RE: A case for eliminating curation rewards by remlaps

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

Viewing a response to: @snowflake/re-remlaps-re-snowflake-re-remlaps-re-snowflake-a-case-for-eliminating-curation-rewards-20170305t191407500z

steem · @remlaps · Mar 5 '17

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

@snowflake: "Voting is the whole point of steem"

Which is it?  If voting "bring absolutely no value to the platform," then get rid of it, and curation rewards too.

If "voting is the whole point of steem," then incentivize it and keep or increase the curation rewards, and wait patiently while competition for rewards forces voters to get better and better, increasing content quality on the platform and demand for steem.

You can't have it both ways.  I happen to agree with your second version of the truth.

properties (22)

`author`	remlaps
`permlink`	re-snowflake-re-remlaps-re-snowflake-re-remlaps-re-snowflake-a-case-for-eliminating-curation-rewards-20170305t201947227z
`category`	steem
`json_metadata`	{"tags":["steem"],"users":["snowflake"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
`created`	2017-03-05 20:19:48
`last_update`	2017-03-05 20:19:48
`depth`	5
`children`	3
`last_payout`	2017-04-06 03:28:54
`cashout_time`	1969-12-31 23:59:59
`total_payout_value`	0.000 HBD
`curator_payout_value`	0.000 HBD
`pending_payout_value`	0.000 HBD
`promoted`	0.000 HBD
`body_length`	626
`author_reputation`	33,149,047,814,372
`root_title`	"A case for eliminating curation rewards"
`beneficiaries`	`[]`
`max_accepted_payout`	1,000,000.000 HBD
`percent_hbd`	10,000
`post_id`	2,652,256
`net_rshares`	0

@remlaps · Mar 5 '17

Nesting limit. Replying to your post.

So in summation: You believe that voting (which is not curation) is, "the whole point of steem," but you don't think it deserves to be explicitly rewarded.  Instead, you believe that voters (who are not curators) should be conscripted into service for the authors and steem-holders to gain profits and ROIs?

Personally, I cannot subscribe to a philosophy that permits one class of stakeholders (authors) to behave parasitically towards another (voters), so it seems that we just have a fundamental disagreement of ideas.  I wish you a good evening.

properties (22)

`author`	remlaps
`permlink`	re-remlaps-re-snowflake-re-remlaps-re-snowflake-re-remlaps-re-snowflake-a-case-for-eliminating-curation-rewards-20170305t215150888z
`category`	steem
`json_metadata`	{"tags":["steem"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
`created`	2017-03-05 21:51:51
`last_update`	2017-03-05 21:51:51
`depth`	6
`children`	0
`last_payout`	2017-04-06 03:28:54
`cashout_time`	1969-12-31 23:59:59
`total_payout_value`	0.000 HBD
`curator_payout_value`	0.000 HBD
`pending_payout_value`	0.000 HBD
`promoted`	0.000 HBD
`body_length`	588
`author_reputation`	33,149,047,814,372
`root_title`	"A case for eliminating curation rewards"
`beneficiaries`	`[]`
`max_accepted_payout`	1,000,000.000 HBD
`percent_hbd`	10,000
`post_id`	2,652,933
`net_rshares`	0

@snowflake · Mar 5 '17

I didn't say voting I said " curators".  There is a nuance there.  Voters and curators are not the same thing.  Voters vote for the content that they like,  curators vote for the content that pay the most.

properties (22)

`author`	snowflake
`permlink`	re-remlaps-re-snowflake-re-remlaps-re-snowflake-re-remlaps-re-snowflake-a-case-for-eliminating-curation-rewards-20170305t202934200z
`category`	steem
`json_metadata`	{"tags":["steem"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
`created`	2017-03-05 20:29:33
`last_update`	2017-03-05 20:29:33
`depth`	6
`children`	0
`last_payout`	2017-04-06 03:28:54
`cashout_time`	1969-12-31 23:59:59
`total_payout_value`	0.000 HBD
`curator_payout_value`	0.000 HBD
`pending_payout_value`	0.000 HBD
`promoted`	0.000 HBD
`body_length`	205
`author_reputation`	33,312,252,512,655
`root_title`	"A case for eliminating curation rewards"
`beneficiaries`	`[]`
`max_accepted_payout`	1,000,000.000 HBD
`percent_hbd`	10,000
`post_id`	2,652,315
`net_rshares`	0

@snowflake · Mar 6 '17 (edited)

>So in summation: You believe that voting (which is not curation) is, "the whole point of steem," but you don't think it deserves to be explicitly rewarded. Instead, you believe that voters (who are not curators) should be conscripted into service for the authors and steem-holders to gain profits and ROIs?

I believe that the current curation rewards system is doing a lot more harm than good.
If you know a system where curation doesn't involved robots and where people are actually voting for things that they like then I' ll revise my opinion.

>Personally, I cannot subscribe to a philosophy that permits one class of stakeholders (authors) to behave parasitically towards another (voters), 

This is non sense, voters are also stakeholders.

properties (22)