scrobble.life
#reward-pool

Hive Blog Rewards Will Need to Go

Hive has been an exceptional place for people new to crypto to get started. You don't need to KYC with shady centralized exchanges. You don't need to ape in chasing green dildos with your life savings. You just need to write interesting things on a blog, and stakeholders of the chain can reward you. For many, this is one of the lowest barriers to entry to own your own piece of the digital revolution. Blogging rewards have been instrumental in making Hive the place we all know today, and any change, including one as drastic as this, should be debated thoroughly before a consensus could develop.

Before we can discuss this, we'll need to back up. To get the big picture of this situation, we need to understand the history, the current problems, the future problems, and also what's at stake (no pun intended). There are also other problems that will not be covered in this post that will need to be figured out, such as incentivizing staking without curation rewards, HBD emission, and inflation reallocation or removal.

But first things first, let's start at the beginning...

8-LiLLIoN3wFCNo84.png Source

An Abridged History

When Dan Larimer designed MUXER, he envisioned a crypto community with a social aspect which could be used to reward users who brought value to the stakeholders. Eventually this idea was fleshed out to become STEEM, with even more ambitious goals and complex design.

While it is complex under the hood, the idea was brilliant in its simplicity. A cryptocurrency with built in social media that could host dApps. Blogging with rewards turned out to be the first dApp, used to showcase the power of the chain with its fast and fee-less structure. However, to this day, it is the only dApp that takes base inflation and distributes it to users.

Evil Inflation Can Be Good

There are some purists out there that say all inflation is bad. However, if inflation is providing value to the ecosystem as a whole, then one could argue it's not only good, it is necessary. We have inflation to pay our witnesses to secure the transactions every user submits. We have inflation that goes to the DAO to fund things to better the chain. We also have staking inflation, but that's almost negligible in the grand scheme of things. And then we have inflation that pays out bloggers in the form of a reward pool.

Are Blogging Rewards Worth it?

Honestly speaking, there has never been a consensus on what is "good" or "valuable" in terms of blogging. Our community has identified some things that are definitely off limits which almost everyone agrees with, but in terms of creating a standard, our "one-size-fits-all" reward structure for microblogging, long form content, video content of all types, memes, etc have had contention from day one, with no real direction to allow reasonable expectations for users. This has led to bad user experience for many who were used to traditional social media, but then were downvoted and felt punished when they tried out Hive for the first time and didn't meet the stakeholder's opaque conditions.

All is not lost however. While there are glaring problems and difficulties with this structure, this has been something of a loss leader, getting people to try our wonderful chain and experience how painless transfers and transactions can be with crypto. They have easily memorable wallet addresses and instantly feel a connection to them. For the people who decide to stick it out through all the uncertainty, we create die hard fans and ambassadors of the chain in the greater conversations on the net.

As a person who saw the chilling effects downvotes had on the platform in addition to the problems stated above, this has always led me to the conclusion that the reward pool must be decentralized even further to the second layer, to allow each community or style of content their own reward pool. For example, something like a meme community could decide on their own policies for what is posted, and if it's valuable, the users could reap the rewards, without sharing a pie with people who make video content. This allows for much more flexibility in policy, while also concentrating value in the communities that bring it.

This conclusion has always seemed inevitable to me, but I have stopped myself from formally proposing it because it would uproot what people have built here. It would fundamentally change the nature of this chain, destroy business plans, and possibly see an exodus of users. While there are problems with the reward pool allocation and experience, I never felt it was bad enough to throw the baby out with the bathwater. That is, until now...

The Straw that Broke the Camel's Back

At the beginning of this experiment, our community content moderation had to deal with people translating and spinning articles or blogs that weren't theirs in order to try and get rewards. This was difficult to detect, but not impossible. If our vigilant community members weren't able to stop it, the problem would have grown so pernicious we may have been forced to take drastic and counterproductive measures to combat it.

This is what I see lying in wait with AI. In its current state, it can help with help a writer with blank page syndrome, or it can come up with topics or lists, but it's still very limited in regards to creating engaging content that passes as human. Even in the more extreme cases, we have other AI bots that can detect it to combat abuse on the chain. This will not last forever. AI is taking massive leaps and bounds in a short time, and before long we'll have difficult choices to make. There will be a future time with witch hunts on new users, accusations against old users, and an Ouroboros of our own community unless we make a plan now. We cannot wait until the problem is at our threshold, as these kinds of decisions need to be thoroughly thought through, pros and cons weighed, and implementation put in gradually so the pain is not felt all at once to give community members time to acclimate.

If the above is true, we cannot be sure that blogging rewards can survive on the second layer either. When computers can mimic humans with extreme accuracy, there will arise a culture of extreme distrust among the community, and this will be catastrophic for us. New members would be welcomed with accusations instead of open arms. Top earners will be vilified even more than we've seen in the past. However, allowing each niche/topic/type/etc. to have its own reward pool, their own content policies, and its own culture, will be the best bulwark against the worst case scenario from playing out.

Where Do We Go From Here?

Anyone seeing the evolution of AI and AGI on the horizon can see how disruptive it is to our ecosystem. It seems inevitable that the tools to fight it will always be one step behind the means to exploit. While it may seem like a distant future now, some estimates have it coming much sooner than we can imagine. Open source AI appears to be jumping leaps and bounds above the corporate models, and this could come to a head here in roughly 3-5 years.

That doesn't give us much time to discuss, debate, decide, and then execute a plan. There are many problems and knock-on effects this will have. How do we empower those who have built a business model around the reward pool? Will HBD inflation only come from converting HIVE and DAO emissions? Why would people power up HIVE if they can't earn curation rewards? Wouldn't this jeopardize governance?

These questions and more need to be answered before anything can even be fully considered. We, as a community, need to begin this discussion ASAP before it's too late. I have removed a large chunk of this post going over different options for staking, but may include that in a followup post after hearing feedback.

I ask everyone to consider this carefully. Don't think about the short term earnings, but rather the big picture. Leave your questions and comments below, I will reply to each and every one I can. Or join me on the Town Hall tomorrow on X where I will answering any questions I can.

Comments · 38

  • @novacadian(65)· 921d

    Hive Blog Rewards Will Need to Go

    Maybe what is needed is a reworking of the rewards system as opposed to doing away with them.

    If the concept is "proof of brain", then perhaps rewards could be weighted by how sure we are that the action (upvote/downvote/etc) was a non-automated manual action by a living brain. This could give the edge to the brain of a minnow over the automation of a dolphin.

    How might one decide if an action is a non-automated manual one? A distributed CAPCHA system was discussed somewhere in my distant archive on the Chain, if memory serves. It's an interesting programming challenge to be able to identify proof of brain while not holding up traffic.

  • @blackibutterfly(59)· 970d

    Yeah, AI is a conundrum. Actually, there is no AI, (Artificial Intelligence). It is just code made by Humans that scrapes every bit of its information from the internet and spits it back out.. Not one thing is original in its raw form, in my opinion.

    We are the intelligent ones with the ability to use this code ethically.. Of course, most won't if they think it will give them "an edge".. So, somehow, we have to all become equal with no "edge". No need to manipulate. How we do that, not sure but it needs to be done. We are either here to lift each other up or to shove each other down. Pretty simple really, that part.. Just planting a thought seed.. something to think about and consider as we move forward.

  • @jacobpeacock(74)· 972d

    Correct me if I am wrong @r0nd0n but are you sure that you are not playing rodeo clown for the plans that @jarvie has to remove the Reward Pool?

    Also Happy New Year and I sincerely hope that you are doing well.

    Much Love & Respect.

  • @erh.germany(68)· 988d

    Did you come up with some more thoughts or insights since you wrote the above text?

    I've been here since 2017 and the really exceptional content I find actually tends to be on posts that point to content taking place outside of Hive. Authors and books that are not found in the usual search engines, for example, or are very difficult to find. The idea of earning money with your own content has made all content mediocre in my opinion. The fact with all platforms on the Internet is that mediocrity is rewarded. The second fact is that people find reading tiring and the habit of reacting to headlines and snippets of text is widespread. In my view, these are impulse reactions.

    Individuals like to think of themselves as exceptional and are mistaken in their self-assessment of the quality of their content. "There is nothing new under the sun", yet people generally always post exactly what is nothing new, hence the expected. The expected, however, is the dissemination of ideas that are already thin in the first step. The wider you spread these thin ideas like butter on bread, the thinner they become. The paradox is that the more superficial attention they receive, the more important they appear to be.

    The same thing happens in the film industry. Once outstanding, and therefore successful, scripts are copied and each new copy loses quality and the only thing that hypes such poor content are the budgets of people who are actually completely uninterested in the matter. In order to be highly interested in something, you need people who are really into it and are well trained and experienced in their profession.

    I agree to the extent that getting voted and collecting the rewards is basically a hindrance in wanting to become excellent or an expert. It's too easy. I don't mean that it's easy to get high payouts. Rather, I mean that it's too easy to build loyalty with people you basically don't know. Anyone can easily become a flatterer, all they have to do is say what someone else likes.

    It's a "wanting to please culture" that has more and more difficulty recognising what real criticism means. The well-meaning critic who criticises another is always interested in seeing the other person develop, grow beyond what they can already do, but can become even better at. Flattery and unconditional confirmation is the death of improving skills. Though it's a booster for posting.

    Concentrating on the voting button allows direct communication to slip through the lack of commentary, for example, and the unwillingness to really engage with an individual challenger in a sporting manner. How many challengers can you actually handle per day? Communication via the wallet, for example, has fallen by the wayside (including me too). At the beginning of my time here, I directly tipped a lot more often or slipped a few tokens to someone else. If one wants, one can reward others via your wallet, for example to give more than just cents via a vote.

    There was a time when I bought art with HBD and the artist agreed to send me a work of art by mail. The fact that Hive has not become a place where matter is still seen as a trade commodity is a question I ask myself. .... I don't know, maybe I got blind and lazy, myself.

  • @unklebonehead(69)· 997d

    Ok, Im just gonna go ahead and ask if it's even possible. It probably is and it will probably stir up some more of the hater comments.

    What if, or is it possible, to use Hive as a protocol to tie the apps & ecosystem together but use a different currency such as bitcoin, eth or even monero as the currency side of it?

    I know Spk Network are working on ceramic accounts to allow inter chain stuff. Hell Dtube you could use Steem & Avalon alongside Hive. From what little I know about the tech side of things, Hive seems to out perform other blockchains when it comes to speed of transactions. So why not use it as a protocol and something else that already has more value and market stability for the currency aspect? Why does it have to do EVERYTHING?

    You can all now roast if me if you so wish. But I expect an honest technical, real answer first and not just a "god your a dumbass answer". We all know and I own that I am a dumbass. So the insults wont work. Lol.

  • @buttcoins(75)· 998d

    While i recognize the threat of AI to the hive reward pool and humanity in general. I could not disagree more.
    If this idea gets traction and happens, it is the immediate death of HIVE imo. With AI it will at least be a battle, that may very well be lost. But what you propose is Suicide in my view.

  • La incertidumbre de lo que pasará o no pasará!! Ojalá que lo que ocurra sea bueno para nuestra comunidad y así poder sobrevivir a los posibles cambios y podamos adaptarnos.

  • @manniman(69)· 999d

    There are people here in this comment section! :)

    Layer0s has formed mostly on Discord and are moving to X now. Additional layers are forming surrounding Speak and VSC currently, mostly carried by a few leaders. It's interesting how things have turned out.

    There are a lot of smart people who understand STEEM/HIVE as a technology, none hates good open source technology. But some will never engage with the current governance again. There are only 20+1 witnesses and the famous Hive Watchers are still around.

    Time will fly and all CEX will de-list coins without a regulatory appropriation. That will cause a tiny cataclysm for sure. Meanwhile as the technology advances, reason to keep the current L1 as main-chain decline at the same speed.

    You don't have to be Nostradamus to understand that the incentives for a fork are the highest, the closer to the peak of the next bull market we are, somewhere in the next 12months. I don't dislike this layer1 version of the Hive Blockchain, but there's no reason to be romantic about software versions. Whoever gets the critical amount of socio-digital support behind them, will come out with "the best idea" and the others will most likely blurt away in the following winter season. It's a clown world we live in.

    There has been disagreement on inflation, votes up/down, witness count/votes, DAO usage and private transaction for as long as I know. No reason to think that will ever change :)

    What do you think?

  • @hiveqa(59)· 999d

    Good write-up. We do really need the "twitter/X spaces" of Hive. Something where people can quickly distribute info to their followers. Not sure if anyone finally did that?🤔

  • @lpfaust(68)· 999d

    I’ve primarily been inactive as a content creator and passively engaged with the chain until I caught up with @crimsonclad at RareEvo this past summer. Catching up with her brought my engagement back with HIVE, and your proposal about removing blog rewards made me think a bit deeper about this subject after we chatted.

    I don’t think this topic has a five-second soundbite solution if we are looking for an honest answer because it’s much deeper than just removing the value of rewards from a rewards pool.

    The removal of the rewards pool effectively proposes a break of the DPOS governance protocol at the most fundamental level. At its core, that’s what HIVE staking represents – the ability to use the stake you accumulate (through value provided to the network, be it financial or otherwise) to affect change in the governance of the chain (witnesses, DHF proposals, author rewards, curation rewards, etc.)

    What makes HIVE unique among all other POS and DPOS governance chains is how content creation and the building of a loyal base of followers on the blockchain permits a path for individuals without financial means to have a voice in the governance of the network - simply by providing value through content they create rather than through a transactional purchase of HIVE tokens. Staking the earned rewards into the chain from that value of the content created is much like a small business owner investing their profits into their business and is what gives them a voice in governance.

    This idea of sweat equity allowing an individual to amass a position to influence blockchain governance is unique to HIVE and a brilliant way to ensure decentralization grows on the chain to preserve and evolve the chain as time goes on. It’s superior to other POS and DOPS chains, which permit the ability to affect governance only through value provided by the transactional purchase of a token.

    I would argue that removing the ability to earn HIVE for those who provide value to the network through sweat equity (e.g., content creation) reduces the chain to a pure POS governance model Ponzi scheme masquerading as some form of a DPOS “social network” with some defi and NFTs thrown in to enhance the flavor of the Ponzi. What would the chain then become if not another flavor of LUNA? Why would staking HIVE matter beyond any interest one would earn through staking once you’ve stripped the current utility from the token? HIVE blockchain creator rewards are not simply about value and outsourcing it to a shitcoin layer 2 NFT. You will have effectively shut the door for any creator to affect any change whatsoever on the governance of the chain through their hard work and centralized all the governance power into only those with the most significant economic means.

    HIVE and the legacy chain communities have always had a very flawed sense that somehow the individual with more significant economic means and transactionally purchased tokens or the DAPP builder brings more value to the chain than the content creator who creates content that attracts attention and brings thousands of new views or new DAPP users to the chain. When creators' earnings show either value parity or greater value than the purchaser or DAPP builder, creators are punished, silenced, demonetized, and forced back into the underclass through aggressive downvoting. It’s a fundamental misunderstanding of where perceived value comes from. Perceived value does not come from cool new tech or the latest slick ponzi simply from being built. Without a growing community, tech alone has no value, regardless of how cool it is or how much capital has been invested. Perceived value comes from a community adopting the technology, growing the community (influencers), and adding value and utility (content creation on HIVE or its various DAPPs, selling products on a marketplace, etc.)

    I don’t believe the DPOS governance and rewards pool are the issues. The core issue is the culture and ethos propagated in the HIVE community.

    Since the legacy chain, the HIVE culture fosters, encourages, and rewards a Robber Barron culture rather than a growth culture. The culture of the legacy chain and HIVE has focused on strip-mining maximum value created on the chain. It has never been enough to take block rewards as a witness – maximum author and curation rewards were taken in addition through self-upvotes and voting cartels while downvoting others with great content surpassing some arbitrary ROI threshold. Curation trails were created so crumbs could be passed to some of the creators, and automation has optimized the process so perfectly that one doesn’t even need to engage with any of the content. It’s one awesomely efficient, fully automated, circle-jerk of strip-mining value from a chain. It’s the culture and legacy the founders of the legacy chain (Dan & Dave) left HIVE, which remains and is the poison pill that kneecaps HIVE's growth and adoption.

    Listen, a growth mindset for any business or project is hard. It requires delaying gratification. It requires spending money. It requires nurturing a product, a community, and an ecosystem. It requires growing the pie rather than eating everything. It requires understanding and respecting the value everyone brings to the table. It requires a common set of values and establishing different community norms propagating across the community.

    TBH, I’m not convinced that entrenched behavior and chain culture within HIVE would change or that my observation would be taken seriously.

    I’ve attended two of the X Space town halls because the same question is asked constantly about retaining and growing users on the HIVE blockchain. The truth is it’s not a question that seeks any serious answers. The same six people have been speakers – the same three witnesses or six DAPP developers. The same ground is covered, and the same answers are regurgitated. They talked more than they listened, and I found that very little engagement between the panel and the audience happened in those two instances. It’s simply a reflection of the HIVE culture in an audio format – the flawed belief the value only resides in the contribution of the investor and the DAAP creator.

    I don’t think it’s the rewards pool or the governance model that’s the core problem. It’s the culture of the community. Removing the rewards pool turns HIVE into LUNA 2.0.

    TLDR: Removing the rewards pool destroys the HIVE chain; there is a fundamental misunderstanding of who brings value to HIVE; the problem is the strip-mining culture of the HIVE community rather than encouraging a growth culture.

  • @wanderingmoon(63)· 1000d

    I do not believe hive curation and tips should be done away with completely but I do agree that communities and layer two should be allowed to set their own rules.

    I see nothing wrong with using AI to "HELP" with writing but should not be completely relied on (no copy paste). Just be sure to state in such posts an attribution when necessary.

  • @opidia(67)· 1000d

    But but butt ...are you saying we should follow the exemple of whaleshares ?! The exact same reason why everybody left ?! because no more curation and only staking and tipping...how interesting!

  • @eddiespino(80)· 1000d

    I commented on this on MM, but I'll also put it here on the chain.

    I could not join the Town Hall today, but I'll share my opinion.

    I don't think Hive is ready to remove the reward pool. Look at the tribes or tokenized communities; I can count the successful ones with one hand and have many fingers left.

    When we have 10 or 20 successful tokenized communities, maybe we can start to talk about removing the rewards on L1. We also need better layer 2. Hive Engine has been having issues for weeks. I think it would be worth first trying to improve HE and help develop the other L2 before trying to remove the reward pool on Hive.

    Removing it now would be a death sentence to Hive because many users will leave. Damn, maybe many would consider going to Steem or trying other options (like that new one that is going to be launched on Koinos).

    I agree with making the investment in Hive Power more attractive; investing in HBD shouldn't be more attractive. A nicer APR on holding Hive Power without having to vote would be nice, in my opinion.

  • @igormuba(72)· 1001d

    We need again an initiative like utopian was, they used to upvote heavily original and useful content. To this day when I google something I find tutorials that were sponsored by utopian, sometimes even my own

  • @sagarkothari88(78)· 1001d

    I guess, during town-hall, my point was misinterpreted because I couldn't present it well.

    Here is what I suggested - wild & random thoughts for food

    Screenshot 2023-12-01 at 11.15.22 PM.png

    Solution 1

    • Instead of 65% for the reward pool, bring it down to 50%
    • 15% for locking hive for 13 weeks / Hive Power
    • Extra 15% for locking hive for 1 year
    • With this people will be driven for staking more for better rewards.
    • These numbers can vary. It's just for an example

    Solution 2

    • Only keep tipping feature to authors instead of reward pools
    • With this we never have to worry about 7 days time line for curation, or downvotes or upvotes.
    • With this content creators can post & earn from tipping anytime.
    • After earning from tipping, they are encouraged to power-up for better rewards.
    • Now, this tipping can be anything - it already exists by many comments like Hive, ALIVE, BEER etc.
  • @r1s2g3(77)· 1001d

    we cannot be sure that blogging rewards can survive on the second layer either.

    First build that second layer, before you write all of the AI bullshit.

  • @allentaylor(69)· 1001d

    The first time I heard you say we should do away with blogging rewards, I thought that would be the death of Hive.blog. Now I see what you're talking about. By transferring the value, and the judgment of it, to the communities, new users to the blockchain could join a community the moment they set up their account. With the 3 types of communities, anyone on the blockchain could join or start a community of any of those three types. If each community distributed its own rewards by either creating a Layer-2 token or using one already on the market, then all types of content could still be rewarded.

    On staking, HIVE could always transition into a governance token where anyone on the blockchain could trade Layer-2 tokens for HIVE to increase their governance stake. The staking mechanism wouldn't necessarily need to change. Although, there may not be a need for HBD anymore.

  • @thelogicaldude(74)· 1001d

    Remove the rewards pool and Hive dies, period. I would be extremely surprised if it doesn’t. I know I would personally unvote any witness that is going to this idea and move my businesses elsewhere.

    AI is already everywhere, you are not going to stop it, and then removing the rewards would also chase away most actual humans that are participating. There would really be no incentive at all at that point to continue creating on Hive.

    Let’s not split hairs here. This is a business for most of us in one way or another, you remove my ability to make income from this platform and it is essentially worthless.

  • @johnhtims.thrds(56)· 1001d

    Getting rid of the reward pool will result in a mass exodus of users. This needs to stop being brought up.

  • @starkerz(73)· 1001d

    hey R0n, want to come on CTT on Saturday afternoon PST to discuss this? i think its super important, and we are building layer two tokenised community front ends which are free to spin up. U stake the token and can drop to existing crypto communities, including those on hive. U can exclude known bot and abuser accounts if you wish and have various ways of excluding exploiters to me whether we like it or not, AI will be used by other hiveans to add a scam tax to the community those hiveans will then use their own stake to upvote their own AI content accounts for the AI bots that the hive scammer users own themselves. As of right now, hive knows who the humans are. This is a good reference back to the time before the AI. So we have that to start with. We can then use these people to verify who the new real human users are, even if its by face to face meeting with several existing known human hiveans who each attest and approve that the new user is infact not a bot. after a certain threashold of existing hiveans vouching for the new user, they move to a "potential real human status" and can earn the real human status via interactions with other known human community accounts over time.

    Anyway, love to discuss this further on CTT Podcast on Saturday. anyone is welcome to join to discuss

  • @bil.prag(76)· 1001d

    didn't expect the AI twist in the argument. still, i like how the mining of hive is done, the idea that you can get your part of rewards only if you distribute it to others is unique and it made this blockchain more decentralized than most (is it perfect, no, is there a lot with better distribution, no).

    if there is no curation the only reason to hold hive would be RC and witness voting. So 1k hive to be sure you have enough RC and that is it. Why hold hive to vote for witnesses to help them make hive? hive would go from DPoS to PoS.

    And Elon Musk said that in few years we will have Digital God so... And he is always right.

  • @sepracore(64)· 1001d

    I haven’t seen the community this united since that time taskmaster posted a picture of boobs.

  • @findingfreedom(53)· 1001d

    I think AI can be used for both good and bad. Currently the content on Hive DOESN'T really bring value, because it's not bringing views and new users in. What's considered quality isn't cutting it for growing the platform.

    How can AI help? Well, it can help improve the accuracy of the information being shared across the platform. People want information and they aren't getting that here with any relevancy. AI can change that.

    I'm brand spanking new on Hive and can't find any content I like or even that helps me with anything. Part of that is the lack of good content discovery tools, but it's mostly content that is TOO personal. Maybe InLeo can help with that with their better search tools they are developing.

    How can it hurt? Well you've already covered what seems the common argument.

    Now I sit back and take all the perspectives in, because that's the best way to come to sound decisions.

    Now for what's really needed; Hive has been glitchy as heck and that needs to be fixed ASAP or none of these side conversations will matter anyway!!! The nodes suck, all of them and need to be stabilized.

  • @whatsup(76)· 1001d

    I don't get the problem, so what if people create AI assisted blogging?

    I'm going to need a more clearly defined problem before I understand this.

    All I'll say is the reward system has been (challenging, and problematic) the foundation of Hive, our communication center and what holds the Community together and how we found so many non crypto people who wanted to be a part of this thing.

    There are 100,000 blockchains now running and looking for developers, we have a few games that have done well also, but outside of that Hive is a blockchain swapping HBD for Hive, who is going to have either or need either without a community?

    Even though I haven't been very active here lately, I love Hive and the community, but with zero incentives there are easier places to communicate.

  • @themarkymark(81)· 1001d
  • @unklebonehead(69)· 1001d

    Thank you. You say it much better than I could ever say it. Different points than what I had come up with. But it's the same very important message that has to be brought out into the open and discussed now rather than later.

  • @enforcer48(75)· 1001d

    Near the end of 2023, Hive is still grasping at the questions from 2016.

  • @l337m45732(75)· 1001d

    stoked to have you there buddy, gunna be a great discussion

  • @antisocialist(75)· 1001d

    Perhaps we should task the curators with increasing their diligence while curating? Instead of voting it mostly to those that drop it like it is hot, those curators could cultivate the authors that do other things outside of blogging traveling food posts that helps bring attention to us?

    Rather than blindly voting rewards to people, perhaps relationships beyond 'me big vote, you lick boots speak corporate speak' could be developed?

    Hivewatchers has been a source of friction all along. It exists because curators can't be bothered with not voting rewards to scammers. The anti-abuse community, few that we are, has had to chase behind the people complaining about dilution while voting rewards to people that dump all they get as quick as they get it. Wtf?

    Rather than being responsible curators, many curators expect hivewatchers and sundry volunteers to keep the mess tolerably cleaned up.

    Scammers get more support than dissenters. Dissenters at least make examinations of what is likely truth more plentiful. Scammers are who are diluting the complainers.

    I agree with what you say about rewards migrating to the 2nd layer, but I can't see that as a realistic occurrence before rc's have value. Once rc's can be rented out the need to distribute the hive token can be dialed back. People will move to the second layer because the first is more expensive to maintain a presence on.

    Until then, it looks like we get what we got because that is how it is and nobody that could change it will change it, imo.

    The adage is just as true now as ever, 'If you don't like how hive is being managed, buy more hive.'

  • @ammonite(73)· 1001d

    Interesting. I am still trying to form my opinion on this but first I would like to see better content discovery and search options on Hive and possibly a revision of the 7 day payout window to allow for rewarding evergreen content from the reward pool.

    If content has possible value into the future I believe people will be more respecting of what they put on chain and the reward pool may even get better dispersed.

  • @article61(71)· 1001d

    In the movies they usually send in a robot to kill the other robot.

  • @neoxian(72)· 1002d

    removing blog rewards would completely destroy how my city works, it destroys what made Steem and then Hive special in the first place. I would stop my witness and power down at least half of my hive and use it to buy splinterlands cards. And most of my hive activities outside of Splinterlands would come to a halt.

  • @forexbrokr(75)· 1002d

    Honestly speaking, there has never been a consensus on what is "good" or "valuable" in terms of blogging.

    The value of content is actually black and white.

    Does it make money? Yes or no.

    Just none of the front-ends choose to monetise their content and the DHF continues to subsidise the garbage we see now.

  • @stayoutoftherz(80)· 1002d

    What a moronic idea! Yes, there will be AI-generated posts that will go undetected, so what? They don´t ruin the platform. Removing the blogging rewards (plus curation rewards too?) will definitely ruin it by losing many if not most content creators.

  • @sorin.cristescu(74)· 1002d

    Hive has several unique features going for it.

    Perhaps its most powerful feature is that anyone with an internet connection can "earn Hive with their brain", with no need for capital outlay.

    And that is only possible because of blogging rewards.

    Thanks to blogging rewards a poor farmer from Kenia such as @juliasjohn can get a few cents, a sum which is significant for him. Hive is the only platform I know that keeps the original blockchain promise of banking the unbanked and helping them financially.

    Are there risks of abuse? Of course there are, there always were. Is there a risk to crash and die in a horrible car accident when taking your car in the morning ? Of course there is! But the solution is not to ban cars! Nor is it to abolish blogging rewards!

  • @jacobpeacock(74)· 1002d

    Thanks for clarifying your thinking on this topic.

    Gonna mull it all over more before forming any sort of opinion or conclusion.

    For now though, I see your points and still think that dissolving the pool would do more harm than good. Even 'simply' restructuring it to 'Layer 2' would (in my perspective) be harmful given the extra 'trust' (in the tokens and token creators) that it would require.

    It is worth noting that I see the same problem ahead with AI generated content... but I feel confident the tools (and systems) can be built to thwart the bulk of it in its current form.

    In the future it will be even harder to detect and thwart but honestly there will always be bad actors to contend with... and I am unsure that 'burning the house down just to kill the termites' is the solution that is needed.

  • @sorin.cristescu(74)· 1002d

    Sorry for being blunt, but this is muddled thinking. It gets me so upset reading such highfallutin nonsense, I don't even want to start dismissing your skewed reasoning.

  • @niallon11(77)· 1002d

    I'm with you on this. I think that the reward pool should be allocated as staking rewards instead of content rewards. Provide easy to launch communities, apps and tokens with a good secondary market for them and let each community moderate their own token, content and rewards.

    If people want more hive they trade their leo, spt or whatever secondary token they get rewarded in.

    People can support the eco-system by powering up hive and getting rewarded passively without the need for voting trials, downvotes, infighting over quality content.