Witnesses, what are your thoughts: Hardfork for automated #burnsteem25 for posts
.png)
Hello my dear Steemians and Witnesses of Steemit,
After making a Challenge post yesterday the whole post brought me to one of the important topic that could bring the benefit to the whole Steem as Cryptocurrency and Steemit platform as a blockchain.
Here is the link to my post, if you are interested: Link
I am talking about the Initiative #burnsteem25, which means that with setting posts with 25% to @null that amount of Steem is burnt and not anymore free on market.
When writing my post yesterday, that was about the developers I ended up about this topic and the whole point is that if we want it to work appropriately then everyone should contribute and burn their 25% of reward and the best is that it happens automatically. How to make it, the answer is simple:
I have asked in my post the developers who I listed to give their opinion but also I asked the Steemit Team, at least I got a reply from @steemcurator01:
Hardfork with automatically set posts 25% to @null"? |
|---|
First of all, we all know that the value of Steem is very low at 1 STEEM = $0.246170 and if you look at the graph it is almost continuous since 2019 with a little peak early 2021
https://www.coingecko.com/en/coins/steem
If everyone who is earning cents or who is earning multiple hundreds for their posts automatically will burn 25% of rewarded Steem, then the Price of Steem will be recovering very quickly and who knows would be going definitely up to £1.00 or maybe more?
What we can do to help to raise the Price of Steem, it is to remove free Steem from market there are two ways to do it:
- first, to stake them, that means we need investors who will buy large amount so that is remove from market and convert in Steem Power. The only problem is the low Price of Steem and also being at* Rank#340 makes it not attractive for Investors. So we can forget this first solution
By the way, every time when we produce post we produce Steem,so amount is getting larger although not very quickly. Many pay their living with the help of Steem and this is a great side of this unique Token. That means more people get onboard more tokens we produce and more will be thrown to Cryptomarket, that might get over-saturated, more tokens and less buyers the price will go down.
- second option to "Burn" Steem, that means certain amount of produced Steem will be sent to @null. This is one of the tactic that is used to remove excessive amount of token from market in order to reduce the circulated tokens. Therefore, the price will go up.
Example of the benefit of automated #burnsteem function |
|---|
I used this example in my previous post and wanted to cite it again so that you can compare how much hte Steem blockchain will benefit if small user will manually set the post to "Burnsteem"
Here is the user's post that earned only $0,34 like one of the users from Incredible India @rubina203 who is active and in #club100 but also sets 25% to @null and 10% of her post to community account.
Or it is better if such users like @trafalgar who earn over £300 Steem will make a noticeable change if they burn 25% of Steem?
If you look you see that the majority of votes are due to delegation and I can fully understand such users, this is their investment and only silly people will not use this system, we all know people invest in order to earn more and this is a real world.
Steem will benefit from Delegation for Upvote system |
|---|
If Hardfork is done and everyone's post will automatically be set with 25% to @null then even those users who delegated to such accounts like @upvu, @justyy, @upex and so on will be contributing to Burn Steem.
The same with users whopay to buy the Upvote, they also will be contributing to Burn Steem
Just think about your normal work and that we all contribute to the welfare of our society with paying taxes like:
- income tax
- national insurance
- contribution to pension system
All that allow us to support those in our real life who are homeless, healthcare is for free in UK but this is because we all pay in national insurance so that people who work can contribute and those who are poor still can receive an expensive Cancer treatment. I know that this is different from Steem but if we all agree that it will help Steem to recover and climb up the Ranking and up the Price ladder, why not?
Call for Witnesses: |
|---|
Dear Witnesses, we have given YOU our Vote to represent us therefore we would like you to consider that. The Steemit Team is on board and if you also in agreement, then we will need the developers to write a program for Hardfork.
The only my doubt is if the developers who are on Steemit are able to create a program and to perform Hardfork without causing more problem with Steemit Platform.
Would be good to know what you think, appreciate for reading my post.
Thank you for bringing this up. We urgently need to discuss the content of future hard forks. I hope I won't be the only witness to comment here.
That is not correct. The amount of STEEM produced depends on other factors. @remlaps wrote about it e.g. here: https://steemit.com/steemtalk/@remlaps-lite/a-quick-look-at-steem
Whether the price goes up also depends on many factors. I can't fully understand all the financial aspects of blockchain tokens, but I would also suggest that auto-burning can have an impact on the market price. However, I guess the impact will not be very significant.
I rather think that an investor will invest in a product that matches his expectations. In my opinion, we should therefore rather try to improve the Steem product. But for that we also need hardfork.
I'm not a friend of automatic burning.
So far, even the current optional transfer to @null is not popular.
Especially if the Steemit team thinks your suggestion is a good idea, I can't understand why they don't set a beneficiary for @null in their posts.
And you also don't set a beneficiary.
That should be the goal for all of us. However, we should be sure that the change will have the desired effect.
Forcing users to burn part of their rewards could be a deterrent for many users. It would be like getting my full income first and then having to pay part of it to the government as taxes. It would be better if the tax was already deducted from my income.
Perhaps it would be better to focus on inflation or to directly burn part of the STEEM produced with each block so that it is not available for the reward fund.
I believe that acceptance would be much higher.
HI @moecki, yes, you are not only a Witness who commented and that is also because I asked other Steemians to approach the Witnesses from their communities to read the post.
You know how it is people read and leave, because many think I am only one and I can not change the world, then I often think about the nature and for example ants, they are small, seems to be not important but they work like one well organised team, they can build bridges using their own bodies and many other fantastic things. But of course, we are human, more clever and we all have our ideas and think that is the correct one.
I do not understand much how the blockchain works, I never tried to dig into it because this is not my specialist field and the only feature that attracted me in Steem was blogging. Therefore, if you say that blockchain generates Steem not only with posting then it is good to know.
Returning to the name of my post suggesting burning Steem for all, I have taken 25% just like an example because currently it is a popular trend for small accounts to receive upvote by SC01/ SC02 and a special "Burn Team" SC03. But we are all Steemians and if something like that would come to consideration then we also can discuss if maybe a smaller percent like 3% or 5% but for all, so that it is not so painful for some whales.
You probably missed the posts of @steemitblog in the past when they set 100% to @null, but not recently
I did it in the past, but recently I decided to set Beneficiaries for Donation projects, for Crowdfunding, also for Spotlight of other users post so that they receive something.
I regards to "Burn Steem" action, I do not think that doing that voluntarily in the first instance, which is done only by smaller accounts with the hope to be visited by SC01-03 account could bring any benefits. It is just unfair to encourage small users to do so and the same time to see the big "Whales" getting by self-voting even own comments with their own multiple accounts.
This is another option, if Witnesses will agree with that
Thank you for your thoughtful feedback and also it was very valuable to know your opinion,
TEAM 1
Congratulations! This comment has been upvoted through steemcurator04. We support quality posts , good comments anywhere and any tags.Thank you @o1eh for joining our comments and for support :)
This is a good point:
Even if witnesses decide against this particular change, it's good that @stef1 raised this topic so that improvements can become possible. I hope other witnesses will comment, too.
TEAM 1
Congratulations! This comment has been upvoted through steemcurator04. We support quality posts , good comments anywhere and any tags.Thank you @o1eh and I wish you some good surprises this new year :-)
Hi, @stef1,
The issue is complex, but we believe that focusing solely on lowering the supply and burning is not going to work because STEEM does not really have an intrinsic value yet.
One aspect of why the price of STEEM is low is because of the community itself, more specifically large investors. The goal of PoB was to act as a catalyst to attract more users, which will eventually reflect on the price of STEEM. But currently, most whales and large accounts use an elaborate system of vote circling. Instead of being able to reward a more thriving blockchain by supporting new users, we have basically the same individuals extracting value and just hoping that something will happen and go out before the ship sinks. Any solution that does not include figuring out this issue will simply tighten the grip on the Average Joe. People will keep farming and force the price down again to take advantage of any bump in the price in the future. If we should consider STEEM as a simple way to store value such as XMR or BTC, for example, then we are better off just scrapping the social aspect and redirecting the reward pool to SP holders.
The other thing is that we are assuming that the price will rise because there will be more people buying STEEM. We are here assuming that there will be more investors buying STEEM. Yet other chains are outperforming us with the same supply. If we take measures in the suggested direction and the price does not rise, then this would mean fewer people will be able to be curated. And fewer people will be incentivized to post here due to a very low return compared to before. This would be like shooting ourselves in the foot.
We also believe we should avoid the appellation of burning to save the chain or forcing a burning percentage on x, it looks like we are sinking and desperate. We really do not want to give our user base on a golden plate to the competition. Lowering the print rate is easy. A fork could be simply pushed to lower the inflation based on a theoretical value. We could make the inflation as a witness parameter, which allows witnesses a better reaction to the market. We could also make the pool split as a witness parameter as well, and adjust some of it to be sent to @null. One could imagine if, suddenly, we told investors that from now on, your yield will be reduced by 25%. They will have a considerable urge to switch to another chain and subjecting STEEM to a huge selling pressure on their way out.
There are other ways that we still did not explore yet that can be used to burn STEEM without any forks. Communities could be leveraged by allowing and providing the needed tooling for people to advertise content in exchange for burning STEEM. Advanced solutions can be worked on to allow users to promote their posts by burning STEEM. Even a fork can be pushed to provide more solutions to burn STEEM. Such as something that was discussed before to allow users instant power down in exchange for a % fee that will be burned ... the suggestions are actually plenty. With this approach, burning STEEM actually means that you are getting a service.
In the end, one thing is sure: if the blockchain becomes an artifact, and there are no worthy products that bring value to STEEM as a utility asset, then no one is going to buy it even if the print rate is nearing 0. Burning and lowering inflation could be considered a lazy solution if the core issues related to why Steem should have value are not tackled in the first place. The thing is, tackling these issues means core development needs to start again.
TEAM 1
Congratulations! This comment has been upvoted through steemcurator04. We support quality posts , good comments anywhere and any tags.Just a thought...
Why not focus on increasing demand instead of reducing supply? When supply will always increase as long as new coins are being produced.
Theoretically, burning seems a promising way to regulate the circulation but I think value of anything depends more on the market sentiment.
So, like moecki said, why not improve the product and increase its demand?
Scarcity may or may not increase the price but a promising product definitely will.
Hi Hira, thank you for reading the post, I agree with everything that will bring Steem forward or upward the Ranking in Cryptochart of in its value.
The only problem is how we can improve the products, once again we need developers who will be producing something on Steem blockchain and here is where we are stuck. There are nothing currently we can offer, like I mentioned already in one of my replies, to create attractive places for Gamers and to develop own video DTube: a community powered video sharing platform where users vote on videos to reward creators, curators, influencers and viewers in cryptocurrency.
Whatever helps should be considered and the Witnesses as well as Developers need to communicate with Steemians what is happening.
I am grateful for you taking time and leaving your thoughtful comment, wishing you Happy New Year!
Good evening!
Sorry I didn't get in earlier... I'm really not quite focussed on the matter at the moment...
I'm not taking part in the #burnsteem25 campaign so far. From my economic understanding, this will only lead to a slight increase in the price of Steem in the very short term, but not to lasting stability.
Including the very high rewards would change that. I'm still doing the maths, but that would probably be an upward impulse, at least if this "levy" remains in place in the long term.
However, I can see avoidance strategies that could undermine this. And I'm sticking to my guns: my preferred path would be to forego more and more users in favour of a few very good bloggers who could ensure an exceptional quality of contributions on the platform and thus a unique selling point. This would, of course, contradict the current strategy of recruiting anyone who can stick their face in a camera...
Hi,
This can be achieved now without the need for any change. There is actually nothing stopping anyone from creating something like Medium and leverage the Steem blockchain to do it.
But people need to understand that the utility of the chain goes beyond it social aspect. For example, if we are discussing blogging here because we are on Steemit.com, another platform or project could be discussion games or any service that can be built on Steem. It can be an ecommerce, a game, and any other business model that can take advantage of the technology that Steem is offering. This is why we need to be careful to not undermine the utility of the blockchain when thinking and applying future changes.
I understand that you don't see the steem in isolation, but as part of an ecosystem. But isn't this only as stable as its individual components...?
Thank you @weisser-rabe for your opinion, I see the reply of @symbionts and also agree we are on Steem blockchain and that normally can offer much but it is not used for anything except Blogging, unfortunately. I do not believe that doing "burnsteem" by some individuals who are doing that in order to get better Upvote rather than trying to save Steem, they will not be able to fix it it is like a drop in ocean.
I hope that we will have some outcome of the discussion, obviously there are many good thoughts in this comment chain.
I really appreciate your participants and sharing your thoughts, which is very valuable to know. Using this chance, wanted to wish you Happy New 2024!
The same for you! A good start in the New Year!
I agree with you but I have an additional suggestion!
Where can we read about it...? ;-))
Scroll down a bit!
As I described in the Reflections section, here, this is one tentative conclusion that I drew from reading Richard Dawkins' coverage of the Iterated Prisoner's Dilemma in The Selfish Gene.
Hi, with due respect. You used to support our witness but suddenly you have removed the vote from us. We apologize for any kinds of wrongness.
Please support us with your witness vote. It will be much help for us. 🙏
https://steemitwallet.com/~witnesses
I don't remember why. I unvoted a couple witnesses who were disabled or had stale feeds, not sure if yours was included in that, or maybe I just clicked the wrong button by accident. I see that your witness is active and your feed is up to date now, so I'll revote you.
Thank you so much for your kindness!
I understand your idea, and certainly it's a noble one, but I have my doubts it will work: the only spike we had in these last 4 years was one Steemit offered more to its users, I'm talking about Tron rewards, and this made the price go up.
I think this platform has to offer something new to investors, so the rumor can spread and the price rise again, rather than asking the users to sacrficie part of their earnings.
Thank you @giuatt07 for you thought and I also agree that making people to sacrifice some % of their reward, I am not saying 25% because that was just taken as an example form running trend on Steemit, but some % even less than 5%, it will not hurt.
On other hand it is really like a trying to patch the boat rather then buy new boat.
I also agree that Steem needs something else to offer that will be different and interesting and maybe new in its way and nature. We definitely need two things on Steemit:
our own DTube or a community powered video sharing platform , because there are many who do videos on youtube and link them to Steemit like many of your DIY videos too or our Artists who do their videos of painting. Many could post such video instead of writing posts
gaming platform, the young generation play games and we know that even our little children start with video games, we need to offer something for your people if we want more users
Obviously loosing Tron rewards and also malfunctioning in receiving Tron rewards did not make a favour for Steem and Steemit, and the hope is that it will come back.
I thank you for your time and your thoughtful feedback, using a chance wanted to wish you Happy New Year!
Happy New Year to you too !
I think the gaming idea would be great, the only difficult part is to find a team of developers that could make something so interesting that it would attract the attention from investors.
Thank you for raising this issue.
I am not sure if the reduction of the author reward is working well.
But what I can say is that we need to make steem useful. What I meant by that is that we need services on steem to bring mass adoption. That's what I have been implementing these days like these:
I felt that the ppebak could be successful since the topic intrigues massive people.
As a witness, I personally suggest that we developers should work together to develop a killer service on steem which makes steem attractive.
Thank you @etainclub for expressing your thought and yes, I agree with you that is something that could be better option for everyone, good product that will be used and spread.
Same like you, I agree it is important for all the team work of developers, if we look back to the best projects it is the team work, it is easy to see the failure and benefits of any program when many people working on solution.
It would be great to see how everything will develop.
Thanks again and also using the chance wishing you Happy New Year!
We need to think carefully. IMO, the first thing we should do is transaction fee than burning reward.
Transaction fee was sort of the reason for resource credits. Want to participate on steemit.com then you need resource credits, need resource credits? Buy steem and power it up... I don't think we need to change to a fee based model, being free was one of steem's selling points back in the day in terms of being attractive to build things on top of it... we just need things built on top of it, still.
it could be...
Thank you @steem-agora for visiting this post and for reading, knowing your experience and knowledge that I always valued and relied on. It is a sensible topic and of course, not easy making decision, who knows maybe not the best but I hope that there will be some other new ideas born from this discussions that you, the Witnesses would be able to discuss and hope to come to any reasonable solution for getting more from this blockchain.
I am grateful for you taking time and visiting this post, wishing you Happy New 2024!
I add null as a beneficiary in most of my posts, but to be very honest, that is too much for a low return of rewards person like me. I propose that if they are looking at this as a mandatory rule for all posts, they should reduce it to a maximum of 10%.
Remember, higher taxes attract a lower number of payers, so if you wish to take the maximum benefit, set it at 10%. After all, how many of us get any return on our investment of 25% on null (if you please permit me to call it an investment)?
I feel even the ones who objected to your proposal will think sympathically if the rate of burnsteem is set to 10 or at 5%.
Give it serious thought and involve more people who are willing to take your proposal seriously, with a lower setting for burnsteem. As far as I am concerned, I have nothing to lose or gain since I have no plan to redeem as long as the rates are as low as at present time. In case the rates remain the same, my Steem will remain in the chain and serve as burned Steem.
Thank you @dove11 for your time and reading my post. I agree 25% for everyone is definitely a big chunk and of course, many who earn much would not be happy to loose, but as you say something less than 5% and for everyone can make its difference because then it is a large amount of posts and also a large amount of Steem will be taken off from circulation.
Of course, there are other ways to make Steem attractive but we are talking about those marketing and mass onboarding, large investors for last 5 years and I am a bit doubtful that it magically work.
Who knows in what direction Steem will go, we will see if any productive idea will be born from all the discussion here.
I would like to thank you for your valuable feedback and would like to wish you Happy New Year!
Thank you so much, I wish you a Very Happy New Year t2024, to you and your loved ones!
Thank you for starting such an interesting discussion. I must admit, at first I thought your idea was a very good one. However, after reading the comments, I realized that our problem is different. The price of STEEM is low because we are not moving forward. No code improvements, no really popular DApps, no new services. At the same time, other blockchains can offer all of these. In the conditions of fierce competition, stagnation is an unforgivable luxury. It is clear that investors will choose tokens that are more promising in their opinion.
However, there is a certain positive. The blogging community has developed well in recent times. At least in my opinion. Perhaps this will be the beginning of some positive changes.
But so far, it seems that everyone is waiting for a miracle. Maybe everyone hopes that some billionaire will come and do all the work for us (community). But why should he come?
Yes, that is the point, many investors just using the services on Steemit that help to multiply their finance, regardless if the price is not really changing. The worse case scenario the price of Steem will decline like it was once reaching 0,13 or less then even for investors it will not be attractive. The first thing then what investors will do is to sell sooner in order to reduce their losses. That is the point investors always there where it is profitable for them, but unlike to us, Steemians who are trying to create community relationships and support there is nothing that will make them to stay if they do not see that is does not work for them.
I remember it was the time when the Steemit team announced that they support developers but I do not know if anything much was done since. It would be good to know what is done and how the group of developers are working to add more attractive stuff to platform.
Thank you @o1eh for taking part in this brainstorming :)