's just an observation that I made. Real investors with big money don't care about earning 10% annum through curation, they want 10-100x.
properties (22)
authorsnowflake
permlinkre-cmp2020-re-snowflake-a-case-for-eliminating-curation-rewards-20170306t013139200z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2017-03-06 01:31:39
last_update2017-03-06 01:31:39
depth2
children0
last_payout2017-04-06 03:28:54
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length232
author_reputation33,312,252,512,655
root_title"A case for eliminating curation rewards"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id2,654,019
net_rshares0
@coininstant ·
What, if you eliminate curation rewards, then I am cashing out and moving on!  Curation rewards are half the reason I am here, that would be a deal breaker!  Had too remove my automated robotic vote on this post.
👍  ,
properties (23)
authorcoininstant
permlinkre-snowflake-a-case-for-eliminating-curation-rewards-20170306t174605885z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2017-03-06 17:46:06
last_update2017-03-06 17:46:06
depth1
children1
last_payout2017-04-06 03:28:54
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length212
author_reputation88,155,862,363,129
root_title"A case for eliminating curation rewards"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id2,658,853
net_rshares58,120,551,393
author_curate_reward""
vote details (2)
@snowflake · (edited)
I'm going to sound a little harsh here but at least I'm being honest and its nothing personal
Steemit doesn't need people like you who do not engage in the community and only let their bots running to earn a few pennies per day. It needs users who actually engage, bring their friends to the site and interact with the platform the same way they would on any other social media site.
You bring absolutely no value to the platform by just letting your bot blindly vote and not getting involved in the community.
👍  
properties (23)
authorsnowflake
permlinkre-coininstant-re-snowflake-a-case-for-eliminating-curation-rewards-20170306t190044800z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2017-03-06 19:00:45
last_update2017-03-06 19:01:03
depth2
children0
last_payout2017-04-06 03:28:54
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length510
author_reputation33,312,252,512,655
root_title"A case for eliminating curation rewards"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id2,659,278
net_rshares31,697,645,775
author_curate_reward""
vote details (1)
@donkeypong ·
Upvoted for a great contribution to the discussion. I'm not sure I agree with eliminating curation rewards (there are pros and cons), but it should be part of the conversation.
👍  
properties (23)
authordonkeypong
permlinkre-snowflake-a-case-for-eliminating-curation-rewards-20170305t031028009z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2017-03-05 03:10:36
last_update2017-03-05 03:10:36
depth1
children6
last_payout2017-04-06 03:28:54
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length176
author_reputation431,667,636,679,304
root_title"A case for eliminating curation rewards"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id2,647,045
net_rshares12,383,500,140
author_curate_reward""
vote details (1)
@snowflake ·
Can you give me the cons please because I honestly can't see any :P
properties (22)
authorsnowflake
permlinkre-donkeypong-re-snowflake-a-case-for-eliminating-curation-rewards-20170305t034444200z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2017-03-05 03:44:45
last_update2017-03-05 03:44:45
depth2
children5
last_payout2017-04-06 03:28:54
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length67
author_reputation33,312,252,512,655
root_title"A case for eliminating curation rewards"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id2,647,236
net_rshares0
@clayop ·
One may argue that curation trails will have no income to sustain. But I think curation guilds can have alternative way to compensate curators, e.g. writing a post.
properties (22)
authorclayop
permlinkre-snowflake-re-donkeypong-re-snowflake-a-case-for-eliminating-curation-rewards-20170305t051631550z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2017-03-05 05:16:33
last_update2017-03-05 05:16:33
depth3
children0
last_payout2017-04-06 03:28:54
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length164
author_reputation270,845,899,918,618
root_title"A case for eliminating curation rewards"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id2,647,547
net_rshares0
@donkeypong ·
$6.60
Others have written on this. It's not my expertise. But I'd see the main cons (to eliminating curation rewards) as being: 

(1) A lack of incentive to keep the site organized and clean. I know you addressed this in your post, but I still feel it would be a risk to throw that away (until proven otherwise, maybe on a testnet first?). 

(2) Part of me believes this thing works much better when people have a variety of things to do, can have fun, and stay occupied. A larger comment reward pool will be huge, since not everyone wants to write long articles. I'd like to see the site design accommodate (and the community be able to accept) some shorter length content and alternative types of content as well (news, links, video, music, FAQs, etc.). 

But the idea of paying people to vote is very interesting. Voting is something a lot of people can do and  it may attract users who are not as interested in posting or commenting. 

Could rep systems be tied into voting somehow, so that there still would be some incentive to curate the site, aside from a monetary one?
👍  , , ,
properties (23)
authordonkeypong
permlinkre-snowflake-re-donkeypong-re-snowflake-a-case-for-eliminating-curation-rewards-20170305t044310070z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2017-03-05 04:43:18
last_update2017-03-05 04:43:18
depth3
children3
last_payout2017-04-06 03:28:54
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value4.953 HBD
curator_payout_value1.651 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length1,071
author_reputation431,667,636,679,304
root_title"A case for eliminating curation rewards"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id2,647,445
net_rshares31,180,854,811,759
author_curate_reward""
vote details (4)
@ducky9605 ·
I'm new here and still studying and learning at the same time. 
Curation rewards also made me think that only whales can benifit
the rewards, since I'm a neophyte to this site, somehow confusion about how to earn. My little contribution to the site made me feel unimportant. But if @snowflake can convince those people involved in the curation for the betterment of the community, I would appreciate it very much.
Thank you for the enlightenment.
👍  
properties (23)
authorducky9605
permlinkre-snowflake-a-case-for-eliminating-curation-rewards-20170305t013348689z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"users":["snowflake"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2017-03-05 01:33:54
last_update2017-03-05 01:33:54
depth1
children0
last_payout2017-04-06 03:28:54
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length446
author_reputation427,460,973,391
root_title"A case for eliminating curation rewards"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id2,646,690
net_rshares376,226,358
author_curate_reward""
vote details (1)
@edje · (edited)
You have certainly a good point!

I'm now 2 months active on the platform and do notice that posting rewards are much more rewarding than curation rewards.

I do curate; I vote for those posts I liked. But I may only vote 5 to 10 times a day on posts since I generally only vote for posts that I've read and like. I do vote on comments; When in a conversation I generally do vote for all the replies to show my appreciation.

Interestingly, with all the bots in the network, I can create a 'shit' post, get 1 or 2 people voting 100% on it and 100 bots and I've earned more than days of voting. Although I'm advised to setup auto voting, I still have kind of an issue with auto voting; Auto voting does not help content/post quality at all; Also auto voting may increase my rewards through curation rewards, I think the total sum of rewards I can get by maximising auto voting is still very very small to author rewards. Most of the days my voting power stays way above 90%.
👍  
properties (23)
authoredje
permlinkre-snowflake-a-case-for-eliminating-curation-rewards-20170305t013903595z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2017-03-05 01:39:03
last_update2017-03-05 01:45:45
depth1
children0
last_payout2017-04-06 03:28:54
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length973
author_reputation182,981,833,957,909
root_title"A case for eliminating curation rewards"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id2,646,708
net_rshares12,095,511,764
author_curate_reward""
vote details (1)
@etcmike ·
If this proposal were to go through, then my question would be:

**What value would there be in accumulating or buying  STEEM Power?**

If holding STEEM Power has no benefit then one would constantly be selling STEEM to convert it to a measure of value.  The constant selling would drive the price of STEEM down which would further encourage one to sell STEEM as soon as they get it from a post or comment.

I am trying to understand what the value of holding or accumulating STEEM would have if there was no benefit in holding it.  What ever system is developed has to uphold a market for STEEM where people want to buy it because it has value.

Thanks in advance for helping me understand,
Mike
👍  , , ,
properties (23)
authoretcmike
permlinkre-snowflake-a-case-for-eliminating-curation-rewards-20170305t030459764z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2017-03-05 03:04:57
last_update2017-03-05 03:04:57
depth1
children5
last_payout2017-04-06 03:28:54
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length696
author_reputation534,676,096,189,306
root_title"A case for eliminating curation rewards"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id2,647,022
net_rshares106,889,499,803
author_curate_reward""
vote details (4)
@bryan-imhoff ·
$6.66
If curation rewards were eliminated, I'd favor a portion of that now freed up rewards pool to go to higher interest rewards on holding SP. This would give one reason.
I think the ability to influence payouts and reward content you care about is a good incentive on its own. It will also become more self serving in a way as community features roll out. Voting activity i think will naturally become more insular. Most people will interact within a few communities of their interest. If a community as a whole has more SP among its members and is active and engaged, they all will earn a greater percentage of the rewards pool. When I vote up someone and thereby give them a few Steem power, the next time they upvote me, their vote is more valuable to me. It's not a planned collusion, just a natural organic behavior that creates mini economies within the broader network. 
I also recall an app someone built months ago, where you could look and see your top supporters on a post in terms of the payout value their votes contributed. Anyone remember this and have a link? Imagine Patreon and KickStarter type programs set up with Steem. Transferring Steem directly would be one method of funding, but clearly votes can fund projects as well. I think voting is genius because it is essentially a tipping system that doesn't feel like taking money out of your own pocket, though in a roundabout way you are. Rather than paying directly into funding campaigns, I could envision people buying and holding SP with the value of their votes being calculated in $ amount by an app such as the one described, which would determine supporter level. You could essentially power up and earn KickStarter and Patreon backer type rewards on a regular basis without ever touching your underlying principle investment. 
I'd also support communities having some kind of cost either for formation or upkeep that would require Steem to either be held as SP or burned like with promoted posts now.
In short (too late!) I don't see curation as the killer reason to hold Steem and think the elimination of curation rewards could be viable.
👍  , , ,
properties (23)
authorbryan-imhoff
permlinkre-etcmike-re-snowflake-a-case-for-eliminating-curation-rewards-20170305t071103579z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2017-03-05 07:11:03
last_update2017-03-05 07:11:03
depth2
children1
last_payout2017-04-06 03:28:54
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value4.994 HBD
curator_payout_value1.664 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length2,117
author_reputation71,780,425,099,152
root_title"A case for eliminating curation rewards"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id2,647,954
net_rshares31,318,238,519,909
author_curate_reward""
vote details (4)
@snowflake · (edited)
>Voting activity i think will naturally become more insular

That's a good point and I've said this before steem will have so many different kind of content that is completely irrelevant to most people that curating this content will make no sense. Why would people care about upvoting family picture of people they never heard of? This is why the concept of curating for money is flawed because it goes against the natural will of the people.
👍  
properties (23)
authorsnowflake
permlinkre-bryan-imhoff-re-etcmike-re-snowflake-a-case-for-eliminating-curation-rewards-20170305t195148900z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2017-03-05 19:51:48
last_update2017-03-05 19:52:06
depth3
children0
last_payout2017-04-06 03:28:54
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length443
author_reputation33,312,252,512,655
root_title"A case for eliminating curation rewards"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id2,652,061
net_rshares39,059,053,364
author_curate_reward""
vote details (1)
@snowflake ·
$0.02
Steem power by definition is meant to give you power. Unfortunately 99% of people don't understand the purpose of steem power because only 0.2% can use this tool.
The benefit of holding steem power is to increase your influence, it's like a game the more you have the more power you have. 
Eliminating curation rewards would make this game a lot clearer because it will give influence to those who are active. 
In terms of financial incentives steem is like any other crypto, if you believe in the project and think its value will increase then you accumulate some, as the price increase the amount of reward you will be able to allocate will also increase.

>The constant selling would drive the price of STEEM down which would further encourage one to sell STEEM as soon as they get it from a post or comment.

This is already happening because the system is broken, it was meant to be a system where steem power gives you influence but turned out to be a system where only 0.2% can play the game. This needs to be reversed asap to bring the value of steem back up and eliminating curation rewards is an easy way to do it.
👍  
properties (23)
authorsnowflake
permlinkre-etcmike-re-snowflake-a-case-for-eliminating-curation-rewards-20170305t032738800z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2017-03-05 03:27:39
last_update2017-03-05 03:27:39
depth2
children2
last_payout2017-04-06 03:28:54
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.015 HBD
curator_payout_value0.005 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length1,124
author_reputation33,312,252,512,655
root_title"A case for eliminating curation rewards"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id2,647,150
net_rshares735,923,201,406
author_curate_reward""
vote details (1)
@abit ·
Influence on this platform has no value unless the platform succeeded already.
Chicken and egg.

>Eliminating curation rewards would make this game a lot clearer because it will give influence to those who are active.

This is not necessarily true. Big players still have more influences even if curation rewards is killed. They're active: they're curating manually or with a bot or delegated to others.
properties (22)
authorabit
permlinkre-snowflake-re-etcmike-re-snowflake-a-case-for-eliminating-curation-rewards-20170305t213340125z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2017-03-05 21:34:27
last_update2017-03-05 21:34:27
depth3
children1
last_payout2017-04-06 03:28:54
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length403
author_reputation141,171,499,037,785
root_title"A case for eliminating curation rewards"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id2,652,809
net_rshares0
@everythink · (edited)
100% agreed with that. May I translate you article to Russian network Golos?
Resteemed and promoted.
Here is my translated version of your article: https://golos.io/steem/@everythink/otmena-voznagrazhdenii-za-kuratorstvo-perevod-posta-snowflake
Please give me a note if your don't like that I've published it on Golos that way.
👍  ,
properties (23)
authoreverythink
permlinkre-snowflake-a-case-for-eliminating-curation-rewards-20170305t103136629z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"app":"steemit/0.1","links":["https://golos.io/steem/@everythink/otmena-voznagrazhdenii-za-kuratorstvo-perevod-posta-snowflake"]}
created2017-03-05 10:31:36
last_update2017-03-05 14:54:03
depth1
children1
last_payout2017-04-06 03:28:54
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length327
author_reputation4,677,402,812,046
root_title"A case for eliminating curation rewards"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id2,648,634
net_rshares77,368,266,387
author_curate_reward""
vote details (2)
@snowflake ·
>May I translate you article to Russian network Golos?

Sure, no problem
properties (22)
authorsnowflake
permlinkre-everythink-re-snowflake-a-case-for-eliminating-curation-rewards-20170305t191714700z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2017-03-05 19:17:15
last_update2017-03-05 19:17:15
depth2
children0
last_payout2017-04-06 03:28:54
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length72
author_reputation33,312,252,512,655
root_title"A case for eliminating curation rewards"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id2,651,844
net_rshares0
@flauwy ·
$1.59
Wow, what a post I stumbled upon here. Great points. 

Obviously there are many businesses now using the curation reward system but also many new apps build on Steem like Dtube, Viewly, Steepshot, Zappl and now Mangosteem Chat. Also the price is way up to when this post was written. 

Regarding all that, __what are your thoughts on curation rewards now after half a year?__
👍  ,
properties (23)
authorflauwy
permlinkre-snowflake-a-case-for-eliminating-curation-rewards-20170901t062101291z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2017-09-01 06:21:15
last_update2017-09-01 06:21:15
depth1
children0
last_payout2017-09-08 06:21:15
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value1.198 HBD
curator_payout_value0.396 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length375
author_reputation296,259,911,900,510
root_title"A case for eliminating curation rewards"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id13,521,700
net_rshares428,428,560,973
author_curate_reward""
vote details (2)
@freebornangel · (edited)
@sigmajin has shown that mining curation awards with bots has not proven to be a problem.
Removing curation awards takes away one of the only positives I see on the platform.
Why would I care enough to curate if the payout is the same either way?
I'd let my steemvoter run, but I would also stop spreading the love as much,...there wouldn't be a point in running my vote power down.
Fix the curves and keep the rewards,...
👍  , ,
properties (23)
authorfreebornangel
permlinkre-snowflake-a-case-for-eliminating-curation-rewards-20170306t021840493z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"users":["sigmajin"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2017-03-06 02:18:42
last_update2017-03-06 02:20:45
depth1
children8
last_payout2017-04-06 03:28:54
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length422
author_reputation171,005,551,503,977
root_title"A case for eliminating curation rewards"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id2,654,195
net_rshares23,712,375,461
author_curate_reward""
vote details (3)
@snowflake ·
>Why would I care enough to curate if the payout is the same either way?

Maybe because you like what you read? And you want to rewards a fellow steemian?
👍  , ,
properties (23)
authorsnowflake
permlinkre-freebornangel-re-snowflake-a-case-for-eliminating-curation-rewards-20170306t023922200z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2017-03-06 02:39:21
last_update2017-03-06 02:39:21
depth2
children7
last_payout2017-04-06 03:28:54
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length154
author_reputation33,312,252,512,655
root_title"A case for eliminating curation rewards"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id2,654,275
net_rshares41,622,238,794
author_curate_reward""
vote details (3)
@freebornangel ·
$5.88
Yeah, I'd still vote, but the game wouldn't hold the same appeal.

I recognize that your way could be given a chance.
Hopefully the new curves will mitigate against negatives you list.

I have noticed the lack of  0.0 payouts in cashout, so the top must have come down some.
Maybe the whales are voting less?
Trending is definitely lower.

I think most of your qualms are corrected with a less extreme reward curve.

Cutting curation rewards would be akin to chopping of an arm and a leg, they are 1/3 of the equation here, and major surgery.
As a low reward content creator, no fault but my own, curation awards make being here a little more joyful as I can earn something, at least.
👍  , ,
properties (23)
authorfreebornangel
permlinkre-snowflake-re-freebornangel-re-snowflake-a-case-for-eliminating-curation-rewards-20170306t030529799z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2017-03-06 03:05:30
last_update2017-03-06 03:05:30
depth3
children6
last_payout2017-04-06 03:28:54
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value4.408 HBD
curator_payout_value1.469 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length684
author_reputation171,005,551,503,977
root_title"A case for eliminating curation rewards"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id2,654,379
net_rshares29,307,421,746,350
author_curate_reward""
vote details (3)
@gduran ·
Eliminating bots would be great, but without incentives, who would vote?
properties (22)
authorgduran
permlinkre-snowflake-a-case-for-eliminating-curation-rewards-20170305t011928669z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2017-03-05 01:19:33
last_update2017-03-05 01:19:33
depth1
children27
last_payout2017-04-06 03:28:54
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length72
author_reputation58,683,119,745,305
root_title"A case for eliminating curation rewards"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id2,646,611
net_rshares0
@clayop ·
Who gets more psychic income (by being influential) will vote, while for-profit bots obviously won't.
Assuming an extreme case. If no one votes except one person with 100 SP. Now, 100 SP makes any changes on rewards, but in this case he/she can give a whole reward to a post/author by upvote. If the one were you, would you vote or not? That voting must be much more enjoyable than now, and will give more psychic income. I would say, he/she definitely will vote.
properties (22)
authorclayop
permlinkre-gduran-re-snowflake-a-case-for-eliminating-curation-rewards-20170305t031113245z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2017-03-05 03:11:15
last_update2017-03-05 03:11:15
depth2
children14
last_payout2017-04-06 03:28:54
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length463
author_reputation270,845,899,918,618
root_title"A case for eliminating curation rewards"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id2,647,048
net_rshares0
@abit ·
Nah, if there are a million posts on the platform but he/she can only give out one vote, perhaps he/she won't vote, for the fairness, or lack of resource to review all posts to find the best one.
properties (22)
authorabit
permlinkre-clayop-re-gduran-re-snowflake-a-case-for-eliminating-curation-rewards-20170306t015000136z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2017-03-06 01:50:48
last_update2017-03-06 01:50:48
depth3
children7
last_payout2017-04-06 03:28:54
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length195
author_reputation141,171,499,037,785
root_title"A case for eliminating curation rewards"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id2,654,094
net_rshares0
@gduran · (edited)
Boy you got me with psychic income, now I'm really lost.
I really don't agree with you, but I am open minded, maybe you are right and I am mistaken, no problem.
properties (22)
authorgduran
permlinkre-clayop-re-gduran-re-snowflake-a-case-for-eliminating-curation-rewards-20170305t031649861z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2017-03-05 03:16:57
last_update2017-03-05 03:17:51
depth3
children5
last_payout2017-04-06 03:28:54
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length160
author_reputation58,683,119,745,305
root_title"A case for eliminating curation rewards"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id2,647,083
net_rshares0
@snowflake · (edited)
$0.05
The less users are voting the more power is left for active voters. For example if you were the only person voting you would be able to allocate the whole reward pool yourself)
Who would vote? Active users who want power and pretty much everyone who cares about the platform.
👍  , , ,
properties (23)
authorsnowflake
permlinkre-gduran-re-snowflake-a-case-for-eliminating-curation-rewards-20170305t012911500z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2017-03-05 01:29:12
last_update2017-03-05 01:30:54
depth2
children11
last_payout2017-04-06 03:28:54
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.034 HBD
curator_payout_value0.011 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length275
author_reputation33,312,252,512,655
root_title"A case for eliminating curation rewards"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id2,646,677
net_rshares1,404,385,664,024
author_curate_reward""
vote details (4)
@gduran ·
I understand that even less, my voting power I believe isn't even $0.01 so what's the profit in that? To make any money an article has to be upvoted by people whose votes are worth something.
properties (22)
authorgduran
permlinkre-snowflake-re-gduran-re-snowflake-a-case-for-eliminating-curation-rewards-20170305t014609692z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2017-03-05 01:46:15
last_update2017-03-05 01:46:15
depth3
children1
last_payout2017-04-06 03:28:54
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length191
author_reputation58,683,119,745,305
root_title"A case for eliminating curation rewards"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id2,646,743
net_rshares0
@rose98734 · (edited)
$6.37
There arn't many active voters. Even people who post a blog post tend to write and run, they rarely stay and read a bit (you can tell by the number of pageviews).

If the bots disappeared, there would be no upvoting at all because "active users" can't be bothered or simply don't have the time.

BTW - I think the 1% votes are stream votes. That is, there is a manual voter who is followed automatically via autosteem or streamian by other voters. The amount you get is determined by the manual voter. If they vote 1%, then all the people following automatically also deliver 1%. If they vote by a higher percentage, you get a higher percentage by the autovotes as well.
👍  , , , ,
properties (23)
authorrose98734
permlinkre-snowflake-re-gduran-re-snowflake-a-case-for-eliminating-curation-rewards-20170305t014650816z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2017-03-05 01:46:12
last_update2017-03-05 01:46:54
depth3
children5
last_payout2017-04-06 03:28:54
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value4.780 HBD
curator_payout_value1.593 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length670
author_reputation22,746,705,444,341
root_title"A case for eliminating curation rewards"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id2,646,742
net_rshares30,597,338,085,618
author_curate_reward""
vote details (5)
@teamsteem ·
You're bringing up great point. I'm in the top 100 for the best curation score for the past 50 days so it seems I would be bias for keeping curation reward too but I tend to think we might be better off without them. It's still a very complex situation. 

I don't agree with the comment reward pool being a bad thing. I think this will be a good thing. I was skeptic at first but I'm not exciting to see what will come out of it.
👍  
properties (23)
authorteamsteem
permlinkre-snowflake-re-gduran-re-snowflake-a-case-for-eliminating-curation-rewards-20170305t014829056z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2017-03-05 01:48:09
last_update2017-03-05 01:48:09
depth3
children2
last_payout2017-04-06 03:28:54
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length429
author_reputation284,804,541,406,803
root_title"A case for eliminating curation rewards"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id2,646,753
net_rshares4,134,489,897
author_curate_reward""
vote details (1)
@ijavee ·
$0.60
As a newcomer to Steemit January 2017. I looked to the voting on posts as a measure of progress with my writing,but am now disappointed to read that the voting can be manipulated by bots and other means,so if the system is flawed and voting discontinued,then what is there to inspire challenge?

It reminds me of the Stalin quote -"It isn't the people who vote that counts,it's the people who count the votes"  -

And - "The more things change the more they stay as they are"

 https://steemit.com/@ijavee
👍  , ,
properties (23)
authorijavee
permlinkre-snowflake-a-case-for-eliminating-curation-rewards-20170305t091352312z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"links":["https://steemit.com/@ijavee"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2017-03-05 09:13:54
last_update2017-03-05 09:13:54
depth1
children3
last_payout2017-04-06 03:28:54
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.453 HBD
curator_payout_value0.151 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length505
author_reputation6,808,817,286,931
root_title"A case for eliminating curation rewards"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id2,648,358
net_rshares8,341,061,184,151
author_curate_reward""
vote details (3)
@snowflake ·
>then what is there to inspire challenge?

Something you havn't yet been given the taste of, which is called influence. 
If curation rewards are eliminated you will see what it is, it's pretty cool and you will always want more of it.
properties (22)
authorsnowflake
permlinkre-ijavee-re-snowflake-a-case-for-eliminating-curation-rewards-20170305t092427400z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2017-03-05 09:24:27
last_update2017-03-05 09:24:27
depth2
children0
last_payout2017-04-06 03:28:54
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length234
author_reputation33,312,252,512,655
root_title"A case for eliminating curation rewards"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id2,648,397
net_rshares0
@snowflake · (edited)
>I looked to the voting on posts as a measure of progress 

This is a good point. In a usual social media site your circle will grow organically and you have to engage a lot in order to get votes but on steemit you don't have to, you just have to be lucky. It's like a lottery. And there is no way to measure progress because you posts will either get pennies or tens of dollars, there is no organic growth its a flat line ( luck/no luck/luck/no luck)
👍  
properties (23)
authorsnowflake
permlinkre-ijavee-re-snowflake-a-case-for-eliminating-curation-rewards-20170306t061149300z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2017-03-06 06:11:48
last_update2017-03-06 06:14:30
depth2
children1
last_payout2017-04-06 03:28:54
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length451
author_reputation33,312,252,512,655
root_title"A case for eliminating curation rewards"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id2,655,023
net_rshares2,538,063,863
author_curate_reward""
vote details (1)
@ijavee ·
Thank you snowflake. That explains it perfectly.I can now tell friends and family why there can be such a discrepancy in posts that receive  similar number of votes but wildly varying rewards.I'm not sure yet that I see this as a positive as you do,but I like Steemit, so onward and hopefully upwards.Cheers.Ivor.
👍  
properties (23)
authorijavee
permlinkre-snowflake-re-ijavee-re-snowflake-a-case-for-eliminating-curation-rewards-20170306t073509236z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2017-03-06 07:35:09
last_update2017-03-06 07:35:09
depth3
children0
last_payout2017-04-06 03:28:54
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length313
author_reputation6,808,817,286,931
root_title"A case for eliminating curation rewards"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id2,655,361
net_rshares115,439,130,509
author_curate_reward""
vote details (1)
@jacobtothe ·
I almost always vote at 100%, and I only upvote what I actually read. At 3000 Steem Power, my vote doesn't carry much weight,so I may as well throw all of it behind what I read and find interesting.
👍  , ,
properties (23)
authorjacobtothe
permlinkre-snowflake-a-case-for-eliminating-curation-rewards-20170305t054004870z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2017-03-05 05:40:09
last_update2017-03-05 05:40:09
depth1
children0
last_payout2017-04-06 03:28:54
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length198
author_reputation568,172,485,826,750
root_title"A case for eliminating curation rewards"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id2,647,620
net_rshares48,294,140,265
author_curate_reward""
vote details (3)
@kanedizzle08 ·
nice post i followed you
properties (22)
authorkanedizzle08
permlinkre-snowflake-a-case-for-eliminating-curation-rewards-20170522t162234322z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2017-05-22 16:22:33
last_update2017-05-22 16:22:33
depth1
children0
last_payout2017-05-29 16:22:33
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length24
author_reputation1,950,041,898,490
root_title"A case for eliminating curation rewards"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id3,667,570
net_rshares0
@knircky ·
Agree with all your points why curation currently is bad.

Removing it is better than keeping it.

However what we nees is to have a loyalty system for peoplw that are active. That is what curation rewards should do. So instead of getting rid of it i would reward users activity. Ie. We should reward people for showing up regularly over time and reading and voting for stuff.
properties (22)
authorknircky
permlinkre-snowflake-a-case-for-eliminating-curation-rewards-20170306t143749971z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2017-03-06 14:37:48
last_update2017-03-06 14:37:48
depth1
children4
last_payout2017-04-06 03:28:54
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length376
author_reputation212,905,587,244,262
root_title"A case for eliminating curation rewards"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id2,657,671
net_rshares0
@snowflake ·
>We should reward people for showing up regularly over time and reading and voting for stuff.

Eliminating curation rewards will naturally do that by giving active users more influence.
properties (22)
authorsnowflake
permlinkre-knircky-re-snowflake-a-case-for-eliminating-curation-rewards-20170306t190650200z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2017-03-06 19:06:51
last_update2017-03-06 19:06:51
depth2
children3
last_payout2017-04-06 03:28:54
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length185
author_reputation33,312,252,512,655
root_title"A case for eliminating curation rewards"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id2,659,334
net_rshares0
@knircky · (edited)
I think removing curation is better than the curation we have now. But I think rewarding users to show up and consume content regularly is optimal. The value is ultimately driven by users showing up and consuming content. I think rewarding them for this with curation reward is good. However the current system instead of rewarding users to do what they want skews the behavior  of users into a voting financial game that has nothing to do with consuming and liking content and  ultimately corrupts the value creation process in its current form.

Would you agree with this or do you think there are other mechanism at play?
properties (22)
authorknircky
permlinkre-snowflake-re-knircky-re-snowflake-a-case-for-eliminating-curation-rewards-20170306t192237546z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2017-03-06 19:22:39
last_update2017-03-06 19:24:42
depth3
children2
last_payout2017-04-06 03:28:54
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length624
author_reputation212,905,587,244,262
root_title"A case for eliminating curation rewards"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id2,659,464
net_rshares0
@krnel ·
$0.24
> Curation rewards have turned the site into a fake system run by bots and driven by money

> No businesses is going to touch steem in its current form.

Absolutely. I haven't posted my long overdue notes on my thoughts of the problem with bots, but I have commented here and there on the importance of consciousness to evaluate content that will represent the reality of what is valued. 

A site that is being evaluated largely by bots, or autovotes, doesn't represent an accurate evaluation of the content being produced. Of course I concluded the same as you with regards to investors: who the hell would want to invest in a content site that's not even evaluated by human consciousness? Game-picking gambling-mentality free-lottery tickets are also not helpful in that respect, no longer term value and simply a drain of 0 value to the platform. What investor wants that being pumped by whales? SteemSports was the first, but that crap is still around.

Curation rewards drive people to go for valued targets, and inhibit evaluation of content for content, which is another big thing I push. Getting rid of them is good all around as I see, I agree with you.

Regarding comment votes, look at how much I vote for posts vs. comments, and look at my % votes on posts vs. comments. I'll tell you now, I think I vote for as many or possibly more comments in a day. And I usually keep it at 100%. I don't care about curation rewards ;)

> The argument for keeping curation rewards is that investors won't have any incentives to buy steem power if we remove them.
> This assumption is incorrect, it is based on the idea that investors care about growing the number of their steem more than growing the value of steem. There is a very vocal minority in this community who are very self centered and believe that growing the number of steem in their wallet is the end goal. It was the same group of people that were bragging about HF16 because they wouldn't receive their inflation anymore. These individuals don't seem to understand that 1 000 000 steem is worth as much as 1 steem when the price is zero.

Great point!

> ccomment pool because i think it is a terrible idea, it is not KISS at all and do not solve the underlying issue.

Same here. Not KISS at all like you say lol. Copies the problem so a separate economic sector, I concluded such in my review of the proposal in the comments when it first came out. It was a very long comment LMAO.

> Bots are actually undermining the credibility of the whole site

Yup. Wake up people.

Resteemed to support a better step forward.
👍  , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
properties (23)
authorkrnel
permlinkre-snowflake-a-case-for-eliminating-curation-rewards-20170305t045327351z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2017-03-05 04:53:24
last_update2017-03-05 04:53:24
depth1
children2
last_payout2017-04-06 03:28:54
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.183 HBD
curator_payout_value0.055 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length2,582
author_reputation1,343,547,270,297,082
root_title"A case for eliminating curation rewards"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id2,647,481
net_rshares4,620,408,973,429
author_curate_reward""
vote details (14)
@stellabelle ·
$0.07
I also would like to repeat this, because everyone needs to get out of their bubble and face up to reality. I've been researching a lot of about what outsiders think of Steemit and it's not pretty what I've found. We need to all face reality before the reputation of Steem degrades further:

> Curation rewards have turned the site into a fake system run by bots and driven by money
No businesses is going to touch steem in its current form.

This is the truth. Absolutely.
👍  , , ,
properties (23)
authorstellabelle
permlinkre-krnel-re-snowflake-a-case-for-eliminating-curation-rewards-20170306t000849564z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2017-03-06 00:08:48
last_update2017-03-06 00:08:48
depth2
children1
last_payout2017-04-06 03:28:54
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.062 HBD
curator_payout_value0.005 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length473
author_reputation516,061,669,130,124
root_title"A case for eliminating curation rewards"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id2,653,601
net_rshares1,904,976,484,506
author_curate_reward""
vote details (4)
@krnel ·
Absolutely. I've always been for no more bots, but apparently everyone says they are here to stay so that closes down the argument before even looking at the negatives it creates. No matter what the issues, no point in even discussing them apparently because "bots are here to stay". Who wants a social media site evaluated not by people? LOL. It's pretty obvious the low value that gives for outsiders... Face reality indeed. Thanks for adding that feedback.
👍  ,
properties (23)
authorkrnel
permlinkre-stellabelle-re-krnel-re-snowflake-a-case-for-eliminating-curation-rewards-20170306t001141761z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2017-03-06 00:11:39
last_update2017-03-06 00:11:39
depth3
children0
last_payout2017-04-06 03:28:54
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length459
author_reputation1,343,547,270,297,082
root_title"A case for eliminating curation rewards"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id2,653,614
net_rshares54,133,047,824
author_curate_reward""
vote details (2)
@liberosist · (edited)
$6.61
This topic has been debated a lot, but I do feel that many of the problems you point out (correctly) can be fixed by a better system. The pro-curation rewards side will say it's what will attract most people to join, by lowering the barrier of entry to participation, and many support increasing rewards to 50-50. The anti curation rewards side would say it's a waste of resources that feeds bots and the greedy. The truth is in the middle. Curation is a valuable service require a lot of time and effort if performed consistently and correctly. Those who do so deserve a reward for their services. The current system is broken, but the idea is not fundamentally flawed. Things will get a lot better with the new rewards curve in HF17, so we are making progress. 

> Curation reward discourage whales to spread their upvotes

> Guilds were meant to spread the rewards around but because of curation rewards they ended up doing the opposite. Guilds owner are encouraged to not spread their vote because if they do they will lose out on curation rewards.

These are obviously false even today. Curators stands to earn far more from voting on new authors who don't get much votes. Or whichever post has the least vote competition from bots etc. In fact, some have started spreading their votes through comments as they are mostly all unvoted. 

This is why curators that vote for semi-established authors (Steem Guild) made a tiny fraction in curation rewards compared to curators that spread their votes on new authors (Curie or blocktrades) or curators voting on comments (abit). 

As a matter of fact, the opposite problem is true - curators are too heavily incentivized to spread their voting rather than continue to support good authors. Of course, this is another problem that can be fixed with a simpler system.
👍  , , , ,
properties (23)
authorliberosist
permlinkre-snowflake-a-case-for-eliminating-curation-rewards-20170305t100846437z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2017-03-05 10:08:51
last_update2017-03-05 10:14:18
depth1
children29
last_payout2017-04-06 03:28:54
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value4.956 HBD
curator_payout_value1.652 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length1,815
author_reputation177,167,275,265,899
root_title"A case for eliminating curation rewards"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id2,648,560
net_rshares31,188,899,373,525
author_curate_reward""
vote details (5)
@snowflake ·
$0.06
>Curation is a valuable service

How is curation a valuable service?  Valuable to whom? 

To me the concept of curating is flawed because it forces people to vote for stuff they are not interested in. It goes against the natural will of people. As more and more content gets published on the steem blockchain the less sense it will make to curate, why would you upvote family pics from people you never heard of? People are going to form their own little communities and upvote within that community, curating content on the whole blockchain makes no sense.

>These are obviously false even today. Curators stands to earn far more from voting on new authors who don't get much votes. Or whichever post has the least vote competition from bots etc. In fact, some have started spreading their votes through comments as they are mostly all unvoted.

There is a nuance between spread and diversify. What you refer to is diversification.  I am talking about the weight guilds put on posts, they never vote under 100%. They put all the weight on the posts that they vote to pocket max curation rewards.
👍  
properties (23)
authorsnowflake
permlinkre-liberosist-re-snowflake-a-case-for-eliminating-curation-rewards-20170305t201050500z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2017-03-05 20:10:51
last_update2017-03-05 20:10:51
depth2
children28
last_payout2017-04-06 03:28:54
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.047 HBD
curator_payout_value0.015 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length1,096
author_reputation33,312,252,512,655
root_title"A case for eliminating curation rewards"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id2,652,194
net_rshares1,804,455,907,375
author_curate_reward""
vote details (1)
@abit · (edited)
$4.67
Curation is valuable to the whole platform.

//Edit: to be clear, I'm not talking about the "curation" happening now on Steem, but the natural curation behavior.

Image a new user come to this website to look for popular contents. She'll see the trending page. The posts are there because the curators (voters) have done their work.

Image a Q/A post which have thousands of replies. It's the curators that brought the most valuable replies to the top, so saves later readers' time.

> To me the concept of curating is flawed because it forces people to vote for stuff they are not interested in. It goes against the natural will of people. As more and more content gets published on the steem blockchain the less sense it will make to curate, why would you upvote family pics from people you never heard of? People are going to form their own little communities and upvote within that community, curating content on the whole blockchain makes no sense.

It's not the concept of curating that is flawed, it's the curation reward distribution mechanism that is flawed. A bad-designed incentive mechanism brings bad results. IMHO it's better to make the incentives aligned, but not eliminate them. I strongly suggest you to read my post and the discussions there: https://steemit.com/curation/@abit/benefits-of-pure-linear-reward-distribution .
👍  , , ,
properties (23)
authorabit
permlinkre-snowflake-re-liberosist-re-snowflake-a-case-for-eliminating-curation-rewards-20170305t224414010z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"links":["https://steemit.com/curation/@abit/benefits-of-pure-linear-reward-distribution"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2017-03-05 22:45:00
last_update2017-03-06 00:06:36
depth3
children4
last_payout2017-04-06 03:28:54
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value3.503 HBD
curator_payout_value1.167 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length1,342
author_reputation141,171,499,037,785
root_title"A case for eliminating curation rewards"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id2,653,232
net_rshares25,937,250,998,719
author_curate_reward""
vote details (4)
@abit ·
[Nesting]
>Good content naturally rises to the top, there is no need to incentivizes people to vote.

But why not reward the people who have done their work well (assume it has really been done well)? With a "right" reward people will feel even better, so more engagement.

>Also currently it is not 'good content' that rises to the top , it is 'content that will earn the most money'. The platform don't really reflects what most people want.

To be clear, I'm not saying trending in current system is natural. But current design is not good doesn't mean changing it to anything else is good.
properties (22)
authorabit
permlinkre-snowflake-re-liberosist-re-snowflake-a-case-for-eliminating-curation-rewards-20170305t231557590z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2017-03-05 23:16:45
last_update2017-03-05 23:16:45
depth3
children7
last_payout2017-04-06 03:28:54
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length593
author_reputation141,171,499,037,785
root_title"A case for eliminating curation rewards"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id2,653,398
net_rshares0
@liberosist ·
> How is curation a valuable service? Valuable to whom?
To me the concept of curating is flawed because it forces people to vote for stuff they are not interested in. It goes against the natural will of people. As more and more content gets published on the steem blockchain the less sense it will make to curate, why would you upvote family pics from people you never heard of? People are going to form their own little communities and upvote within that community, curating content on the whole blockchain makes no sense.

It's a valuable service to the community, as many have stated before. Again, that's a function of the current system rather than the concept of curation rewards itself. You are right that in July 2016 the curation landscape was really messed up, and only 20-30 authors were being upvoted regularly. The bots were all swarming to these authors, while the rest of the community went unrewarded. 

However, things have changed dramatically since. With the emergence of curation guilds that focused sincerely on quality and seeking out new authors, bots have had to adapt and use clever algorithms to determine quality and vote on posts by new authors. Indeed, this has also encouraged manual curators to vote on good posts they like, because they know a curation guild or whale would be looking out for these posts. 

Today, the curation community is so efficient that it is almost impossible for a new author creating good content to go unnoticed for long. This is because the curation rewards allow incentive for intensive curation. Several curators spend several hours every single day trying to find the best quality posts and they'll stop doing so and switch to casual mode without an incentive. Casual mode is where votes keep on piling on the same authors over and over again, with no one bothering to dig to the depths to find great content that was lost. 

Without these curators, Steemit would be the wasteland it was in July/Aug 2016. Thousands of users left ignored with zero exposure. Today, while influx of users hasn't happened, many of them have been at least discovered and given a shot at being retained. 

I will agree though that with the Communities feature incoming, curation rewards may not be required for voting and could be restructured to actual curation, Communities moderators etc. 

> There is a nuance between spread and diversify. What you refer to is diversification. I am talking about the weight guilds put on posts, they never vote under 100%. They put all the weight on the posts that they vote to pocket max curation rewards.

This is also demonstrably false. Steem Trail does vote with most posts at 100%, but Curie's average strength has always been about 40%-70%, while Steem Guild was about 25% for many months. Steem Guild has since changed their focus, but your claim of "they never vote under 100%" isn't true at all. That said, the top independent curators blocktrades and abit do vote 100%.
👍  
properties (23)
authorliberosist
permlinkre-snowflake-re-liberosist-re-snowflake-a-case-for-eliminating-curation-rewards-20170306t031424193z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2017-03-06 03:14:27
last_update2017-03-06 03:14:27
depth3
children4
last_payout2017-04-06 03:28:54
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length2,959
author_reputation177,167,275,265,899
root_title"A case for eliminating curation rewards"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id2,654,413
net_rshares34,354,854,876
author_curate_reward""
vote details (1)
@smooth ·
> How is curation a valuable service? Valuable to whom?

It is extremely valuable to users and to the platform itself. Any site with a large amount of content would be a complete jumble of unusable nonsense if there weren't some form of curation. Most successful (centralized) sites explicitly use a combination of human and algorithmic curation, or algorithmic with some degree of user input. They spend a lot of money developing maintaining and operating these systems. BTW, another word for algorithmic curation in the context of a decentralized system is bot voting.
properties (22)
authorsmooth
permlinkre-snowflake-re-liberosist-re-snowflake-a-case-for-eliminating-curation-rewards-20170306t062519500z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2017-03-06 06:25:18
last_update2017-03-06 06:25:18
depth3
children6
last_payout2017-04-06 03:28:54
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length570
author_reputation253,602,537,834,068
root_title"A case for eliminating curation rewards"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id2,655,100
net_rshares0
@stellabelle · (edited)
$0.04
YES:
> It goes against the natural will of people.

YOU ARE CORRECT. This place is fake and eveybody knows it. This lack of real substance degrades our reptuation and makes people mock us. Hell, I can't even stand on firm ground when I tell people I write on this platform. We need readers, real people, and those who actually give a shit about reading to come in here and add value.
We don't need to line the whale pockets of those who don't even like to read.
👍  , , , , , ,
properties (23)
authorstellabelle
permlinkre-snowflake-re-liberosist-re-snowflake-a-case-for-eliminating-curation-rewards-20170306t000138990z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2017-03-06 00:01:39
last_update2017-03-06 00:03:45
depth3
children2
last_payout2017-04-06 03:28:54
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.032 HBD
curator_payout_value0.003 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length461
author_reputation516,061,669,130,124
root_title"A case for eliminating curation rewards"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id2,653,573
net_rshares1,171,258,310,872
author_curate_reward""
vote details (7)
@merej99 ·
I actually wouldn't mind trying a hardfork "cycle" where curation rewards are omitted. I curate because I love to read, comment and upvote. I rarely look at what I've earned in curation rewards because...  well, I think most of them are about .001 anyway.

But if we get rid of curation rewards, PLEASE also get rid of the vote slider for accounts with less than 100m vests!  It is so pointless when I see minnows voting 1% because they heard somewhere that it would "hurt their vote power."  

But piggybacking on what @neoxian said about flagging - there must also be a striked difference between flagging and downvotes.  Flagging = major offenses and potential to get nuked.  Downvotes = difference of opinion and no effect on earnings.  My opinion is based on the fact that no one likes a thumbs down - but when it affects ***one's wallet*** that's a whole new world of butt hurt.
properties (22)
authormerej99
permlinkre-snowflake-a-case-for-eliminating-curation-rewards-20170305t022810252z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"users":["neoxian"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2017-03-05 02:28:00
last_update2017-03-05 02:28:00
depth1
children13
last_payout2017-04-06 03:28:54
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length884
author_reputation109,727,414,619,488
root_title"A case for eliminating curation rewards"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id2,646,868
net_rshares0
@snowflake ·
>But if we get rid of curation rewards, PLEASE also get rid of the vote slider for accounts with less than 100m vests! It is so pointless when I see minnows voting 1% because they heard somewhere that it would "hurt their vote power."

This kind of mentality will be gone so you won't have to remove vote slider, everyone will be voting at higher percentage because they will finally be voting for something they like instead of something that will earn them curation rewards.

>But piggybacking on what @neoxian said about flagging - there must also be a striked difference between flagging and downvotes. Flagging = major offenses and potential to get nuked. Downvotes = difference of opinion and no effect on earnings. My opinion is based on the fact that no one likes a thumbs down - but when it affects one's wallet that's a whole new world of butt hurt.

I don't really see the point of a flag, there is no such thing at the blockchain level. There is only upvote and downvote so even if something were to be flagged on steemit, it wouldn't be flagged on esteem8 or busy.org or esteem. Like I said above downvoting is an integral part of the system, the huge unbalance in power made this feature controversial when in fact its essential.

>My opinion is based on the fact that no one likes a thumbs down - but when it affects one's wallet that's a whole new world of butt hurt.

When the voting period is still ongoing the rewards are not in your wallet yet 

Please read the following post
https://steemit.com/payout/@timcliff/everything-you-need-to-know-about-potential-payouts-and-flagging-for-new-users
properties (22)
authorsnowflake
permlinkre-merej99-re-snowflake-a-case-for-eliminating-curation-rewards-20170305t024421900z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"users":["neoxian"],"links":["https://steemit.com/payout/@timcliff/everything-you-need-to-know-about-potential-payouts-and-flagging-for-new-users"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2017-03-05 02:44:21
last_update2017-03-05 02:44:21
depth2
children12
last_payout2017-04-06 03:28:54
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length1,612
author_reputation33,312,252,512,655
root_title"A case for eliminating curation rewards"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id2,646,942
net_rshares0
@abit ·
>everyone will be voting at higher percentage because they will finally be voting for something they like instead of something that will earn them curation rewards.

I think my pure linear proposal serves this better. https://steemit.com/curation/@abit/benefits-of-pure-linear-reward-distribution
properties (22)
authorabit
permlinkre-snowflake-re-merej99-re-snowflake-a-case-for-eliminating-curation-rewards-20170305t215243290z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"links":["https://steemit.com/curation/@abit/benefits-of-pure-linear-reward-distribution"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2017-03-05 21:53:30
last_update2017-03-05 21:53:30
depth3
children11
last_payout2017-04-06 03:28:54
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length296
author_reputation141,171,499,037,785
root_title"A case for eliminating curation rewards"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id2,652,946
net_rshares0
@mindhunter ·
A very small change that could help us find our 'Product-Market Fit' and thus find those hungry new users that we could attract to Steemit!
👍  ,
properties (23)
authormindhunter
permlinkre-snowflake-a-case-for-eliminating-curation-rewards-20170305t110150276z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2017-03-05 10:59:30
last_update2017-03-05 10:59:30
depth1
children0
last_payout2017-04-06 03:28:54
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length139
author_reputation203,929,529,404,460
root_title"A case for eliminating curation rewards"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id2,648,748
net_rshares32,925,407,279
author_curate_reward""
vote details (2)
@neoxian ·
$0.02
The current curation awards encourage upvoting and discourage flagging.  Because flagging earns no curation.  This is actually a pretty big deal for me.  

There would be much more flagging without curation awards and this would hurt the platform.
👍  , ,
properties (23)
authorneoxian
permlinkre-snowflake-a-case-for-eliminating-curation-rewards-20170305t015533242z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2017-03-05 01:55:33
last_update2017-03-05 01:55:33
depth1
children1
last_payout2017-04-06 03:28:54
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.021 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length247
author_reputation167,518,216,312,453
root_title"A case for eliminating curation rewards"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id2,646,773
net_rshares771,116,553,094
author_curate_reward""
vote details (3)
@snowflake ·
$0.04
Downvoting is an integral part of the system, it has become an issue because of power concentration. 
If you remove curation rewards, users will have a much bigger say and so they would be able to upvote any downvoted posts back up  
Please read this post I explained this in more details  https://steemit.com/steem/@snowflake/my-take-on-what-happened-to-karenmckersie
👍  ,
properties (23)
authorsnowflake
permlinkre-neoxian-re-snowflake-a-case-for-eliminating-curation-rewards-20170305t020740900z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"links":["https://steemit.com/steem/@snowflake/my-take-on-what-happened-to-karenmckersie"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2017-03-05 02:07:42
last_update2017-03-05 02:07:42
depth2
children0
last_payout2017-04-06 03:28:54
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.033 HBD
curator_payout_value0.011 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length368
author_reputation33,312,252,512,655
root_title"A case for eliminating curation rewards"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id2,646,811
net_rshares1,396,857,840,090
author_curate_reward""
vote details (2)
@onthewayout ·
$0.50
properties (23)
authoronthewayout
permlinkre-snowflake-a-case-for-eliminating-curation-rewards-20170305t201050933z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2017-03-05 20:11:00
last_update2017-03-05 20:11:00
depth1
children3
last_payout2017-04-06 03:28:54
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.380 HBD
curator_payout_value0.124 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length130
author_reputation13,205,527,560,619
root_title"A case for eliminating curation rewards"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id2,652,195
net_rshares7,385,930,552,561
author_curate_reward""
vote details (36)
@snowflake ·
There is a license that prevent this, without it people would have forked long ago.
properties (22)
authorsnowflake
permlinkre-onthewayout-re-snowflake-a-case-for-eliminating-curation-rewards-20170305t203107400z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2017-03-05 20:31:09
last_update2017-03-05 20:31:09
depth2
children2
last_payout2017-04-06 03:28:54
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length83
author_reputation33,312,252,512,655
root_title"A case for eliminating curation rewards"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id2,652,328
net_rshares0
@shaka · (edited)
$4.55
Your proposal is aiming for an entirely different product. Not a product that I would place a bet on, but no license can prevent you from building it.
👍  , ,
properties (23)
authorshaka
permlinkre-snowflake-re-onthewayout-re-snowflake-a-case-for-eliminating-curation-rewards-20170306t002226743z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2017-03-06 00:22:27
last_update2017-03-06 00:25:36
depth3
children1
last_payout2017-04-06 03:28:54
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value3.415 HBD
curator_payout_value1.135 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length150
author_reputation738,584,176,624,744
root_title"A case for eliminating curation rewards"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id2,653,653
net_rshares25,565,223,228,197
author_curate_reward""
vote details (3)
@pitterpatter · (edited)
Having people view, comment then vote  should be rewarded. That would be a win win for steemit authors and community. Why should a few bad eggs take away something that was a tool/reward for everyone.
properties (22)
authorpitterpatter
permlinkre-snowflake-a-case-for-eliminating-curation-rewards-20170307t125309318z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2017-03-07 12:53:09
last_update2017-03-07 12:53:48
depth1
children0
last_payout2017-04-06 03:28:54
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length200
author_reputation15,046,024,868,692
root_title"A case for eliminating curation rewards"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id2,664,874
net_rshares0
@remlaps ·
$7.22
Oh, for goodness sakes, not again.  Where to begin?  Obviously, I can't respond to your whole article in one comment, but a few points.

-1-
When the whitepaper was written, people could be rewarded for witnessing, market making,  mining, curating, or authoring.  After hf17, only witnessing, curating, and authoring will be left.  When you take away curating, how far behind do you think the author rewards will be?  Your arguments all apply to authors, too.  People write for free on other web sites, and the rewards distribution changes the things that they post and write about.  Why shouldn't authors be satisfied with the same long-term increasing value of their steem power that you expect the voters to be happy with?

-2-
Writing a bot and keeping it running is not "passive investing."  It's taking an active interest in the content on the blockchain.  To get a reward, the bot needs to predict what people will vote on.  And yes, someone who invests the time and resources it takes to do that well should be rewarded.  The better the voting, the bigger the reward.

-3-
Look at the "Blockchain Operations Distribution" chart at the bottom of this page - https://steemdata.com/charts

And your conclusion is that the author rewards should stay and the curation rewards should be eliminated?  That slice of curation rewards is an awful lot of unhappy customers to alienate all at the same time.   Who, exactly, do you think is going to read the articles if just the writers are still here using the site?

-4-
Finally, the 1% voters are not manual voters.  They're bots in pursuit of something very similar to your own goal.  Here are [the](https://steemit.com/socialist-bot/@fyrstikken/the-anonymous-winfrey-bot-upvotes-for-everyone-download-here-easy-steps-for-n00bs) [announcements](https://steemit.com/curation/@fyrstikken/i-am-starting-the-winfrey-voting-guild-and-100-people-can-join).  And Dan's comment is very disappointing (frightening, actually...)
👍  , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
properties (23)
authorremlaps
permlinkre-snowflake-a-case-for-eliminating-curation-rewards-20170305t063706707z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"links":["https://steemdata.com/charts","https://steemit.com/socialist-bot/@fyrstikken/the-anonymous-winfrey-bot-upvotes-for-everyone-download-here-easy-steps-for-n00bs","https://steemit.com/curation/@fyrstikken/i-am-starting-the-winfrey-voting-guild-and-100-people-can-join"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2017-03-05 06:37:09
last_update2017-03-05 06:37:09
depth1
children21
last_payout2017-04-06 03:28:54
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value5.414 HBD
curator_payout_value1.803 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length1,968
author_reputation33,149,047,814,372
root_title"A case for eliminating curation rewards"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id2,647,816
net_rshares32,683,060,273,944
author_curate_reward""
vote details (41)
@abit ·
> And Dan's comment is very disappointing (frightening, actually...)

Agreed. I would downvote it to zero if I saw it earlier.
👍  , ,
properties (23)
authorabit
permlinkre-remlaps-re-snowflake-a-case-for-eliminating-curation-rewards-20170305t220200963z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2017-03-05 22:02:48
last_update2017-03-05 22:02:48
depth2
children2
last_payout2017-04-06 03:28:54
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length126
author_reputation141,171,499,037,785
root_title"A case for eliminating curation rewards"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id2,653,010
net_rshares53,394,506,067
author_curate_reward""
vote details (3)
@dennygalindo ·
Agree it's frightening. I think curation rewards are the most innovative thing here. Everything else has been done somewhere else. Lots of places don't  pay you to vote. Lots of places pay you on views. Curation is only originality of steem (sbd are also original but not being used well)
properties (22)
authordennygalindo
permlinkre-abit-re-remlaps-re-snowflake-a-case-for-eliminating-curation-rewards-20170306t163952083z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2017-03-06 16:39:51
last_update2017-03-06 16:39:51
depth3
children1
last_payout2017-04-06 03:28:54
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length288
author_reputation6,552,498,469,686
root_title"A case for eliminating curation rewards"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id2,658,446
net_rshares0
@personz ·
> Writing a bot and keeping it running is not "passive investing." It's taking an active interest in the content on the blockchain.

Agree! 😆

But disagree that it's always the case that

> To get a reward, the bot needs to predict what people will vote on. 

Not all bots directly attempt to predict what people will vote on.
👍  
properties (23)
authorpersonz
permlinkre-remlaps-re-snowflake-a-case-for-eliminating-curation-rewards-20170306t190512901z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2017-03-06 19:05:12
last_update2017-03-06 19:05:12
depth2
children1
last_payout2017-04-06 03:28:54
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length326
author_reputation42,452,361,038,560
root_title"A case for eliminating curation rewards"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id2,659,317
net_rshares14,414,499,826
author_curate_reward""
vote details (1)
@remlaps ·
True.  I oversimplified that a bit.
👍  
properties (23)
authorremlaps
permlinkre-personz-re-remlaps-re-snowflake-a-case-for-eliminating-curation-rewards-20170306t230559530z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2017-03-06 23:06:03
last_update2017-03-06 23:06:03
depth3
children0
last_payout2017-04-06 03:28:54
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length35
author_reputation33,149,047,814,372
root_title"A case for eliminating curation rewards"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id2,661,022
net_rshares25,852,393,125
author_curate_reward""
vote details (1)
@snowflake · (edited)
>When the whitepaper was written, people could be rewarded for witnessing, market making, mining, curating, or authoring. 

To me steem is a blockchain to reward content creators on the internet. It's a one purpose protocol. There is no need to create extra incentives for people to earn, the innovation is already there, rewarding content creators. 


I could be wrong but from the whitepaper back then it looks like founders where more focused on creating a simple site, they didn't really envision steem to be used by by many different websites. But this is the direction it's going, and if you want websites to integrate steem it needs to be as simple as possible and removing all the complexe mechanism and incentives is part of the process.
I'm sorry but I didn't understand the rest of the questions in 1), please formulate differently..

>-2-
Writing a bot and keeping it running is not "passive investing

Never said that. I said investors want passive investment and yeah curating is active investing, most investors have no time for that.

>And your conclusion is that the author rewards should stay and the curation rewards should be eliminated?

Curators ( 80-90% of which are bots) bring absolutely no value to the platform, authors do however.

>Who, exactly, do you think is going to read the articles if just the writers are still here using the site?

The vast majority of curators are running bots, nobody is reading content already. It literally can't get any worst.
The algorithm for curating encourages people to vote at 30 min, this means that almost every curators is upvoting content blindly without prior reading, curating doesn't incentives reading at all, it actually does the opposite.

Reading is part of what I call human interactions, it's the same as commenting, writing,voting, it is basically a form of engagement. If you eliminate curation rewards you will increase all forms of engagement because active users will have a lot more stake to vote with and would actually start upvoting for things that they like instead of content that will earn them money.

>Finally, the 1% voters are not manual voters. They're bots in pursuit of something very similar to your own goal. 

Are you saying that curation rewards do not incentivize this behavior?
👍  , , ,
properties (23)
authorsnowflake
permlinkre-remlaps-re-snowflake-a-case-for-eliminating-curation-rewards-20170305t073208300z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2017-03-05 07:32:09
last_update2017-03-05 07:36:45
depth2
children14
last_payout2017-04-06 03:28:54
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length2,281
author_reputation33,312,252,512,655
root_title"A case for eliminating curation rewards"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id2,648,017
net_rshares90,789,221,939
author_curate_reward""
vote details (4)
@remlaps ·
$6.11
> Never said that. I said investors want passive investment and yeah curating is active investing, most investors have no time for that.

There's more than one way to invest in steem.  A passive investor can fund a business on the steem block chain like steemsports or busy.org or steemvoter.  They hire entrepreneurs to do the labor.  That's how markets work.  Can you name one other product or platform that became successful by taking choices away from customers and investors?

If you get rid of curation rewards, you may as well also get rid of steem power.  No one's going to tie their money up for 90 days with no reward for doing so.  The few investors who remain will leave their money in steem, so they can get out quickly whenever they want to.  Aside from curation rewards, every other benefit for steempower holders is also a benefit for steem holders.

> Curators ( 80-90% of which are bots) bring absolutely no value to the platform, authors do however.

Then why not eliminate voting completely?

> Are you saying that curation rewards do not incentivize this behavior?

No, I'm saying that if you can't get a basic and obvious fact like this right, the rest of your argument probably also hasn't been researched very carefully.  You just throw out your own beliefs as if they were fact, but you have no basis in data for the things you say.  That's a dangerous way to design a platform.
👍  , ,
properties (23)
authorremlaps
permlinkre-snowflake-re-remlaps-re-snowflake-a-case-for-eliminating-curation-rewards-20170305t143547786z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2017-03-05 14:35:48
last_update2017-03-05 14:35:48
depth3
children13
last_payout2017-04-06 03:28:54
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value4.583 HBD
curator_payout_value1.528 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length1,403
author_reputation33,149,047,814,372
root_title"A case for eliminating curation rewards"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id2,649,826
net_rshares29,924,385,526,627
author_curate_reward""
vote details (3)
@snowflake · (edited)
$0.03
Guild owners voting with their clients's accounts to skew public opinion is a pretty desperate and dishonest behavior. 
This is one of those thing that you get with curation rewards..
👍  
properties (23)
authorsnowflake
permlinkre-remlaps-re-snowflake-a-case-for-eliminating-curation-rewards-20170306t203950700z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2017-03-06 20:39:51
last_update2017-03-06 20:47:36
depth2
children0
last_payout2017-04-06 03:28:54
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.033 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length183
author_reputation33,312,252,512,655
root_title"A case for eliminating curation rewards"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id2,660,007
net_rshares1,099,578,935,130
author_curate_reward""
vote details (1)
@ripplerm ·
$6.12
> Curation rewards provides a financial incentive for users to spend a very significant amount of their time discovering good content.

NO, in terms of financial amount, the curation reward is far from enough to incentivise any users, including whales, to spend their time on the job.

When we talk financial, it's not the absolute amount that we should be looking, but the return-on-investment (ROI). 

Just have a look at how much a Top curator can earns: http://steemwhales.com/trending/?p=1&d=1&s=cr
The average rewards received by the top-10 curators (my bot is among them) are somewhere 0.05~0.1% per-day, which translated into and ROI of 20~40% p.a. 

While this figure might sound attractive to some guys, it's not attractive at all if you take into consideration the risk associating (There's high possibility that your SP will become valueless if Steemit couldn't turn out success). 
And bear in mind that these return-rates can only be achieved with bots which mainly bring negative value to the platform. Most curators (including whales who running bots) are having an ROI lower than 15% p.a.

Those who honestly do manual curation will hardly get any better than 3%p.a.... and for the coming HF17 with more linear curve, we should see the rewards spread more evenly, which will result in overall lower ROI even for top curation-bots.

Any incentive that couldn't beat the minimum interest-rate or inflation in our real-world, is considered negative incentive. 

IMO, the curation reward is never going to be a main reason that's drive people to do the curation.
👍  , , , ,
properties (23)
authorripplerm
permlinkre-snowflake-a-case-for-eliminating-curation-rewards-20170305t061234126z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"links":["http://steemwhales.com/trending/?p=1&d=1&s=cr"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2017-03-05 06:12:36
last_update2017-03-05 06:12:36
depth1
children1
last_payout2017-04-06 03:28:54
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value4.593 HBD
curator_payout_value1.531 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length1,574
author_reputation12,900,481,895,884
root_title"A case for eliminating curation rewards"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id2,647,748
net_rshares29,958,017,702,256
author_curate_reward""
vote details (5)
@ats-david ·
$5.41
I agree with you, generally. But I disagree with the claim that human curators can't earn as much ROI as bots. I was right on the heels of @biophil's bot for a few weeks until I had to back off a liitle of the time I was putting into the platform. I was right there earning ~25%+ per year. On a regular curation day, I can still earn over 0.05%, even without using my 40 daily votes.
👍  , ,
properties (23)
authorats-david
permlinkre-ripplerm-re-snowflake-a-case-for-eliminating-curation-rewards-20170306t003213392z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"users":["biophil"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2017-03-06 00:32:12
last_update2017-03-06 00:32:12
depth2
children0
last_payout2017-04-06 03:28:54
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value4.060 HBD
curator_payout_value1.353 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length383
author_reputation324,017,334,201,433
root_title"A case for eliminating curation rewards"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id2,653,685
net_rshares28,054,760,763,360
author_curate_reward""
vote details (3)
@shla-rafia ·
Thats offtopic but that the dear voter doesn't even give a click when a full-time marketer like me needs 100 to print steem on lighters shows that nobody cares about working (not posting a link on twitter but hard physical work on the street) to get new users.
👍  , , , ,
properties (23)
authorshla-rafia
permlinkre-snowflake-a-case-for-eliminating-curation-rewards-20170306t163010141z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2017-03-06 16:30:21
last_update2017-03-06 16:30:21
depth1
children0
last_payout2017-04-06 03:28:54
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length260
author_reputation67,630,971,735,138
root_title"A case for eliminating curation rewards"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id2,658,381
net_rshares75,408,842,133
author_curate_reward""
vote details (5)
@sigmajin ·
this was a bad idea to being with, and it remains a bad idea.

Lets print money to pay  people for doing nothing while depending on people to curate for free isn't a business model, its a fantasy.
👍  ,
properties (23)
authorsigmajin
permlinkre-snowflake-a-case-for-eliminating-curation-rewards-20170306t160634837z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2017-03-06 16:06:33
last_update2017-03-06 16:06:33
depth1
children3
last_payout2017-04-06 03:28:54
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length196
author_reputation35,847,511,233,614
root_title"A case for eliminating curation rewards"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id2,658,230
net_rshares25,932,864,808
author_curate_reward""
vote details (2)
@snowflake ·
Still not getting the notion of increasing the value of steem I see..
properties (22)
authorsnowflake
permlinkre-sigmajin-re-snowflake-a-case-for-eliminating-curation-rewards-20170306t190527000z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2017-03-06 19:05:27
last_update2017-03-06 19:05:27
depth2
children2
last_payout2017-04-06 03:28:54
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length69
author_reputation33,312,252,512,655
root_title"A case for eliminating curation rewards"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id2,659,323
net_rshares0
@sigmajin · (edited)
i get it.  this just won't do it.  youre not going to increase the value of steem by printing more of it and giving it away free.  it doesnt work that way.
👍  ,
properties (23)
authorsigmajin
permlinkre-snowflake-re-sigmajin-re-snowflake-a-case-for-eliminating-curation-rewards-20170306t194445399z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2017-03-06 19:44:42
last_update2017-03-06 19:52:09
depth3
children1
last_payout2017-04-06 03:28:54
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length155
author_reputation35,847,511,233,614
root_title"A case for eliminating curation rewards"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id2,659,617
net_rshares25,932,864,808
author_curate_reward""
vote details (2)
@sixexgames ·
The only reason I upvoted this and commented is because I want money ;)
👍  
properties (23)
authorsixexgames
permlinkre-snowflake-a-case-for-eliminating-curation-rewards-20170305t125703513z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2017-03-05 12:57:03
last_update2017-03-05 12:57:03
depth1
children0
last_payout2017-04-06 03:28:54
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length71
author_reputation2,670,490,697,484
root_title"A case for eliminating curation rewards"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id2,649,328
net_rshares952,097,694
author_curate_reward""
vote details (1)
@steemitqa ·
You actually bring up a great point. People will think SteemIt is some sort of scam when there is like 1,000 upvotes and like .10 cents.
properties (22)
authorsteemitqa
permlinkre-snowflake-a-case-for-eliminating-curation-rewards-20170307t014250430z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2017-03-07 01:42:51
last_update2017-03-07 01:42:51
depth1
children0
last_payout2017-04-06 03:28:54
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length136
author_reputation22,135,803,163,402
root_title"A case for eliminating curation rewards"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id2,662,004
net_rshares0
@stellabelle · (edited)
$0.12
I am in complete and total agreement with removing curation rewards as you have outlined and shown with clear logic. As it is right now, the experiment of paying people (mostly whales) to curate has failed. 

# Let me repeat, it is a failure. 

If any value is to ever be created from this website, it will need to focus on ORGANIC CURATION, ORGANIC READERS AND ENGAGEMENT. This will happen ORGANICALLY because readers, writers and curators will do this. In fact, they will do it better than bots. I am saying this despite the fact that I am currently being rewarded with curation rewards. But to me, it's not even worth it because this system is NOT working well. We need to listen to the cold, hard truth, admit failure, and improve. 
Creating a valuable site is WAY MORE IMPORTANT than having our little numbers go up in our individual accounts. As snowflake said, if Steem goes to zero, our numbers will be worthless. 
@dantheman, let's do this. I am completely behind this 100%. Building something that is valuable and that we are all proud of is of central importance. Enough of the fakery. Enough. We need drastic improvements over people bickering about half-eaten chicken wings.....scraps, mere scraps. We are all better than this. We can make this place valuable, if we're smart about understanding what creates REAL VALUE.
👍  , , ,
properties (23)
authorstellabelle
permlinkre-snowflake-a-case-for-eliminating-curation-rewards-20170305t235925957z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"users":["dantheman"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2017-03-05 23:59:24
last_update2017-03-06 00:09:42
depth1
children6
last_payout2017-04-06 03:28:54
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.118 HBD
curator_payout_value0.003 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length1,333
author_reputation516,061,669,130,124
root_title"A case for eliminating curation rewards"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id2,653,561
net_rshares2,938,893,637,847
author_curate_reward""
vote details (4)
@abit ·
Emotional words don't make much sense.

We all know current mechanism is not working, but it doesn't mean your solution will work.

Please explain why removing curation rewards WILL work better (than a linear reward distribution mechanism, or the flatter curve proposed for HF17).
👍  
properties (23)
authorabit
permlinkre-stellabelle-re-snowflake-a-case-for-eliminating-curation-rewards-20170306t014226820z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2017-03-06 01:43:15
last_update2017-03-06 01:43:15
depth2
children5
last_payout2017-04-06 03:28:54
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length280
author_reputation141,171,499,037,785
root_title"A case for eliminating curation rewards"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id2,654,057
net_rshares13,787,782,442
author_curate_reward""
vote details (1)
@ocrdu · (edited)
Social media sites are all about emotion, if your economic model doesn't cater for that, you're bound to fail.
Having said that: predicting the future is very hard. If the new curve doesn't yield the results we want, maybe even proving the underlying economic thinking wrong, we can pick up the discussion about abolishing curation rewards again.
properties (22)
authorocrdu
permlinkre-abit-re-stellabelle-re-snowflake-a-case-for-eliminating-curation-rewards-20170306t144650052z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2017-03-06 14:46:54
last_update2017-03-06 14:48:12
depth3
children0
last_payout2017-04-06 03:28:54
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length346
author_reputation140,931,335,327,250
root_title"A case for eliminating curation rewards"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id2,657,729
net_rshares0
@snowflake ·
A linear reward curve will improve power concentration but people will still be voting for thing that pay instead of things that they like.
Another positive when eliminating curation rewards is that active users will have more power, and if whales are smart about increasing the value of steem they will refrain from voting to let the minnows/dolphins ( who actually buy steem power) do their thing.
properties (22)
authorsnowflake
permlinkre-abit-re-stellabelle-re-snowflake-a-case-for-eliminating-curation-rewards-20170306t060038400z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2017-03-06 06:00:39
last_update2017-03-06 06:00:39
depth3
children3
last_payout2017-04-06 03:28:54
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length399
author_reputation33,312,252,512,655
root_title"A case for eliminating curation rewards"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id2,654,981
net_rshares0
@stellabelle ·
$0.05
http://i.giphy.com/IIv5dqZIh2rMQ.gif

No idea why this post is $6.14 when it has 207 comments and 305 views.
broken.....
👍  ,
properties (23)
authorstellabelle
permlinkre-snowflake-a-case-for-eliminating-curation-rewards-20170306t230400631z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"image":["http://i.giphy.com/IIv5dqZIh2rMQ.gif"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2017-03-06 23:04:00
last_update2017-03-06 23:04:00
depth1
children11
last_payout2017-04-06 03:28:54
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.054 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length120
author_reputation516,061,669,130,124
root_title"A case for eliminating curation rewards"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id2,661,008
net_rshares1,620,864,501,103
author_curate_reward""
vote details (2)
@snowflake ·
It's a controversial subject or/and whales are not ready for this 

>Steemit is reaching that tricky stage where early adopters become resistant to change in service of "protecting their existing benefits" while also being aware that continued growth depends on making changes in such ways that the community becomes attractive to newcomers.
properties (22)
authorsnowflake
permlinkre-stellabelle-re-snowflake-a-case-for-eliminating-curation-rewards-20170306t235308800z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2017-03-06 23:53:09
last_update2017-03-06 23:53:09
depth2
children10
last_payout2017-04-06 03:28:54
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length341
author_reputation33,312,252,512,655
root_title"A case for eliminating curation rewards"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id2,661,346
net_rshares0
@stellabelle ·
I'm a semi early adopter and I am all for this. When something is not working, I'm all for fixing it. 
The reason you're getting resistance is the same reason most empires imploded. Humans are stuck in a downward cycle. SAD!
👍  ,
properties (23)
authorstellabelle
permlinkre-snowflake-re-stellabelle-re-snowflake-a-case-for-eliminating-curation-rewards-20170306t235940957z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2017-03-06 23:59:39
last_update2017-03-06 23:59:39
depth3
children5
last_payout2017-04-06 03:28:54
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length224
author_reputation516,061,669,130,124
root_title"A case for eliminating curation rewards"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id2,661,400
net_rshares103,907,890,811
author_curate_reward""
vote details (2)
@stellabelle ·
I will say though, I invested only my time, so my perception is different. I also have a very different understanding of money. To me, money is just energy. But when a bad path is followed for too long, that's when people usually lose it all.
👍  
properties (23)
authorstellabelle
permlinkre-snowflake-re-stellabelle-re-snowflake-a-case-for-eliminating-curation-rewards-20170307t000113364z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2017-03-07 00:01:12
last_update2017-03-07 00:01:12
depth3
children1
last_payout2017-04-06 03:28:54
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length242
author_reputation516,061,669,130,124
root_title"A case for eliminating curation rewards"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id2,661,412
net_rshares409,016,698
author_curate_reward""
vote details (1)
@stellabelle ·
The reality is: YOUR POST IS VIRAL. It's good that it's on the trending page, but quite sad that it only made six bucks. Obviously, if i was a whale, I'd put my 100% behind this post, FOR THE COMMENTS ALONE....
👍  ,
properties (23)
authorstellabelle
permlinkre-snowflake-re-stellabelle-re-snowflake-a-case-for-eliminating-curation-rewards-20170307t000245139z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2017-03-07 00:02:45
last_update2017-03-07 00:02:45
depth3
children1
last_payout2017-04-06 03:28:54
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length210
author_reputation516,061,669,130,124
root_title"A case for eliminating curation rewards"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id2,661,427
net_rshares4,543,507,220
author_curate_reward""
vote details (2)
@surpassinggoogle ·
210 comments, is no joke. this is a huge topic. Who knew!
properties (22)
authorsurpassinggoogle
permlinkre-snowflake-a-case-for-eliminating-curation-rewards-20170306t234004595z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"app":"busy/1.0.0"}
created2017-03-06 23:40:03
last_update2017-03-06 23:40:03
depth1
children0
last_payout2017-04-06 03:28:54
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length57
author_reputation527,661,560,108,742
root_title"A case for eliminating curation rewards"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id2,661,277
net_rshares0
@susanli3769 ·
Hey, I am trying to catch up. I am still new to this community. But have been seeing many good things with this community, And received a lot supports from people. Your article is very interesting. I also tend to agree with your conclusion. But how we can make it happen? Thanks
properties (22)
authorsusanli3769
permlinkre-snowflake-a-case-for-eliminating-curation-rewards-20170904t031357945z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2017-09-04 03:13:57
last_update2017-09-04 03:13:57
depth1
children0
last_payout2017-09-11 03:13:57
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length278
author_reputation1,306,124,128,287,106
root_title"A case for eliminating curation rewards"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id13,804,009
net_rshares0
@timcliff ·
Great post. Very well written.
👍  ,
properties (23)
authortimcliff
permlinkre-snowflake-a-case-for-eliminating-curation-rewards-20170305t062758988z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2017-03-05 06:27:57
last_update2017-03-05 06:27:57
depth1
children0
last_payout2017-04-06 03:28:54
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length30
author_reputation272,954,445,077,789
root_title"A case for eliminating curation rewards"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id2,647,788
net_rshares141,398,316,549
author_curate_reward""
vote details (2)
@transisto · (edited)
$0.48
I disagree that the curation reward should be completely removed. It would certainly be a good idea to consider reducing it to something like 10% or 5%. The code is already there and an infrastructure was built around it. I can think of many inefficiencies that can be resolved by that extra incentive. (I'm not an expert and didn't think everything through, but that seems like a safer alternative)

The way the reward curve was made combined with curation reward meant that cabals would make money by colluding to upvote the same content, no matter what the content was.

The content upvoted by these guilds is, by internet standard, garbage. They are often the kind of posts that one wouldn't bother posting on their own facebook feed. Yet this "100% original content" get created for the sole purpose of being posted on steem.

Curie has a mission to encourage people who fail. People who manage to fail repetitively but show perseverance get the equivalent of a welfare handout.
<b>How unspectacular is this from the outside world?</b>

https://steemit.com/steemit/@donkeypong/announcing-project-curie-bringing-rewards-and-recognition-to-steemit-s-undiscovered-and-emerging-authors

 "Only original content. Articles, poetry, photography, videos, recipes, etc." 

There are billions of times more content being produced online that one can consume, 99.99% of this content is made available for free and 99% of this content is being produced for free. The concept of incentivizing the creation of completely original content solely for being consumed on steemit.com (a still half-assed UI) was a bad idea, yet Ned, Bernie and bunch of whales have put their SP behind this concept through guilds. I have no idea to what extent the people at the top of this platform are clueless about content marketing but I am very scared about my investment if it continues anywhere near that path.
👍  , , , , , ,
properties (23)
authortransisto
permlinkre-snowflake-a-case-for-eliminating-curation-rewards-20170305t121553729z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"links":["https://steemit.com/steemit/@donkeypong/announcing-project-curie-bringing-rewards-and-recognition-to-steemit-s-undiscovered-and-emerging-authors"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2017-03-05 12:15:54
last_update2017-03-05 13:10:39
depth1
children5
last_payout2017-04-06 03:28:54
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.361 HBD
curator_payout_value0.120 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length1,887
author_reputation330,357,940,720,833
root_title"A case for eliminating curation rewards"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id2,649,114
net_rshares7,165,971,616,558
author_curate_reward""
vote details (7)
@liberosist ·
$5.88
This is a very, very small community in its nascent stage, so it's only natural that a vast majority of content is mediocre. There's no one "guilds". There can be guilds of various kinds. It simply means a collaborative curation effort. I would love to see collaborative curation focusing on non-original, engaging content. If there's a Curie focusing on original content, there needs to be guilds that focus on non-original content. That the community hasn't bothered in over 6 months makes me fear that maybe people are just interested in original content on Steemit... Yes, the content may be mostly mediocre, but it's the best Steemit can do right now. 

Since you seem so strongly against original content and you are on of the top investors, I'd encourage you to take the initiative and promote curation of non-original content etc. I'm doing my bit by voting on such content, but of course, we need like whales like yourself to support such initiatives to have any impact. All the best.
👍  , , ,
properties (23)
authorliberosist
permlinkre-transisto-re-snowflake-a-case-for-eliminating-curation-rewards-20170306t114232674z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2017-03-06 11:42:36
last_update2017-03-06 11:42:36
depth2
children0
last_payout2017-04-06 03:28:54
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value4.412 HBD
curator_payout_value1.470 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length993
author_reputation177,167,275,265,899
root_title"A case for eliminating curation rewards"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id2,656,442
net_rshares29,321,356,719,108
author_curate_reward""
vote details (4)
@remlaps · (edited)
$6.11
> The content upvoted by these guilds is, by internet standard, garbage. They are often the kind of posts that one wouldn't bother posting on their own facebook feed. Yet this "100% original content" get created for the sole purpose of being posted on steem.
> 
> Curie has a mission to encourage people who fail. People who manage to fail repetitively but show perseverance get the equivalent of a welfare handout.

In a vibrant market, I would agree with this, but we're not there yet.   There aren't enough people here to determine what success or failure really means, so voters and guilds need to make judgement calls about what will attract people who are off-platform and don't have the ability to vote for themselves.  Right now, I think that new visitors need to see some, "I can do that" content, and authors need to be encouraged to post about topics other than proposed adjustments to the curation rewards curve and flagging.

I agree totally about the focus on original  and substantive content.  Even busy.org can't really be like traditional social media, because they share the blockchain with steemit and posts there are probably still going to get flagged by people on steemit for "link spam."  It really smothers organic behavior.  Of all changes in hf17, I'm most encouraged by the elimination of the penalty for more than 4 post per day.
👍  , ,
properties (23)
authorremlaps
permlinkre-transisto-re-snowflake-a-case-for-eliminating-curation-rewards-20170305t210829534z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2017-03-05 21:08:30
last_update2017-03-05 21:09:15
depth2
children0
last_payout2017-04-06 03:28:54
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value4.584 HBD
curator_payout_value1.528 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length1,358
author_reputation33,149,047,814,372
root_title"A case for eliminating curation rewards"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id2,652,609
net_rshares29,924,805,480,414
author_curate_reward""
vote details (3)
@snowflake ·
>. It would certainly be a good idea to consider reducing it to something like 10% or 5%

This wouldn't remove any issues caused by curation rewards.
properties (22)
authorsnowflake
permlinkre-transisto-re-snowflake-a-case-for-eliminating-curation-rewards-20170305t194510700z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2017-03-05 19:45:12
last_update2017-03-05 19:45:12
depth2
children2
last_payout2017-04-06 03:28:54
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length149
author_reputation33,312,252,512,655
root_title"A case for eliminating curation rewards"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id2,652,016
net_rshares0
@transisto ·
I would reduce the incentive for people to delegate their SP onto guilds for the content reward. I'm not saying it would remove all issues I mean it would reduce it over time.
properties (22)
authortransisto
permlinkre-snowflake-re-transisto-re-snowflake-a-case-for-eliminating-curation-rewards-20170305t231846759z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2017-03-05 23:18:45
last_update2017-03-05 23:18:45
depth3
children1
last_payout2017-04-06 03:28:54
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.000 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length175
author_reputation330,357,940,720,833
root_title"A case for eliminating curation rewards"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id2,653,409
net_rshares0