You are viewing a single comment's thread from:

RE: HF21: SPS and EIP Explained

in #steem6 years ago (edited)

Agree with you about emojis, etc. Also the UI is very clunky, and between that and RC costs, it discourages casual interaction and humor in the sort of way that drives reddit, twitter, etc. It needs a serious re-imagining, like maybe comments are removed from being payout items and are just comments (which would make them much cheaper). As well as emojis, etc. of course.

As for the dynamic split between SPS and the rest of the pool, I'm not sure why you hate it. Stakeholders would vote on the split one way or another, and if stakeholders aren't sold on the existing reward pool mechanism pulling its weight, sooner or later it is going to get drastically reallocated or even zeroed out by hard fork. You can't stop stakeholders from doing that, and the economics of it may become too compelling for it to not happen (if Steem doesn't die first). Giving those same stakeholders a direct vote on the matter doesn't seem all that different to me.

Sort:  

Yes I understand that stakeholders are already essentially deciding where the rewards pool goes, as they should, and if things continue a change will most likely come.

My concern was directing it all to a system when we have no idea what it will look like. A system that will rely on participation, through voting, to ensure the decisions are made. When it’s in the code it’s hands off in a way. If it was directed through the SPS it seems like it would require stake holders to be more actively involved is all... and I question whether they will maybe? Maybe that’s not a logical concern.

Ultimately my distaste for the idea was that I think we need to see how the SPS works, how stakeholders respond etc before taking such a step.

Fair enough, but I believe (could be mistaken) that at the time I even said that it shouldn't be done now but if at all in some future iteration. So I guess we are in violent agreement.

Yes you most likely did state something of the sort, just my initial reaction to the idea was dislike due to the reasons above.

So I guess we are in violent agreement.

Gosh, don’t you hate when that happens? :)

This idea that comments should be removed from the payout pool entirely is interesting. Right now, because I can reward comments like posts, I want to. I want people to interact with me, and I like when they do, and when I see a comment I like, I want to upvote it.

But if all comments were simply "decline reward" I can imagine two feasible workaround scenarios. One, there would certainly be a bot developed that you give posting permission to, and when you "liked" a comment, it would go to the user's most recent post that hadn't paid out yet and deliver your vote value there, while letting you leave the $ emoji on the comment (or whatever)
Or two, people would just stop thinking of comments as posts. It would take away valuable functionality, I think, but this EIP is already taking away most of the valuable functionality of steem as a crypto-rewards social media site, so why not that, too?

Idea three would be that if you want to reward comments and interaction, you pay them a tip either directly (as Steem has very cheap on-chain transfers, in fact fundamentally they really ought to be cheaper than votes, although I'm not sure this is currently the case) or via a tip bot, which already happens on other social platforms.

Yes, that is a roundabout solution. Ease of use is the number one predictor of a platform's success (citation needed) but steem is at least flexible enough to offer those. Hopefully a bot will come to fill the gap and we'll get some integration with a frontend.
SMTs really should have come before this change. It would be less negativily impactful if we were already using community currencies.

Posted using Partiko Android