I think everyone agrees that a higher STEEM price would be desirable. Steem is a content delivery platform whose main value proposition is crowdsourced content discovery and rewarding by stake-based voting. Trending is a feature of nearly every Steem front end where people can go and check out the most highly rewards content. Trending is the place that gets the most attention on the entire platform.
What do you think happens when it is possible to buy votes and get a positive or zero return for investment when you buy enough votes to get to Trending? Trending will be filled with advertisements like this. What do you think non-Steemians who stumble upon Steemit will do when they are browsing the internet? They check out Trending. If trending is full of advertisements like this, they will conclude that Steem(it) is garbage and will not give it a time of day.
Steemians who upvote bid bot stacked shit like this are thoughtlessly pissing in their own cereals because they're devaluing Trending and thus Steem. No content that the community has organically deemed the most valuable should have any place in Trending except if the authors of that content are making a financial loss by buying the votes to that get them to Trending. The best possible promoted content is that has all the rewards redistributed to the entire community (done by having @null as the beneficiary).
What do you think they see, when they stumble upon Steem these days? Have a look into my Steem Trending Reviews.
It is an echo chamber for maybe 100 users.
Nothing tht is relevant outside of Steem.
As is this ad here :)
What do you think they see, when they stumble upon Steem these days? Have a look into my Steem Trending Reviews.
It is an echo chamber for maybe 100 users.
Nothing tht is relevant outside of Steem.
As is this ad here :)
That's no excuse to allow this ad to have a positive ROI in buying votes to get to Trending!
We should do a better job digging up valuable content from the depths of Steem and upvoting it to the bright daylight in Trending! When you see a piece of unrecognized high-quality content, give it a big upvote and use your network by resteeming it. At some point, it will meet the eyes of people with large stake and you'll collect your high curation rewards.
But I guess, even you wouldn't be doing that, right? How many valuable content did you find from the depth of Steem over the last few weeks?
@isnochys - interesting, not very often I get to read your opinion around here, buddy. :)
Anyway, those who don't know @cateredcontent, it is one of the few Steem based writing contests which actually benefits nearly 160 good Steem writers over every contest. The current one is worth USD 1300 to be shared with writers across the globe.
So, half of the I am going to defend Steem gladiators have no clue what they are downvoting. Anyway, hope that made you happy.
I just started to read New a couple of days ago. The trouble is there is so much material. Someone introduced a tool for sifting through large quantities of new posts using various criteria. Anyone remember what it was?
So, half of the I am going to defend Steem gladiators have no clue what they are downvoting. Anyway, hope that made you happy.
Advertising is advertising. No profit-making advertising belongs in Trending.
They're not doling out the money out of the goodness of their heart but to advertise their product. I think they can be pretty satisfied with what they've already got: a lot of eyes on ProxomaX or whatever the product was what they were advertising.
All the same, what people do with the vote power that they purchased when they bought STEEM and powered it up is their business.
Also, after HF21 the bidbots might be suffering, but the circle jerking is alive and well. Now, the "digging through new" strategy is unwise, because curators seeking best ROI will go with posts that have already gotten to the $10 range in order to avoid penalties on curation rewards.
All the same, what people do with the vote power that they purchased when they bought STEEM and powered it up is their business.
No, it's not because the reward pool is common.
Also, after HF21 the bidbots might be suffering, but the circle jerking is alive and well.
It is being dealt with.
Now, the "digging through new" strategy is unwise, because curators seeking best ROI will go with posts that have already gotten to the $10 range in order to avoid penalties on curation rewards.
There's a bit to unpack in that. The early upvoting penalty is linear but the benefits of front running are non-linear. Usually, the sweet spot is around four minutes when it comes to upvoting posts that are predictably highly rewarded. But sometimes even that can yield surprisingly low curation rewards if there are too many people trying to front run each other. It's precisely then when looking for less popular content makes sense.
Any curator who waits for a post to already have $10 on it is wasting money. I know a thing or to about curation reward maximization.
The very best case is finding something at least five minutes old that a lot of combined stake will upvote upon seeing it and having the opportunity to upvote it first. The only problem with that is that it takes some time to do. But the question is whether we want this platform to succeed or not. To work properly, Proof-of-Brain (decentralized stake-based curation) takes a bit of community spirit and effort to be as successful as possible.
Bingo. In your opinion do the currrent top witnesses and the Steemit,Inc team understand economics enough to make this thing successful? I had thought they did but the changes they pushed from HF 21 (mainly the EIP) seem to be against that. The first second and third priority should all be about creating demand for SP, and everything else should be a distant second. By the way, I have seen a couple of your other responses concerning the steem economics and I am just replying to all of those here. :)
😊. Nothing against you buddy. It was just a bit of unease on the downvoting.
Anyway, if you found even one good newbie, you are thousand times better than me. I am not even looking for one. So in that sense it was not correct for me to question you. I get that.
What are you talking about? This post is a 10.000k Steem giveaway, did you lose your mind? I bet my ass, they did not think about a ROI on their post ... they just needed to reach people...... dafuq make sense if you comment, at least a bit. ROI on a 10k Steem giveaways.... DUDE! R I D I C U L O U S
Both Trending and the reward pool are common resources. This campaign is giving prizes to those who advertise their products. They are not sharing them with the whole community. What the downvotes accomplish is remove pending rewards effectively taking some of the money they have invested in this and give it to every other Steemian, not just those who will advertise their products.
A trending page full of ads, regardless of how much money is spent, or burned, or declined, is still useless and ugly. I like how the tribes have designated ad slots, clearly marked. One should have to purchase STEEM, then buy the slot, and that STEEM should then be burned. It should be impossible to upvote the ad. I don't pay Walmart for leaving a flyer in my mailbox.
A trending page full of ads, regardless of how much money is spent, or burned, or declined, is still useless and ugly. I like how the tribes have designated ad slots, clearly marked. One should have to purchase STEEM, then buy the slot, and that STEEM should then be burned. It should be impossible to upvote the ad. I don't pay Walmart for leaving a flyer in my mailbox.
That is true. That is precisely why we should double down on downvoting advertisements boosted to Trending. Even if such an advertising slot system were implemented, which should absolutely be done, there is nothing else that can keep the actual content side clean but our downvotes.
Then education is in order.
I think everyone agrees that a higher STEEM price would be desirable. Steem is a content delivery platform whose main value proposition is crowdsourced content discovery and rewarding by stake-based voting. Trending is a feature of nearly every Steem front end where people can go and check out the most highly rewards content. Trending is the place that gets the most attention on the entire platform.
What do you think happens when it is possible to buy votes and get a positive or zero return for investment when you buy enough votes to get to Trending? Trending will be filled with advertisements like this. What do you think non-Steemians who stumble upon Steemit will do when they are browsing the internet? They check out Trending. If trending is full of advertisements like this, they will conclude that Steem(it) is garbage and will not give it a time of day.
Steemians who upvote bid bot stacked shit like this are thoughtlessly pissing in their own cereals because they're devaluing Trending and thus Steem. No content that the community has organically deemed the most valuable should have any place in Trending except if the authors of that content are making a financial loss by buying the votes to that get them to Trending. The best possible promoted content is that has all the rewards redistributed to the entire community (done by having @null as the beneficiary).
What do you think they see, when they stumble upon Steem these days? Have a look into my Steem Trending Reviews.
It is an echo chamber for maybe 100 users.
Nothing tht is relevant outside of Steem.
As is this ad here :)
That's no excuse to allow this ad to have a positive ROI in buying votes to get to Trending!
We should do a better job digging up valuable content from the depths of Steem and upvoting it to the bright daylight in Trending! When you see a piece of unrecognized high-quality content, give it a big upvote and use your network by resteeming it. At some point, it will meet the eyes of people with large stake and you'll collect your high curation rewards.
Well, said @markkujantunen!
But I guess, even you wouldn't be doing that, right? How many valuable content did you find from the depth of Steem over the last few weeks?
@isnochys - interesting, not very often I get to read your opinion around here, buddy. :)
Anyway, those who don't know @cateredcontent, it is one of the few Steem based writing contests which actually benefits nearly 160 good Steem writers over every contest. The current one is worth USD 1300 to be shared with writers across the globe.
So, half of the I am going to defend Steem gladiators have no clue what they are downvoting. Anyway, hope that made you happy.
I just started to read New a couple of days ago. The trouble is there is so much material. Someone introduced a tool for sifting through large quantities of new posts using various criteria. Anyone remember what it was?
Advertising is advertising. No profit-making advertising belongs in Trending.
They're not doling out the money out of the goodness of their heart but to advertise their product. I think they can be pretty satisfied with what they've already got: a lot of eyes on ProxomaX or whatever the product was what they were advertising.
All the same, what people do with the vote power that they purchased when they bought STEEM and powered it up is their business.
Also, after HF21 the bidbots might be suffering, but the circle jerking is alive and well. Now, the "digging through new" strategy is unwise, because curators seeking best ROI will go with posts that have already gotten to the $10 range in order to avoid penalties on curation rewards.
No, it's not because the reward pool is common.
It is being dealt with.
There's a bit to unpack in that. The early upvoting penalty is linear but the benefits of front running are non-linear. Usually, the sweet spot is around four minutes when it comes to upvoting posts that are predictably highly rewarded. But sometimes even that can yield surprisingly low curation rewards if there are too many people trying to front run each other. It's precisely then when looking for less popular content makes sense.
Any curator who waits for a post to already have $10 on it is wasting money. I know a thing or to about curation reward maximization.
The very best case is finding something at least five minutes old that a lot of combined stake will upvote upon seeing it and having the opportunity to upvote it first. The only problem with that is that it takes some time to do. But the question is whether we want this platform to succeed or not. To work properly, Proof-of-Brain (decentralized stake-based curation) takes a bit of community spirit and effort to be as successful as possible.
Bingo. In your opinion do the currrent top witnesses and the Steemit,Inc team understand economics enough to make this thing successful? I had thought they did but the changes they pushed from HF 21 (mainly the EIP) seem to be against that. The first second and third priority should all be about creating demand for SP, and everything else should be a distant second. By the way, I have seen a couple of your other responses concerning the steem economics and I am just replying to all of those here. :)
😊. Nothing against you buddy. It was just a bit of unease on the downvoting.
Anyway, if you found even one good newbie, you are thousand times better than me. I am not even looking for one. So in that sense it was not correct for me to question you. I get that.
Have a great time! Cheers! 😊
Posted using Partiko Android
What are you talking about? This post is a 10.000k Steem giveaway, did you lose your mind? I bet my ass, they did not think about a ROI on their post ... they just needed to reach people...... dafuq make sense if you comment, at least a bit. ROI on a 10k Steem giveaways.... DUDE! R I D I C U L O U S
Calm down.
Both Trending and the reward pool are common resources. This campaign is giving prizes to those who advertise their products. They are not sharing them with the whole community. What the downvotes accomplish is remove pending rewards effectively taking some of the money they have invested in this and give it to every other Steemian, not just those who will advertise their products.
Yeeeeeeeeeeeees! That is right! Echo Chamber of a few.
A trending page full of ads, regardless of how much money is spent, or burned, or declined, is still useless and ugly. I like how the tribes have designated ad slots, clearly marked. One should have to purchase STEEM, then buy the slot, and that STEEM should then be burned. It should be impossible to upvote the ad. I don't pay Walmart for leaving a flyer in my mailbox.
That is true. That is precisely why we should double down on downvoting advertisements boosted to Trending. Even if such an advertising slot system were implemented, which should absolutely be done, there is nothing else that can keep the actual content side clean but our downvotes.