create account

RE: Steem experiment: Burn post #359 by whatsup

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

Viewing a response to: @burnpost/pyvrys

· @whatsup ·
$0.06
Downvoting because I don't think this belongs on trending.  Not meant to insult the Author or the project.
👍  
properties (23)
authorwhatsup
permlinkpywwc4
categorysteem
json_metadata{"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2019-10-05 17:24:06
last_update2019-10-05 17:24:06
depth2
children5
last_payout2019-10-12 17:24:06
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.029 HBD
curator_payout_value0.029 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length106
author_reputation519,839,651,581,670
root_title"Steem experiment: Burn post #359"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id91,258,928
net_rshares306,453,183,051
author_curate_reward""
vote details (1)
@liberosist ·
$0.07
That this comment is high on Trending signals loudly that something's awry with Steem's reward allocation protocols. What a shocker, I know. In my opinion, this content is more valuable than those above it, which are mostly either Steem circlejerk or far-right conspiracy trash. The only consumable (though mediocre) content appears to be self-voted (by themselves or representing a group) by a whale.
👍  ,
properties (23)
authorliberosist
permlinkpyxt5e
categorysteem
json_metadata{"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2019-10-06 05:12:45
last_update2019-10-06 05:12:45
depth3
children0
last_payout2019-10-13 05:12:45
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.036 HBD
curator_payout_value0.030 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length401
author_reputation177,167,275,265,899
root_title"Steem experiment: Burn post #359"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id91,272,679
net_rshares373,594,523,430
author_curate_reward""
vote details (2)
@smooth · (edited)
That's fair but IMO this is more a question of whether the Trending page is really implemented and featured in an ideal manner, and perhaps having this 'content' there is a way to drive home the point.

It is entirely possible that this is the 4th most "value-contributing" content item (after considering time weighting), even if not the 4th most interesting to read or feature. Of course, people can disagree on that too, but it is a different question from whether value paid (or in this case burned) should be used to determine featured visibility status.

BTW, I consider downvotes of @burnpost content to be entirely legitimate and proper. Stakeholders who feel more should be allocated to burning and those who feel less should be allocated to burning (as well as visibility effects) have equally legitimate say in the matter. The resulting consensus should determine the amount burned.
properties (22)
authorsmooth
permlinkpyx3jg
categorysteem
json_metadata{"users":["burnpost"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2019-10-05 19:59:42
last_update2019-10-05 20:03:00
depth3
children3
last_payout2019-10-12 19:59:42
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_length893
author_reputation260,342,945,372,716
root_title"Steem experiment: Burn post #359"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id91,262,651
net_rshares0
@whatsup ·
$0.06
Agreed the trending page is not ideal.

And yes, the value of burning is hard to know.

Appreciate your acceptance of the dv.  

I don't know how important the trending page is either, but since we are asking the community to help clean things up, I would rather not see this so prominent.    I think it sets a bad example.

I realize it is subjective.
👍  
properties (23)
authorwhatsup
permlinkpyx3q3
categorysteem
json_metadata{"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2019-10-05 20:03:42
last_update2019-10-05 20:03:42
depth4
children2
last_payout2019-10-12 20:03:42
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.029 HBD
curator_payout_value0.029 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length352
author_reputation519,839,651,581,670
root_title"Steem experiment: Burn post #359"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id91,262,745
net_rshares306,848,487,843
author_curate_reward""
vote details (1)
@hobo.media · (edited)
Actually, this burnpost project seems hypocritical considering many of the people supporting it would flag other posts for repetitive posts not adding content value. Steemcleaners receiving upvotes for spam posts is also hypocritical. But my understanding is that burnpost somehow is protecting the SBD peg to the US dollar. 

That is why @hobo.media has been upvoting it. If it seems to not be true then @hobo.media will stop.
properties (22)
authorhobo.media
permlinkpyz5vj
categorysteem
json_metadata{"app":"steemit/0.1","users":["hobo.media"]}
created2019-10-06 22:45:21
last_update2019-10-06 22:46:30
depth5
children1
last_payout2019-10-13 22:45:21
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_length427
author_reputation21,121,859,045,871
root_title"Steem experiment: Burn post #359"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id91,296,837
net_rshares0