create account

RE: Proposed Upgrade for Blockchain Incentives by teamsteem

View this thread on: hive.blogpeakd.comecency.com

Viewing a response to: @arhag/re-smooth-re-steemitblog-proposed-upgrade-for-blockchain-incentives-20161118t195900774z

· @teamsteem ·
I think I like the idea of 3 separated pool rewards. At least 2 separated pool for posts and comments the way @arhag propose really seems to make a lot of sense. I'll be awaiting more tinkering, details and comments to make a better opinion of those proposals. 

Also I'm not sure I understand the statement below. If comments don't have curation rewards then what will be the incentives to vote for those comments? 

> Comments should not have curation rewards because those who are reading have already found the discussion by other means.

What @smooth said is a no brainer in my opinion.

> Voting up the most insightful, entertaining, etc. comments can be both non-trivial effort and add a lot of value.
👍  , ,
properties (23)
authorteamsteem
permlinkre-arhag-re-smooth-re-steemitblog-proposed-upgrade-for-blockchain-incentives-20161119t032135438z
categorysteem
json_metadata{"tags":["steem"],"users":["arhag","smooth"]}
created2016-11-19 03:21:30
last_update2016-11-19 03:21:30
depth3
children0
last_payout2016-12-19 18:20:15
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_length708
author_reputation284,804,541,406,803
root_title"Proposed Upgrade for Blockchain Incentives"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,799,786
net_rshares7,960,250,646
author_curate_reward""
vote details (3)