create account

Improving the Steem platform for long-term content by theoretical

View this thread on: hive.blogpeakd.comecency.com
· @theoretical ·
$64.90
Improving the Steem platform for long-term content
I've been working steadily over the past couple days on one of the routine housekeeping tasks that's been neglected of late, namely, getting our Github issue tracker under control -- sorting, opening, closing, and replying to various tickets. As the ecosystem's grown and matured, I've discovered a need to change my personal workflow away from the development-oriented workflow I used in early Steem days, back to the more issue-tracker-centric, maintenance-oriented workflow I used in the later BitShares days. Which, among other things, means classifying every single ticket in my personal Zenhub according to how urgently it needs my attention. So I've been looking at a lot of tickets lately.

[This ticket](https://github.com/steemit/steem/issues/267) started out straightforwardly enough, as a request to revert the change which limits posts to two payout cycles. As I stated in my reply to the ticket, the reason we decided not to do this is to reduce our memory usage and limit the working set which needs to be kept in memory by consensus nodes. I would ordinarily have closed the ticket right then, but it was generating a lot of high-quality discussion, so I decided to let it run for a bit. I'm closing it now, though, and asking the discussion to continue in the comments here.

At first, I was a bit puzzled by the degree of controversy this straightforward change created. After all, Reddit archives old posts and discussions, disabling any updates or upvotes, probably with similar technical justifications, and nobody's up in arms about it.

But I eventually figured out what's going on here.

It's been my working assumption -- and likely the working assumption of others on the development team -- that Steem is all about *fresh, new* content; the value of content rapidly diminishes as its age increases. Many aspects of the system -- for example, how the sorting works -- are also designed with this assumption in mind. Let's call this Type I content.

But there is another type of content. A wiki, a blog, a Stackoverflow question, or (ironically enough) a Github ticket may continue to be relevant long after it is published. Let's call this Type II content. For [another ticket](https://github.com/steemit/steem/issues/283) I asked @dantheman for his opinion on where the canonical location for build instructions should be; his answer was to place them in the source tree. This was a simple, straightforward practical question with a simple, straightforward practical answer, and neither of us thought much about it at the time. But the question we should have asked ourselves was this one: *Why don't we store the build instructions in Steem?* And the answer is that build instructions are Type II content, and Steem simply isn't designed for it, which meant we'd have too many annoyances if we tried it.

In short, our focus on Type I content means that Type II content is something of a second-class citizen. And the assumption that we don't care about Type II content has become deeply ingrained in our thinking, to the point where we'd stopped noticing the missed opportunities.

So here are the questions I'm going to ponder:

- If we were designing Steem from the ground up, but we decided to design it with a focus on Type II content instead of Type I content, what choices would we have made differently?
- What is the right path to making Type II content a first-class citizen in Steem?

I haven't even begun to properly consider these questions, but I think they're important. What do you think?
πŸ‘  , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , and 103 others
πŸ‘Ž  ,
properties (23)
authortheoretical
permlinkimproving-the-steem-platform-for-long-term-content
categorytheoretical
json_metadata{"tags":["theoretical"],"users":["dantheman"],"links":["https://github.com/steemit/steem/issues/267"]}
created2016-08-18 17:28:09
last_update2016-08-18 17:28:09
depth0
children54
last_payout2016-09-18 19:36:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value59.776 HBD
curator_payout_value5.122 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length3,532
author_reputation30,164,760,525,645
root_title"Improving the Steem platform for long-term content"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id874,144
net_rshares21,258,577,311,450
author_curate_reward""
vote details (169)
@akareyon · (edited)
I am more than glad to hear that you are having these thoughts and realising the potential value of timeless posts, the "Moby Dicks" and "Iliads" of our time. It will be a huge incentive for those who don't just spend hours, but days and weeks on their thoughts and are reluctant to "produce for the trash bin". 

How could it be implemented? Can Type I and II always be discerned upon conception? 

If it is possible to adjust the payout time from 24 hrs to 12 and back and add one for the month, I imagine it is technically feasible to make it so that even years later a post - a classic which OOTL noobs constantly need to be pointed to for example - can catch an upvote still. Or maybe a "nouveau riche" powerful user stumbles over something valuable in the archives next year, maybe the Gini coefficient becomes more reasonable as reasonably active readers catch up on a 500-page Steemit webcomic...

Why not allow weekly or monthly... "pensions"? Nothing needs to be taken from anywhere else, just as the 30-day payouts don't "take from" the 12/24-hr payouts perceptibly and just leave away the whole curation award calculation, if I understand correctly: the ratio Type I/II upvotes will probably exceed 1 by far due to the curation incentives alone. No new module needs to be invented, no new pedestal be chiseled, just a restriction needs to be lifted, it seems...?

That announcement alone would already have made me quite curious and happy :) Who asks for much?

But now that you ask what it should be like to concentrate on such content first and foremost... 

###### ...then one form of curation would be for some, myself included, in becoming archivars, data snorkels, archaelogist who dig deep into the forgotten and lost to unearth gems and treasure of never beheld beauty. 

It does not have to be the same scheme as in the 24h run, but let's say a mole finds this 5-year old heart-gripping soul-ripping post that sat at 4 upvotes and .02 $ all the time and it suddenly explodes over the next few weeks, this digger objectively did some great work. 

That would be my first thought, I think.
πŸ‘  , ,
properties (23)
authorakareyon
permlinkre-theoretical-improving-the-steem-platform-for-long-term-content-20160819t014023541z
categorytheoretical
json_metadata{"tags":["theoretical"]}
created2016-08-19 01:40:21
last_update2016-08-19 01:40:57
depth1
children0
last_payout2016-09-18 19:36:51
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_length2,108
author_reputation6,770,831,834,202
root_title"Improving the Steem platform for long-term content"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id881,531
net_rshares4,989,298,562
author_curate_reward""
vote details (3)
@arcurus ·
$0.02
Β¨the reason we decided not to do this is to reduce our memory usage and limit the working set which needs to be kept in memory by consensus nodes.Β¨

@theoretical can you please give more details / an example / some numbers for this statement.

The text itself is static and could be stored in the Interplanetary File System.
So the question is what is about the consensus? Is it that expansive, if so what part?

Just as suggestion:
Couldn't rewarding content be the same way implemented like a simple transaction? Like every day you can distribute 0,1% of your ¨inflated¨ steem power to articles payed out in steem dollars. Steem Power that is not be distributed after 30 days is evenly distributed to all active participants.
Self / sybil voting is visible through the transparency of the blockchain. Participants that do self / sybil voting could therefore be flagged.

For example you have 100 Steem Power. If you dont vote for 10 days you have 100 * 0,1% * 10 = 1 Steem converted to steem dollars worth to distribute.
If 50% of the Steem power holder do not take part in voting, you have 2 Steem to distribute.
With the vote itself, a part of that could be instantly transfered to the owner of the article. No need for any further consensus. 
If one self votes, the account itself could get flagged. With every flag the steem power to distribute could be the same way reduced like an upvote would have given. Both the flagger and the flagged person loosens therefore equally steem to distribute, that could be distributed from others.
πŸ‘  
properties (23)
authorarcurus
permlinkre-theoretical-improving-the-steem-platform-for-long-term-content-20160818t191051923z
categorytheoretical
json_metadata{"tags":["theoretical"],"users":["theoretical"]}
created2016-08-18 19:10:51
last_update2016-08-18 19:10:51
depth1
children0
last_payout2016-09-18 19:36:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.024 HBD
curator_payout_value0.000 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length1,539
author_reputation549,553,053,579
root_title"Improving the Steem platform for long-term content"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id875,918
net_rshares53,031,238,528
author_curate_reward""
vote details (1)
@dantheman ·
$3.52
Theoretical's statements regarding memory usage being the primary consideration are not fully on point.  The primary consideration is the "attention of the masses".   The overall security of the voting platform depends upon all things that can get voted upon being rewarded.

There are two fundamental use cases for Steem... content and currency.  

Exchanges, merchants, etc need the ability to run nodes that are fully up to date on the economic state of the platform without respect to the social media side of the platform.

The sooner content can be separated from having financial consequences the more efficient the platform becomes for financial applications.  It is financial applications that ultimately give the platform value many times that of other social media networks.

Posts that are eligible to receive payout need to keep track of "votes" and all other information relevant to the post.  Removing the financial rewards associated with a post is sufficient for freeing things from memory.  Those that wish to have a meta consensus above the economic consensus can.
πŸ‘  , , , , , , , , , , , ,
properties (23)
authordantheman
permlinkre-theoretical-improving-the-steem-platform-for-long-term-content-20160818t203347792z
categorytheoretical
json_metadata{"tags":["theoretical"]}
created2016-08-18 20:33:48
last_update2016-08-18 20:33:48
depth1
children9
last_payout2016-09-18 19:36:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value3.486 HBD
curator_payout_value0.032 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length1,083
author_reputation240,292,002,602,347
root_title"Improving the Steem platform for long-term content"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id877,314
net_rshares3,747,315,204,322
author_curate_reward""
vote details (13)
@alifton · (edited)
@dantheman, I'm not sure every one quite understands the quandry posed when trying to enable a "forever payout" model when using Graphene as a framework for Steemit.  I'll do my best to explain, but I'm sure I'll have missed some major key points as to why such a model is a much bigger problem than most people realize. Anyone who can point out things I missed please feel free to do so.

-----------------------------------------
####  Why the forever payout model may not be as easy to implement as some might think :
----------------------------------------
The issue at hand is a very complex one because Graphene is a very different style of framework on which to build a social media platform.  It's a very resilient framework that utilizes a Peer-to-Peer system to help distribute all content and transactions via a blockchain in a highly ordered and very expeditious manner, rather than constantly querying a centralized database over and over to access content.

With that upside comes the downside of it not being meant for long term random reads and writes like most other social media frameworks.  Because Steemit uses a linear blockchain to get everything accomplished (unlike wikipedia) its blocks are unchangeable once they're validated and merged with the existing blockchain. 

That's pretty much the root cause of the whole long term payout issue and where the long term payout problem stems from.  You can always add to the existing blockchain but you can not go backwards and simply rewrite it.  Once blocks have become part of the blockchain they remain immutable and may only be referenced, but must remain unchanged to preserve the integrity of the blockchain. Adding to or taking away from an existing post's payout has to end at sometime (based on how Steemit is currently written) or it would cause a whole mess of other issues that come with running a massive decentralized database. Such an overhaul would completely negate the merits of a Graphene based Peer-to-Peer network with an immutable blockchain. (Unless someone pulls a crazy thing like Ethereum, in which case all bets are off and we all saw how well that's working out.)

The choice to use Graphene poses a bit of a quandary when utilized as a social media framework because its biggest trade off is the speed and resilience that comes from using a decentralized Peer-to-Peer network with an immutable blockchain, in favor of a much slower centralized database that can be rewritten indefinitely.  Graphene was never meant to be an indexing style of framework like the ones used for platforms like Facebook, Reddit, and Wikipedia.  Graphene favors lots of small transactions happening in an incredibly short period of time and by its very nature was likely (originally) best suited for a Twitter style platform and not a Reddit or Facebook style one.  Steemit took a massive quantum leap in trying to bridge that gap by utilizing the methodology of a Graphene style blockchain to accomplish the best of both worlds on a decentralized Peer-to-Peer network.

That sort of thing is something that simply could not be accomplished by Facebook, Reddit, or Wikipedia because they all rely on very centralized servers to get the same job done.  They do so however by sacrificing the benefits you gain from decentralization in terms of speed, resilience, and the Peer-to-Peer viability that Graphene has to offer.

----------------------------------------

**Is there a perfect solution to the forever payouts model that's been proposed?  I honestly don't know at this time. I'm still very much at a loss as to how this sort of thing would be accomplished given the very nature and limitations that come with using Graphene as the framework with which the Steemit platform was built.**
properties (22)
authoralifton
permlinkre-dantheman-re-theoretical-improving-the-steem-platform-for-long-term-content-20160818t224849065z
categorytheoretical
json_metadata{"tags":["theoretical"],"users":["dantheman"]}
created2016-08-18 22:48:42
last_update2016-08-18 22:52:27
depth2
children6
last_payout2016-09-18 19:36:51
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_length3,768
author_reputation661,948,714,392
root_title"Improving the Steem platform for long-term content"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id879,286
net_rshares0
@arcurus ·
the blockchain itself does not necessarily need to store all the content. The static content / even the updates could be stored in the Interplanetary File System. What is needed to be stored in the blockchain in the end is just a hash of the content, that doesnt sound that expensive to me.  
So yes, we could create a p2p wiki, and yes we could store the hash of it in the blockchain, and yes we could allow to make micro transactions (upvotes) for all content. The main problem we could run into is, that the upvotes becomes too much to handle. But this problem we have also now...
properties (22)
authorarcurus
permlinkre-alifton-re-dantheman-re-theoretical-improving-the-steem-platform-for-long-term-content-20160819t060223219z
categorytheoretical
json_metadata{"tags":["theoretical"]}
created2016-08-19 06:02:21
last_update2016-08-19 06:02:21
depth3
children0
last_payout2016-09-18 19:36:51
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_length583
author_reputation549,553,053,579
root_title"Improving the Steem platform for long-term content"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id884,371
net_rshares0
@arhag ·
> That's pretty much the root cause of the whole long term payout issue

Actually the bigger issue with the long term payout model seems to be less the technical side (which could be fixed with some changes to the platform so that no comment or vote objects need to be kept in RAM) and more the issue of limited voter attention to fight potential "payout farming" abuse.
πŸ‘  
properties (23)
authorarhag
permlinkre-alifton-re-dantheman-re-theoretical-improving-the-steem-platform-for-long-term-content-20160819t020351358z
categorytheoretical
json_metadata{"tags":["theoretical"]}
created2016-08-19 02:03:51
last_update2016-08-19 02:03:51
depth3
children2
last_payout2016-09-18 19:36:51
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_length370
author_reputation52,490,827,205,383
root_title"Improving the Steem platform for long-term content"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id881,791
net_rshares432,583,923
author_curate_reward""
vote details (1)
@markrmorrisjr ·
Is there a way to renew that block at specific intervals, so that the old block goes into archive, while a clone is put up for another 30 days?
properties (22)
authormarkrmorrisjr
permlinkre-alifton-re-dantheman-re-theoretical-improving-the-steem-platform-for-long-term-content-20160818t232116331z
categorytheoretical
json_metadata{"tags":["theoretical"]}
created2016-08-18 23:22:21
last_update2016-08-18 23:22:21
depth3
children1
last_payout2016-09-18 19:36:51
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_reputation118,896,685,049,569
root_title"Improving the Steem platform for long-term content"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id879,774
net_rshares0
@markrmorrisjr ·
Yeah, if that's what you thought any of us were saying, you weren't paying attention. It's about long term, small scale monetization, which would have been possible if payouts had stayed residual on a 30 day cycle, with us being responsible to  bring new eyeballs to the content to even earn ANY upvotes, let alone enough to make a payout, but what I hear you saying is that long term, the payouts for content creation are not a part of the strategy, at all, is that correct? If so, tell us now, because that changes everything.
πŸ‘  
properties (23)
authormarkrmorrisjr
permlinkre-dantheman-re-theoretical-improving-the-steem-platform-for-long-term-content-20160818t225041845z
categorytheoretical
json_metadata{"tags":["theoretical"]}
created2016-08-18 22:51:48
last_update2016-08-18 22:51:48
depth2
children1
last_payout2016-09-18 19:36:51
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_length528
author_reputation118,896,685,049,569
root_title"Improving the Steem platform for long-term content"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id879,333
net_rshares4,288,103,610
author_curate_reward""
vote details (1)
@markrmorrisjr ·
Sorry, I misread your comment. I think you mean, the earlier payout can end on content the better for financial activity and stability. Thanks, the second comment here helps me understand your issue, but it changes the entire platform for me and anyone who thinks like me. Not enough to leave, but I certainly won't be adding long form content here.
πŸ‘  
properties (23)
authormarkrmorrisjr
permlinkre-markrmorrisjr-re-dantheman-re-theoretical-improving-the-steem-platform-for-long-term-content-20160818t225702335z
categorytheoretical
json_metadata{"tags":["theoretical"]}
created2016-08-18 22:58:06
last_update2016-08-18 22:58:06
depth3
children0
last_payout2016-09-18 19:36:51
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_length349
author_reputation118,896,685,049,569
root_title"Improving the Steem platform for long-term content"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id879,439
net_rshares4,204,023,147
author_curate_reward""
vote details (1)
@erroneous-logic ·
I think that I can't come up with a way to sort out how to reward the fresh new content AND keep up rewards for relevant reference style content at the same time. I am, of course, not the knower and sayer of all, so perhaps someone else can come up with a way. It might require a second platform entirely.
properties (22)
authorerroneous-logic
permlinkre-theoretical-improving-the-steem-platform-for-long-term-content-20160818t173713933z
categorytheoretical
json_metadata{"tags":["theoretical"]}
created2016-08-18 17:37:12
last_update2016-08-18 17:37:12
depth1
children2
last_payout2016-09-18 19:36:51
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_length305
author_reputation316,498,867,746
root_title"Improving the Steem platform for long-term content"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id874,332
net_rshares0
@markrmorrisjr ·
Older content would only get eyeballs if  someone took it upon themselves to share it. The current platform only provides a 12 hour window and again at 30 days. So that means outside sharing, new traffic and new users, since there is no way to upvote without creating an account.
properties (22)
authormarkrmorrisjr
permlinkre-erroneous-logic-re-theoretical-improving-the-steem-platform-for-long-term-content-20160818t190732939z
categorytheoretical
json_metadata{"tags":["theoretical"]}
created2016-08-18 19:08:36
last_update2016-08-18 19:08:36
depth2
children1
last_payout2016-09-18 19:36:51
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_length279
author_reputation118,896,685,049,569
root_title"Improving the Steem platform for long-term content"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id875,879
net_rshares0
@proskynneo ·
As I understand it there are two use general cases by which old content would be upvoted.

1. The author links back to their previous posts and self promotes.
2. A user discovers an author and want to look over their old content to find gems they missed when it was new. 

I imagine the passive influx of random users would be pretty minimal and that any substantial amount of voting would come from one of these two sources. Just trying to understand what you think authors are missing out on by using Steemit so that I can thoroughly think through the problem.
properties (22)
authorproskynneo
permlinkre-markrmorrisjr-re-erroneous-logic-re-theoretical-improving-the-steem-platform-for-long-term-content-20160818t201845483z
categorytheoretical
json_metadata{"tags":["theoretical"]}
created2016-08-18 20:18:45
last_update2016-08-18 20:18:45
depth3
children0
last_payout2016-09-18 19:36:51
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_length562
author_reputation4,454,785,474,512
root_title"Improving the Steem platform for long-term content"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id877,055
net_rshares0
@johnsmith · (edited)
$0.14
The value of content should not drop to zero simply because it has passed the payout window. There will likely be hundreds of thousands if not millions of new members reading 'old' content in the coming months and years. To me it would make sense to have the 24hr initial payout and then monthly payouts... forever. Why not? If I read an 'old' post and get some value from it, I upvote it and know the author will get a small reward. This could become a defining feature of the Steemit platform - permanent income streams! It would be huge, absolutely huge for content creators.
πŸ‘  , , , ,
properties (23)
authorjohnsmith
permlinkre-theoretical-improving-the-steem-platform-for-long-term-content-20160818t175313444z
categorytheoretical
json_metadata{"tags":["theoretical"]}
created2016-08-18 17:53:12
last_update2016-08-18 19:54:48
depth1
children7
last_payout2016-09-18 19:36:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.132 HBD
curator_payout_value0.007 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length578
author_reputation22,729,726,767,685
root_title"Improving the Steem platform for long-term content"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id874,568
net_rshares273,931,111,152
author_curate_reward""
vote details (5)
@arcurus ·
I fully agree. On top of that if the payout algorithm would be linear the payout could be done instantly with every vote. In this case we could not need to have different payout intervals at all. And on top of that rewards would spread more widely. 
Self / Sybil voting is easily detected through the blockchain. Therefore self voters could get flagged for selfvoting / and or the payout algorithm itself could detect cycles and discourage it / encourage voting to more ¨distant¨ participants.
properties (22)
authorarcurus
permlinkre-johnsmith-re-theoretical-improving-the-steem-platform-for-long-term-content-20160818t191657636z
categorytheoretical
json_metadata{"tags":["theoretical"]}
created2016-08-18 19:16:57
last_update2016-08-18 19:16:57
depth2
children6
last_payout2016-09-18 19:36:51
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_length493
author_reputation549,553,053,579
root_title"Improving the Steem platform for long-term content"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id876,015
net_rshares0
@markrmorrisjr ·
instant payouts wouldn't possible, without changing the "compete for this pot of steem daily" process that is already in place. As it stands, it is my understanding, that every upvote your content gets today, potentially decreases my payout, since it is all based on how many votes there are and how they are weighted, with each vote cast in a day, paying a percentage of the daily "prize"  as it were, created by the increasing volume of steem, but perhaps I am confused and this is not at all how it works.
properties (22)
authormarkrmorrisjr
permlinkre-arcurus-re-johnsmith-re-theoretical-improving-the-steem-platform-for-long-term-content-20160818t192702748z
categorytheoretical
json_metadata{"tags":["theoretical"]}
created2016-08-18 19:28:09
last_update2016-08-18 19:28:09
depth3
children5
last_payout2016-09-18 19:36:51
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_length508
author_reputation118,896,685,049,569
root_title"Improving the Steem platform for long-term content"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id876,211
net_rshares0
@mark-waser ·
$0.03
I think that you're making the mistake of conflating the SteemIt platform with the underlying Steem infrastructure.  I wouldn't change Steemit to make Type II content a first-class citizen -- I'd develop another platform (re-using the appropriate code from SteemIt liberally) with an easy method to "archive" appropriate long-term content from Steemit after 30 days.
πŸ‘  , , ,
properties (23)
authormark-waser
permlinkre-theoretical-improving-the-steem-platform-for-long-term-content-20160818t174011679z
categorytheoretical
json_metadata{"tags":["theoretical"]}
created2016-08-18 17:40:15
last_update2016-08-18 17:40:15
depth1
children1
last_payout2016-09-18 19:36:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.027 HBD
curator_payout_value0.004 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length366
author_reputation3,513,410,950,995
root_title"Improving the Steem platform for long-term content"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id874,371
net_rshares68,618,922,320
author_curate_reward""
vote details (4)
@proskynneo ·
$0.15
This isn't a clear cut issue because it expands to other aspects of the block chain. If Steem allows for an action that the Steemit.com UI does not handle well or at all, is that fair? And who decides what is and isn't fair?

For example, I manage my keys using the CLI wallet. There is no singular brain key than can recreate my keys. I lose out on the ability to easily manage my keys using Steemit.com but gain increased security (no single point of failure). You would be hard pressed to find someone that would not call my actions those of a power user, but most users would not mind because I am choosing to take the difficulty on myself.

Let's consider another example. Have you heard of vesting withdraw routes? When an account powers down, it can specify a number of destination accounts, a percentage of Steem Power to send, and whether or not to automatically power it up. I have some accounts that are powering down and auto vesting it into this account in the same block. The underlying implementation will directly convert Steem Power if I auto power up so that I do not lose satoshis of Steem on the transfer. I actually have this account set up to route 75% of my weekly power down back to itself and auto vest. That way I can have a variable power down rate week to week. Again, I do not think anyone would say this isn't the action of a power user. However, it is simple enough to understand and useful enough that "regular" users would want to use this. To the best of my knowledge, Steemit.com does not yet support the use of this operation. Is this ok? I have a distinct financial advantage in using my accounts this way that Steemit.com users do not.

Ok, so how does this relate to Type II content? If Steemit.com behaves in one way and Steem behaves in another, it could grant an advantage to those that are in "the know". Steemit.com hides poorly voted yet that content is still available on the block chain. In essence, we are promoting content that is voted above a certain amount by choosing to show it to you. The earning potential of content not shown by Steemit drops drastically. So, if there is content that is handled one way on Steemit.com and another on steemarchive.com (don't know if this is a real site or not) it could drastically advantage one community over another. Is this a good or a bad thing? How would this effect your use of the site?

I don't have answers to these questions, but I did want to point out that these issues go extend beyond content to all operations that can be done on Steem.
πŸ‘  ,
properties (23)
authorproskynneo
permlinkre-mark-waser-re-theoretical-improving-the-steem-platform-for-long-term-content-20160818t180316219z
categorytheoretical
json_metadata{"tags":["theoretical"]}
created2016-08-18 18:03:15
last_update2016-08-18 18:03:15
depth2
children0
last_payout2016-09-18 19:36:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.114 HBD
curator_payout_value0.038 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length2,542
author_reputation4,454,785,474,512
root_title"Improving the Steem platform for long-term content"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id874,745
net_rshares299,030,007,399
author_curate_reward""
vote details (2)
@markrmorrisjr ·
$0.35
I think it should be heavily considered. There are platforms such as wattpad, where writers slave for free, cranking out fiction that draws a lot of traffic. They are getting $0 from their efforts there, unless they sell books through their links to other places. A site like what Steemit appeared to be when I looked into it would provide, exactly what Steemvixen described three fold revenue that could feed a writer from one site. That potential is huge. I am a member of a single Facebook Group of writers where the population of that one group is larger than the user base of Steemit. If done correctly that could be migrated here, and they produce content, that is pretty much their  only function. If you could figure out how to do it, my friend, you guys could compete with publishers such as Amazon, and the readers themselves could even earn from comments and reviews. The potential is huge, there are literally over ten thousand groups labeled "writer" on the Facebook platform with more than 1000 members. That's just one social network, one that many writers don't even belong to for purist reasons. I think you should carefully consider making this work as the potential upside among writers, video content producers, musicians, and photographers could explode this thing, and many artists are already agoristic in their views and prone to trying and accepting new things.
πŸ‘  , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
properties (23)
authormarkrmorrisjr
permlinkre-theoretical-improving-the-steem-platform-for-long-term-content-20160818t174925274z
categorytheoretical
json_metadata{"tags":["theoretical"]}
created2016-08-18 17:50:30
last_update2016-08-18 17:50:30
depth1
children3
last_payout2016-09-18 19:36:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.314 HBD
curator_payout_value0.038 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length1,386
author_reputation118,896,685,049,569
root_title"Improving the Steem platform for long-term content"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id874,524
net_rshares631,920,122,249
author_curate_reward""
vote details (14)
@alifton · (edited)
$13.06
@markrmorrisjr, @anyx & @theoretical 
________________________________
#### Reedited this post after I went back and read what a hot mess it was because I tried to merge content from notepad, github and content related to the OP's post regarding this thread.
________________________________
Sorry if things got a bit ampped up on Github.  Going back though the ticket thread I realized that a lot of us had almost turned it into a free forum for debate rather than on topic discussion regarding the issue of payouts.  In actuality I don't think I've ever seen a Github issue thread get that derailed in a very long time and I'm sorry if I was also contributing to that as well.

To stay a bit more on topic I'd like to first turn things down a notch first by apologizing to everyone who had to dig through that thread and all of the posts that turned into long rants.  I think a lot of the heat in the debate was because the issue of voter nullification took on a big life of its own on in the past day or so. While the 2 issues at hand were unrelated they somehow got jumbled together in regards to the posts about them and they became almost one and the same, regarding upcoming changes to be made in HF 14.

Since that all started, the voter nullification issue has been tabled for the time being and I've had a chance to sleep on it to calm down a bit. Hopefully everything will stay a bit more on topic from here on out.  Sorry if my anger over one issue overflowed into the ticket about the payout times.  The last thing in the world I want to see is Steemit have the same kind of split in the user base that did irreparable damage to the Ethereum Foundation.
______________________________________
With keeping on topic about payouts and resource use, I'm also running a Witness & Mining node as well but it's not taking up anywhere near 7 GB of RAM for some reason and I'm running windows 10 which is known for it's terrible method of allocating resources.  My total RAM usage is around the 3 GB mark which is still a bit high for a simple P2P client but I find it pretty manageable having 16 GB in total right now.  Even with 7 GB being in use 16 GB would be more than enough for right now.

I'm upgrading to a total of 32 GB in the next week or so but it does sound like a bit of code optimization may be in order a full a node is eating up 7 GB now and was only eating 5 GB a few months ago.  I'm not sure if the major difference is stemming from the fact that I'm only running 5 threads right now without hyper threading on an AMD processor, if it's an OS issue or what's going on there, but 7GB for a P2P client seems high to me. If it was using about 2/3rds of that a month back then this model will obviously be unsustainable in the long term when the user base grows to a much larger size.  Regardless of payout times, more users means higher post volumes. 

If the assertion about the RAM allocation problems in relation to posts pending payout is the indeed case, then that would definitely have to be addressed before the post volumes get to be unmanageable on a standard PC. In terms of Reddit's archival policies, the time until archive is 6 months which is well beyond the current 30 day proposal for Steemit.

I've done quite a bit of homework on how the Graphene protocol works and it seems it was optimized to handle a massive amount of small transactions per second and that metric was deemed to be the most important part about Graphene.  TPS speeds rather than overall resource utilization could become a very serious issue if this platform starts to grow outside of that framework, and begins to be comprised of much larger data transactions meant to be sustained for a much longer period of time.  It may not be what Graphene was designed for, but it is how many other social media platforms in existence seem to operate today.  In regards to the life of an active thread, (paid out or not) 30 days is a very small window of time until a post is locked and archived.

Long term data accessibility will be paramount to Steemit's success if it's going to be a game changer and truly in it for the long haul.  Having a "stop grave digging up posts" mentality would put Steemit in the same class with platforms like twitter (an almost purely Type I platform), and less so into the arenas of Facebook and Reddit (much more in the realm of a Type II bias).  I would almost classify wiki as more of a Type III because not only is its past referenced regularly, but it's also updated and changed frequently which is what gives it value over both Type I and Type II style platforms.  A Type III situation would make little sense for a platform like Steemit.  Steemit is not a virtual encyclopedia but there's no reason it could not be a hybridized Type I/Type II kind of platform in which it would act as more of a library with a reference section.  There is always value in having new and fresh content in a library, but no one would debate the merits of also having a section for classic materials written long before many of us were born.  Such a library wouldn't last very long in the real world, (in keeping with the metaphor) it would instead become more of a trendy bookstore.

I'm not sure what specs have been recommended or required for the top tier of witnesses running full nodes but it sounds like multiple SSD's in Raid 0 may almost become a necessity if people start topping out on RAM and have to rely on virtual memory to pick up the slack. While that solution isn't nearly as cost effective or ideal as popping in a bit of extra RAM, when speed counts it's about the only way to go without the need for a full on conversion to rack mounted server blades or off site hosting in a data center.

It's hopefully possible that a combination of the 2 solutions (both code optimization and SSDs in a RAID 0 config) will become more plausible in the near future. Hardware prices are continuing to drop rapidly as SSDs become more of the norm rather than the exception, and during that time more data can be extrapolated in terms of the future rate of growth for this platform.  I'm hoping that more data on what is necessary in terms of long term scalability can mitigate the need to archive old blocks for the sole purpose of saving on system resources. This kind of platform has the potential to be a total game changer and I hope time will afford both Steemit and Graphene the means to become the best go to platforms for long term, high speed, P2P social media.
πŸ‘  , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
properties (23)
authoralifton
permlinkre-markrmorrisjr-re-theoretical-improving-the-steem-platform-for-long-term-content-20160818t184822078z
categorytheoretical
json_metadata{"tags":["theoretical"],"users":["markrmorrisjr","anyx","theoretical"]}
created2016-08-18 18:48:15
last_update2016-08-18 19:42:42
depth2
children2
last_payout2016-09-18 19:36:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value9.800 HBD
curator_payout_value3.260 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length6,497
author_reputation661,948,714,392
root_title"Improving the Steem platform for long-term content"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id875,530
net_rshares8,571,776,593,540
author_curate_reward""
vote details (16)
@markrmorrisjr ·
For  my part, I saw a thread and joined it, not aware that github was primarily being used to discuss the technical aspects. My apologies. I'm a writer and publisher, not a tech.
πŸ‘  
properties (23)
authormarkrmorrisjr
permlinkre-alifton-re-markrmorrisjr-re-theoretical-improving-the-steem-platform-for-long-term-content-20160818t190442054z
categorytheoretical
json_metadata{"tags":["theoretical"]}
created2016-08-18 19:05:48
last_update2016-08-18 19:05:48
depth3
children1
last_payout2016-09-18 19:36:51
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_length178
author_reputation118,896,685,049,569
root_title"Improving the Steem platform for long-term content"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id875,834
net_rshares422,516,291
author_curate_reward""
vote details (1)
@markrmorrisjr ·
I realize that I have contributed a lot to the "complaint" side of the conversation, without suggesting much in the way of a solution.  I won't go into it on this thread, but if anyone wants a bigger perspective, [here is a post I did](https://steemit.com/steemit/@markrmorrisjr/an-open-letter-to-steemit-gods-dan-in-particular-are-you-trying-to-build-the-buzzfeed-of-the-blockchain) about it that got quite a bit of attention.
I also recognize there is still potential for me as a writer to make good money and use the platform in other ways, [I talk about it here](https://steemit.com/introduceyourself/@markrmorrisjr/one-writer-s-take-on-why-you-should-add-steemit-com-to-your-regular-writing-sites)

Here are  some thoughts on going forward. 

 - I think there could be a threshold for number of votes under which content could be archived, without future payout. I would be fine with my $0 posts going there. I have 30 days to promote and make them profitable, after all. 
 - Ad revenue sharing sites provided a mainstay for many writers for almost 10 years, and they are now finding their  sites have dried up, due to changes in Google. Perhaps a look at some of these models, where articles provided revenue for years would be beneficial
 - Provided bots and upvoting from related accounts could be prevented to stop "mining" old content,  I think the argument of older content being in competition with newer content is irrelevant. How would that even work? There is no current mechanism for months old content to be promoted, unless the author hustles to share it, which means new traffic, which is good. 
 - Creating a home for  writers is wise. They will settle in, cheerily  cranking out the content the site needs, on whatever topic will please the audience, at a high level of quality, as long as they get some reward from it. Most would get a raise,  if they even approached $1000 a week. 
 - Writers and bloggers also know content promotion and will build mad backlinks to achieve more views in the hopes of getting upvotes. Their combined marketing savvy is huge. It helped make Facebook a household name. 
 - Since it is unlikely, given the current promotion scheme, that without new traffic, old steemit content would contend with normal views at all, making it a serious source of new users. 
 - In addition to writers, another market that could easily be tied into is the "work at home" crowd, if revenue is ongoing. 
 - I don't see a need for a separate place for this content, since only the content that is receiving votes would show up in the category it was posted to and why would you not want that? There are already filters for "new" to please those who don't do "day old"
 - The increased number of new users, traffic, and engagement would surely make up for whatever cost there is involved with making it technically possible. Perhaps even ear mark a portion of those revenues specifically for that purpose?
πŸ‘  
properties (23)
authormarkrmorrisjr
permlinkre-theoretical-improving-the-steem-platform-for-long-term-content-20160818t190258459z
categorytheoretical
json_metadata{"tags":["theoretical"],"links":["https://steemit.com/steemit/@markrmorrisjr/an-open-letter-to-steemit-gods-dan-in-particular-are-you-trying-to-build-the-buzzfeed-of-the-blockchain"]}
created2016-08-18 19:04:03
last_update2016-08-18 19:04:03
depth1
children0
last_payout2016-09-18 19:36:51
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_length2,938
author_reputation118,896,685,049,569
root_title"Improving the Steem platform for long-term content"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id875,814
net_rshares1,030,115,204
author_curate_reward""
vote details (1)
@nonlinearone ·
"the value of content rapidly diminishes as its age increases" Citation Needed. :)
πŸ‘  , ,
properties (23)
authornonlinearone
permlinkre-theoretical-improving-the-steem-platform-for-long-term-content-20160818t184542642z
categorytheoretical
json_metadata{"tags":["theoretical"]}
created2016-08-18 18:45:45
last_update2016-08-18 18:45:45
depth1
children3
last_payout2016-09-18 19:36:51
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_length82
author_reputation32,682,086,388,813
root_title"Improving the Steem platform for long-term content"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id875,479
net_rshares30,121,031,527
author_curate_reward""
vote details (3)
@markrmorrisjr ·
Depends on the content.
πŸ‘  
properties (23)
authormarkrmorrisjr
permlinkre-nonlinearone-re-theoretical-improving-the-steem-platform-for-long-term-content-20160818t190525664z
categorytheoretical
json_metadata{"tags":["theoretical"]}
created2016-08-18 19:06:30
last_update2016-08-18 19:06:30
depth2
children2
last_payout2016-09-18 19:36:51
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_length23
author_reputation118,896,685,049,569
root_title"Improving the Steem platform for long-term content"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id875,846
net_rshares1,030,115,204
author_curate_reward""
vote details (1)
@nonlinearone · (edited)
I would say a lot of the content that is encouraged and highly rewarded on SteemIt could qualify as "Evergreen." For example fiction, true life stories, introduceyourself, videos and photography just to name a few. http://www.wordstream.com/blog/ws/2012/10/16/guide-to-evergreen-content-marketing
πŸ‘  , ,
properties (23)
authornonlinearone
permlinkre-markrmorrisjr-re-nonlinearone-re-theoretical-improving-the-steem-platform-for-long-term-content-20160818t203101556z
categorytheoretical
json_metadata{"tags":["theoretical"],"links":["http://www.wordstream.com/blog/ws/2012/10/16/guide-to-evergreen-content-marketing"]}
created2016-08-18 20:31:06
last_update2016-08-18 20:31:33
depth3
children1
last_payout2016-09-18 19:36:51
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_reputation32,682,086,388,813
root_title"Improving the Steem platform for long-term content"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id877,266
net_rshares1,606,904,579
author_curate_reward""
vote details (3)
@nonlinearone ·
By the way, I made this post about wanting to be able to comment on a year old Reddit post two days ago https://steemit.com/bitcoin/@nonlinearone/not-to-say-i-told-you-so-but-or-why-i-wish-i-could-reply-to-posts-a-year-later
πŸ‘  , , ,
properties (23)
authornonlinearone
permlinkre-theoretical-improving-the-steem-platform-for-long-term-content-20160818t184820547z
categorytheoretical
json_metadata{"tags":["theoretical"],"links":["https://steemit.com/bitcoin/@nonlinearone/not-to-say-i-told-you-so-but-or-why-i-wish-i-could-reply-to-posts-a-year-later"]}
created2016-08-18 18:48:24
last_update2016-08-18 18:48:24
depth1
children0
last_payout2016-09-18 19:36:51
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_reputation32,682,086,388,813
root_title"Improving the Steem platform for long-term content"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id875,534
net_rshares44,815,887,620
author_curate_reward""
vote details (4)
@nonlinearone · (edited)
Also, if you study Pinterest pins, you will find that many continue to be popular LONG after they were originally pinned. Evergreen content is the best kind.
πŸ‘  , ,
properties (23)
authornonlinearone
permlinkre-theoretical-improving-the-steem-platform-for-long-term-content-20160818t185021311z
categorytheoretical
json_metadata{"tags":["theoretical"]}
created2016-08-18 18:50:24
last_update2016-08-18 18:50:39
depth1
children0
last_payout2016-09-18 19:36:51
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_length157
author_reputation32,682,086,388,813
root_title"Improving the Steem platform for long-term content"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id875,568
net_rshares29,869,035,092
author_curate_reward""
vote details (3)
@nonlinearone ·
Regarding your questions: what happens when someone updates a post within the first payout. Is the entire post reposted to the blockchain or is it a patch? I imagine something like RCS on the blockchain being useful for maintaining content that people want to edit for long periods of time.
πŸ‘  ,
properties (23)
authornonlinearone
permlinkre-theoretical-improving-the-steem-platform-for-long-term-content-20160818t185431892z
categorytheoretical
json_metadata{"tags":["theoretical"]}
created2016-08-18 18:54:36
last_update2016-08-18 18:54:36
depth1
children0
last_payout2016-09-18 19:36:51
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_length290
author_reputation32,682,086,388,813
root_title"Improving the Steem platform for long-term content"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id875,652
net_rshares27,610,581,376
author_curate_reward""
vote details (2)
@outtheshellvlog ·
I think you're thinking of Steemit rather incorrectly =\ If a blog is type II content, and Steemit is primarily a blog site, you're essentially focusing on something that steemit isn't.

Quite frankly, Steemit can be made to be so much more "Tumblr - Ghetto Edition" but that does seem to be the direction Steemit devs want to take it.  Steemit could, however, be turned into a social media platform by integrating video, image galleries, status updates, blogs, etc into a profile.

Take a gander at the typical Oxwall installation for sake of example.

And the reason people don't mind so much about posts being archived on reddit vs being archived on Steemit is because Reddit, you don't get paid out for, but you do on Steemit.  If I make a post that's a tutorial or informative in general, and someone finds it months down the road and find it super helpful, it doesn't stop being helpful just because it's older content.
properties (22)
authorouttheshellvlog
permlinkre-theoretical-improving-the-steem-platform-for-long-term-content-20180220t225435056z
categorytheoretical
json_metadata{"tags":["theoretical"],"app":"steemit/0.1"}
created2018-02-20 22:54:36
last_update2018-02-20 22:54:36
depth1
children0
last_payout2018-02-27 22:54:36
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_length925
author_reputation11,385,462,196,990
root_title"Improving the Steem platform for long-term content"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id39,187,069
net_rshares0
@prufarchy ·
With this type of thinking, we'll have Type II content getting some more attention as it deserves.
πŸ‘  
properties (23)
authorprufarchy
permlinkre-theoretical-improving-the-steem-platform-for-long-term-content-20160818t180221820z
categorytheoretical
json_metadata{"tags":["theoretical"]}
created2016-08-18 18:02:21
last_update2016-08-18 18:02:21
depth1
children0
last_payout2016-09-18 19:36:51
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_length98
author_reputation72,250,903,327,093
root_title"Improving the Steem platform for long-term content"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id874,722
net_rshares514,663,850
author_curate_reward""
vote details (1)
@samupaha ·
$0.06
I've been thinking for a while now that Steem could have more than one blockchain. Each blockchain would have different reward system to encourage different types of content. The blockchains would be sidechains so that SD could be transferred from one chain to another.

I know that Steem operates with the assumption that it's bad to collect transaction fees from users. But an idea just popped into my mind: if somebody wants to have more than two reward payments for the post, he could have more by paying for them. If additional reward rounds increase the memory requirements, it's not feasible to allow them... but if somebody wants to pay for it, why not? Probably not that many posts would have more than two reward payments so the memory requirement would stay moderate.

>What is the right path to making Type II content a first-class citizen in Steem?

Is it in any way feasible and reasonable to have several different content types with different reward mechanisms in one blockchain? It would help a lot if it was possible to help one kind of content without harming other types.
πŸ‘  ,
properties (23)
authorsamupaha
permlinkre-theoretical-improving-the-steem-platform-for-long-term-content-20160818t181034240z
categorytheoretical
json_metadata{"tags":["theoretical"]}
created2016-08-18 18:10:33
last_update2016-08-18 18:10:33
depth1
children0
last_payout2016-09-18 19:36:51
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value0.045 HBD
curator_payout_value0.011 HBD
pending_payout_value0.000 HBD
promoted0.000 HBD
body_length1,091
author_reputation43,637,433,899,367
root_title"Improving the Steem platform for long-term content"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id874,869
net_rshares119,009,622,499
author_curate_reward""
vote details (2)
@steemrollin ·
I agree with @markmorrisjr @stellabelle @sunjata @johnsmith @akareyon.

I think it's extremely important to find a way to make posts, comments & payouts timeless, because good content is timeless.  SEO is slow so I imagine some of these posts are going to draw backlinks, major new traffic and new users.    Type II content is incredibly important for long term sustainability and engagement and probably more important than Type I content.  Recency is mainly important for news and discussion on recent events, but we don't have that much of that.   We're also going to have too much recycling if we focus on Type I content.

<b>Conclusion: Finding some way to continue long-term discussions and reward long-term content is crucial.  </b>
πŸ‘  ,
properties (23)
authorsteemrollin
permlinkre-theoretical-improving-the-steem-platform-for-long-term-content-20160819t070220761z
categorytheoretical
json_metadata{"tags":["theoretical"]}
created2016-08-19 07:02:21
last_update2016-08-19 07:02:21
depth1
children2
last_payout2016-09-18 19:36:51
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_length739
author_reputation85,821,573,953,798
root_title"Improving the Steem platform for long-term content"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id884,928
net_rshares19,931,814,842
author_curate_reward""
vote details (2)
@steemrollin ·
BTW to decrease load on the blockchain, can we somehow allow users to click a button to 'repost'  specific blog posts to keep it alive.  It will just be entered back into consideration for voting each month.  We don't have to have it show up in 'New' and if desired you can have a 'Repost' category.   Maybe have a 2 post per day limit for 'reposts' ...  seems like a simple solution?
properties (22)
authorsteemrollin
permlinkre-steemrollin-re-theoretical-improving-the-steem-platform-for-long-term-content-20160821t004103272z
categorytheoretical
json_metadata{"tags":["theoretical"]}
created2016-08-21 00:41:03
last_update2016-08-21 00:41:03
depth2
children1
last_payout2016-09-18 19:36:51
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_length384
author_reputation85,821,573,953,798
root_title"Improving the Steem platform for long-term content"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id913,934
net_rshares0
@englishtchrivy · (edited)
Allow reposting blogs - yes please !
properties (22)
authorenglishtchrivy
permlinkre-steemrollin-re-steemrollin-re-theoretical-improving-the-steem-platform-for-long-term-content-20160826t124903200z
categorytheoretical
json_metadata{"tags":["theoretical"]}
created2016-08-26 12:48:30
last_update2016-08-26 12:49:30
depth3
children0
last_payout2016-09-18 19:36:51
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_length36
author_reputation190,105,027,681,254
root_title"Improving the Steem platform for long-term content"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id997,167
net_rshares0
@steemvixen ·
I know I contributed to the thread you are referring to. As a professional writer, having residual income is gold. Even if it's only a few cents a month, over time, the steady stream of income makes the ups and downs of the writing life livable. 
The problem I have with content not getting paid more than twice is two fold. First, it's not what was going on when I got here and I saw that residual as a huge draw. I understand why it might not have been in the forefront of your thinking. That's neither here nor there, just a preference. 
The second is more troubling for me. That is the fact that the system keeps my content in perpetuity, where it can be used in the future, long after I may have left the platform for greener pastures. It adds to the organic gravity of Steemit as a URL, and thus is contributing to the bottom line, since over 14% of the sites traffic is coming through content searches. 
That means that as a writer, I am contributing to every new signup, every share, and every time the site comes up in search, because my work adds authority to the pool. 
I understand that my SP grows with the site and in some sense, if things go well, I do get a continuing source of revenue, but that content may essentially be dead to me now. 
With writers, our content is what we build to  sell. Much of it gets sold for  one money, one time, and that kind of work we have to continually seek and do. The other, more valuable kind provides streams of residual income, like I said, albeit small, they add up quickly. 
A writer like myself contributing 4 pieces per day would have over 200 pieces of "property" on the site. Not all of them would produce continued upvotes, but many could. If 1/4 of them produced $1 in revenue per month, that is $50 per month, compounded over 5 years, that's $250 per month and if I develop my audience correctly, I can do much better. If I hit at 75% continuous revenue generation, that would mean $150 a month after the first year. Coupled with the immediate payouts and investment potential, this makes your platform a very attractive home for writers, who might never need go anywhere else if they can develop enough of a following.
πŸ‘  , , , ,
properties (23)
authorsteemvixen
permlinkre-theoretical-improving-the-steem-platform-for-long-term-content-20160818t174204046z
categorytheoretical
json_metadata{"tags":["theoretical"]}
created2016-08-18 17:43:09
last_update2016-08-18 17:43:09
depth1
children4
last_payout2016-09-18 19:36:51
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_length2,182
author_reputation2,155,203,229
root_title"Improving the Steem platform for long-term content"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id874,418
net_rshares27,856,607,081
author_curate_reward""
vote details (5)
@proskynneo ·
The primary reason to freeze discussions was both technical (reduce the memory footprint) and economic (prevent bots from "mining" their old content for rewards). Some potential changes we are discussing internally might address the economic reasoning behind this decision. I will be sure to bring that up during one of our brainstorming sessions.
πŸ‘  
properties (23)
authorproskynneo
permlinkre-steemvixen-re-theoretical-improving-the-steem-platform-for-long-term-content-20160818t180541144z
categorytheoretical
json_metadata{"tags":["theoretical"]}
created2016-08-18 18:05:39
last_update2016-08-18 18:05:39
depth2
children3
last_payout2016-09-18 19:36:51
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_length347
author_reputation4,454,785,474,512
root_title"Improving the Steem platform for long-term content"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id874,797
net_rshares1,725,589,491
author_curate_reward""
vote details (1)
@markrmorrisjr ·
Well, then prevent bots from mining. but don't penalize creators to stop  something bad.
properties (22)
authormarkrmorrisjr
permlinkre-proskynneo-re-steemvixen-re-theoretical-improving-the-steem-platform-for-long-term-content-20160818t183855624z
categorytheoretical
json_metadata{"tags":["theoretical"]}
created2016-08-18 18:40:00
last_update2016-08-18 18:40:00
depth3
children2
last_payout2016-09-18 19:36:51
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_length88
author_reputation118,896,685,049,569
root_title"Improving the Steem platform for long-term content"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id875,360
net_rshares0
@stellabelle ·
I agree with several others here. As a writer and producer of content, I have noticed that when someone discovers my work, they do a backlog reading of it. If they are unable to comment, that is very bad. It reduces this site to the casino style experience that hardcore readers dislike. The more intelligent crew will not like that the backlogged articles are in the dead zone. You basic nullify value that existed once. It's a very short-sighted, bad idea to think of Type 2 content as dead.
πŸ‘  , , ,
properties (23)
authorstellabelle
permlinkre-theoretical-improving-the-steem-platform-for-long-term-content-20160818t183906249z
categorytheoretical
json_metadata{"tags":["theoretical"]}
created2016-08-18 18:39:06
last_update2016-08-18 18:39:06
depth1
children1
last_payout2016-09-18 19:36:51
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_length493
author_reputation516,061,669,130,124
root_title"Improving the Steem platform for long-term content"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id875,339
net_rshares27,824,989,647
author_curate_reward""
vote details (4)
@sunjata ·
I agree with this. My aim has been to build up a body of work that will last and, gradually, build up a readership. I also think that cutting off payments after 30 days is based on a misunderstanding of how content, broadly-defined, gets its value. If you think of the power law in book or record sales, it's not just about an immediate flurry of earnings - the titles at the extreme end have serious staying power. I went into a shop at a railway station a couple days ago and it *still* had a display full of all the Harry Potter novels. If Steemit can't measure, and redistribute, the value from that kind of durably popular work, then why would the next JK Rowling post here rather than with a traditional publisher?
πŸ‘  
properties (23)
authorsunjata
permlinkre-stellabelle-re-theoretical-improving-the-steem-platform-for-long-term-content-20160818t223652588z
categorytheoretical
json_metadata{"tags":["theoretical"]}
created2016-08-18 22:36:51
last_update2016-08-18 22:36:51
depth2
children0
last_payout2016-09-18 19:36:51
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_length720
author_reputation2,215,677,577,306
root_title"Improving the Steem platform for long-term content"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id879,141
net_rshares1,760,805,603
author_curate_reward""
vote details (1)
@tee-em ·
I am writing series that can be referenced for the long haul, as I see Steemit as a long play. From parenting advice with pics, citations and studies to financial alternative investments, my posts will have the goal of long term sustainability.  Upvoted and following!
https://steemit.com/money/@tee-em/get-rich-during-crisis-how-to-arbitrage-bitcoin-silver-gold-and-other-assets-to-maximize-profits-during-collapse-part-1
πŸ‘  ,
πŸ‘Ž  
properties (23)
authortee-em
permlinkre-theoretical-improving-the-steem-platform-for-long-term-content-20160818t175626568z
categorytheoretical
json_metadata{"tags":["theoretical"],"links":["https://steemit.com/money/@tee-em/get-rich-during-crisis-how-to-arbitrage-bitcoin-silver-gold-and-other-assets-to-maximize-profits-during-collapse-part-1"]}
created2016-08-18 17:56:30
last_update2016-08-18 17:56:30
depth1
children0
last_payout2016-09-18 19:36:51
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_reputation12,706,667,096,470
root_title"Improving the Steem platform for long-term content"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id874,612
net_rshares1,632,546,077
author_curate_reward""
vote details (3)
@timcliff ·
Hi @theoretical - I hope this isn't too off topic, but this seems to be the best way to contact people.. I'm trying to put together some info on what the Steemit dev team is up to. Is there anything you would be willing to share as far as new features that are being worked on or thought about? Also, I'm still trying to learn about the dev team / community. How are you involved?
properties (22)
authortimcliff
permlinkre-theoretical-improving-the-steem-platform-for-long-term-content-20160827t064312682z
categorytheoretical
json_metadata{"tags":["theoretical"],"users":["theoretical"]}
created2016-08-27 06:43:12
last_update2016-08-27 06:43:12
depth1
children0
last_payout2016-09-18 19:36:51
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_length380
author_reputation272,954,445,077,789
root_title"Improving the Steem platform for long-term content"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id1,009,528
net_rshares0
@williambanks ·
@theoretical My reply took a couple of days to mull over and got a bit long.  I decided my problem with this approach isn't you per se, but the way this sort of thing is being handled in general.  I've laid it out and proposed what I hope will be a better solution.  Please consider stopping by and hearing me out.
https://steemit.com/steemit/@williambanks/an-open-letter-to-the-developers-of-steemit

Great topic!  Upvoted, commented and following you now!
πŸ‘  
properties (23)
authorwilliambanks
permlinkre-theoretical-improving-the-steem-platform-for-long-term-content-20160820t174934013z
categorytheoretical
json_metadata{"tags":["theoretical"],"users":["theoretical"],"links":["https://steemit.com/steemit/@williambanks/an-open-letter-to-the-developers-of-steemit"]}
created2016-08-20 17:49:33
last_update2016-08-20 17:49:33
depth1
children0
last_payout2016-09-18 19:36:51
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_length457
author_reputation90,708,691,850,244
root_title"Improving the Steem platform for long-term content"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id908,692
net_rshares16,410,393,625
author_curate_reward""
vote details (1)
@zer0sum ·
Steemit Inc has to decide what it wants to be. You are not very similar to Reddit with easily consumable Type I content (no proper search). More like an early version of Seeking Alpha (but for crypto), but with a lot of low value Type II content mixed in.

The White Paper is not helpful, so it's Ned's job to look at the competition and say, "This is the market we are targeting". Emphasis on focus and target. 

Steemit could probably be a serious threat to Seeking Alpha within months because you can pay their financial market writers more,  but you need to be friendly to a Long Tail of Type II content with a page views metric.
properties (22)
authorzer0sum
permlinkre-theoretical-improving-the-steem-platform-for-long-term-content-20160819t144216473z
categorytheoretical
json_metadata{"tags":["theoretical"]}
created2016-08-19 14:42:12
last_update2016-08-19 14:42:12
depth1
children0
last_payout2016-09-18 19:36:51
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_length633
author_reputation1,519,557,237,463
root_title"Improving the Steem platform for long-term content"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 HBD
percent_hbd10,000
post_id889,816
net_rshares0