You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: STOP ATTACKING 3SPEAK & UNDERSTAND THE CONCEPT !
Disagreement on rewards flagging is a feature.
Better to educate the newbs you bring that we don't care who you are, nor what opinion you have of yourself, we are gonna balance out the outliers, especially if they are paid for rewards.
No rewards are yours until the seventh day.
I doubt that this will be changing.
Crying about this feature of crowd sourcing consensus is likely to go poorly for them.
Anybody that has been here long enough to get a grip on the math, and it's need of protection from abuse, realizes abuse mitigation outweighs snowflake feelers.
I think that will be changed with SMT's.
Not the successful ones, imo.
If you allow no effort content, or pay to play, i doubt the smt will last long.
But, the nice thing is that we get try.
We already have pay to play. Just pay for STEEM and play with self upvotes.
Also, active users are down:
Authors are down:
Steem soon has bigger problems than “no effort content”: No content at all.
And what do you figured led to this predicament?
Stinc crippling us with linear rewards for two years while they were on walkabout surely had nothing to do with it, eh?
We may, or may not, recover from the kneecappening.
If we do it won't be the spammers and vote buyers we have to thank.
Linear reward was a step in the right direction. √x would have been better. Going back to the x reward curve was a mistake.
We have a healthy increase in new accounts but a decrease in authors, curators and engagement.
We need to incentivise new users to become authors, curators and engaged — which the √x reward curve would do.
Instead we incentivise the Whales and Orcas upvote themselves for profit.
The same for the 50/50 reward share. If we had tons of articles in need to curation then might have been a godd idea. But we don't. Look at the stats — again:
Curation is down as well.
And do note the two sharp down spikes. Those are the last two hard forks. They did not stop the downwards trend. They had no effect at all because they where not addressing the real problem:
Not enough rewards for new accounts
As it is right now SteemIt has the stick of pyramid scheme. Which is sad as it's a good idea and doesn't need to be that way.
I think it was to have collapsed by now.
I agree the eip has flaws.
The vote tax killed any incentives to stay unless you have sizable stake.
No need to comment, nobody can reward them.
I've just recently cleared the dust round down on 100% vote.
I haven't voted many comments since the fork.
That the top isn't complaining is telling, imo.
You got a graph of the square root curve?
Maybe we can get another fork that helps the newbs rather than run them off.
Here you are √x from 0 to 10⁹ – the VEST of a Wale:
Source: https://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=√x+from+0+to+1e9
As you can see the curve is very steep at the beginning and then flattens out giving new, small user more power and reduces the power of large accounts.
I did that early this year but because STEEM has been falling constantly I lost that privilege again.
I invested mostly to reward users with my 100% upvotes. And now my upvote is worthless again. So delegated everything away to @crypto.piotr's @project.hope. They have enough STEEM power top take advantage from the x² reward curve.
Depressing really.
It's like they wanted the project to fail, once they had their money out.
That curve looks hard on the newbs, too.
5000sp appears an impossible task to somebody with only 15sp delegated to them when their posts keep rounding down.
Not that steem should be easy from the get go.
We need some hurdles to keep the spammers down.
I still like how things went during the whale downvoting experiment, if we had had free downvotes then we could've skipped the more than two years of price decline since, and kept the n2, imo.
Any other changes you would like to see?
It was never intended that a single voter would generate rewards. The is that multiple votes stack to generate rewards by some sort of consensus. That still happens, and can be seen even in this thread.
If you want to pay rewards all by yourself, send a tip.
Well, maybe if we had millions of users the rewards would be that diluted, but we haven't gotten there yet.
Tipping is much easier when one has disposable cash.
Perhaps if the top ten accounts weren't taking 80% of the rewards more folks would tip steem to each other.
I haven't looked since the fork, are the top ten voters still taking 25% of each day's inflation?
https://steemit.com/steemit/@statsmonkey/biggest-upvoters-3132018---part-ii
That never happened. What are you talking about?
No sublinear curve can possibly work. It would be attacked by milking votes being split up across spam and small rewards. The curve must be at least linear or mildly superlinear.
Curiously, the graph you posted showed that the decline was pretty much the same with linear rewards once the crypto boom of late 2017 (which was certainly externally driven) had played out. Likewise earlier in 2017 before the boom with linear rewards (also declining user base). And for that matter we could probably say the same about the n^2 era.
The curve really doesn't appear to be the major factor here
Typo. Typing mistake.
I would disagree here.
I case you missed it: I consider lots of small rewards a good thing. It would incentivise more authorship.
Also milking and SPAM already happens.
I have also have Bitcoin, Litecoin and Ether. They all lost but Steem lost the most.
They didn't do any good either. Not for authorship and not for the price of STEEM.
We tried two of the three rewards curves and they where failures. We haven't tried the third one yet. Apart from @minnowsupport using √x for their latest @PALcoin airdrop.
Milking and spam is somewhat contained by the superlinear (at the low end) curve and dust threshold (another form of low-end supearlinear) which makes it not very profitable, if at all, to split up votes across a large number of small payouts that both bloat the blockchain and require a huge amount of effort for anyone to find, examine, and possibly downvote. Without that property, the problem gets much worse, which we already saw to some extent with linear. Going to sublinear would make it catastrophic. Death by a thousand (or a million) cuts.
Not really walkabout. Cashoutabout.
It's a dang shame.
Greedy folks gotta greed.
Probably pissed it all away, too.
At least, I'm sure about @threespeak SMT. The platform has big supporters and everything will be ok with all dedicated creators.
Unless the spammers overwhelm them with paid for votes.
It will make a nice lesson for those that choose their smt's protocols poorly, imo.
The 3speak SMT will not leverage PoB, we will rely on Steem for that. We might introduce a complementary PoB token for 3Speak but that is not on the agenda for initial launch. Downvotes are an essential part of PoB and should not be viewed as an attack.
3speak as a automated voting algo based on performance, Future of 3Speak's Upvoting Habits!
While we may upvote a post we disagree with, unless it is against the UA, we don’t interfere and let the engagement set the stake distribution.
Tyvm.
Just the message I was trying to convey.
I'm all for the success of 3speak, dtube was a disappointment, it rarely worked for me.
3speak has played the videos everytime, once I lowered my Brave 'shields'.
What I don't get is how the fee to post is arranged.
I have only second hand info that says there is a cost to post.
You got a link to clarify that officially?
I can't wait to see that SMT. I think that will be just perfect. PoB is a very good concept and should be supported forever.