RE: The Stupidity of Hivewatchers
You are viewing a single comment's thread:
but still concentrated rewards, and accomplishing almost nothing.
Are you saying that bootstrapping the currency by distributing it widely to achieve the network effect is not what we are doing here?
Because I thought mass adoption lies through enticing participation broadly, and not just a few bag holders divvying up the spoils.
As to the concentration of the rewards, doesn't that lay at specific accounts' doorstep?
These accounts have names and real people controlling them.
Whoever is providing the gold makes the rules. There is no way out of that.
There is one way, but nobody likes to choose it, because it comes at a loss of comfort.
Comfortable slaves never rebel.
@enforcer48 may prove to be right, until the price drops below a dime there will be no changes.
Buying in doesn't make sense at a higher price.
The return in power is too low.
Time will tell.
Not very well, no. The actual, active human, non-bot, non-spammer user base is very small, and even in that small group the rewards are relatively concentrated (but still not enough to attract real influencers who might in turn grow the user base), and even more importantly the user base is not growing.
Lol, and no wonder, make a sock puppet, put some 'good' content in it, and see how the sycophants treat you.
How many 'you are not good enoughs' would you put up with for a few pennies of effectively worth less than the time magic interwebz munies?
Most people coming here do not get a real greeting, they get met at the door by people with agendas.
Bump every account's roi by 50% and see if things don't work very differently over time.
If nothing else the coin will distribute.
We bumped small/new accounts by FAR more than 50% when we got rid of n^2 and then again when we got rid of convergent linear that "penalized" small payouts. It didn't make a lot of difference. You would have me believe that the next 50%, yeah that's the magic bump that is going to be a game changer. I call bullshit.
Hmm, that is pretty convincing evidence.
You could be right.
Maybe people won't come back once they find out that a new management system has taken root.
One that doesn't endlessly pump inflation to the largest accounts on the platform, but actually lets the coin distribute to those that want to grow their stake.
I firmly support not voting rewards to any authors not on track to make it to 1mv before selling any, or that fall below some minimum expected of high rep accounts.
It is unrealistic to expect you guys to support the price forever while folks are dumping everything they are given.
But, this is on the curators.
Bad curation is hurting the hive.
That's you guys at the top, again.
Why would you suggest that doling out rewards to compliant communities could be a viable alternative?
That doesn't sound very decentralized to me.
It sounds like setting up a random number of new bosses under the even smaller number of old bosses.
It does sound like it pumps the bags of hierarchies and increases sycophancy.
It doesn't sound like user centered management of distributing the governance token of the hive.
But, that may just be me.