RE: Over $14,000 USD worth of Hive & HBD burned in February
You are viewing a single comment's thread:
Probably worth mentioning there's no real need for others to create their own HIVE/HBD burn posts, flooding the feeds with burn posts. You're providing that option. No need to "compete" for burn post votes.
Also, there's a far more valuable and productive approach to describing the "stakeholders can only curate" option. Elsewhere on the internet, paying supporters can support their interests. They can do that here as well. Tapping into that market and framing things in a way they understand would be far more productive and valuable to this ecosystem. As an example: People don't purchase Bits on Twitch in order to "curate" content.
Anyway. That's a story for another day...
0
0
0.000
100% agree. I’ve been asked a few times about this. I also only post one a day and 11 comments under it so it doesn’t take up spots on trending.
I have one question. What's more beneficial in the long run? Is it worth including the HBD or would 100% power up posts be the way to go? Or does it amount to an equal benefit?
Who knows. Seeing as HBD is just a debt
vehicle it is roughly the same end result but the alternative would be someone having Hive and HBD and likely selling both short term.
I just wonder for this burning scenario if the HBD is worth printing at all. Does a 100% power up post remove or stop that particular pile of HBD from coming into existence, or do other votes simply place it elsewhere? And I know I could word this better lol...
I think it is just theory as it is immediately removed from circulation the block after it is created. In my opinion, no one cares or even looks at what is burned, the real benefit is the lack of sell pressure caused by someone selling it.
I've said this a ton of times in the past, I could burn my entire stake (2M+ Hive) and the price wouldn't move 1 cent. No one cares. But I sure can affect the price just selling/buying a fraction of my stake.
Right. This is why nearly every time I encounter a situation like this and start thinking about the numbers, my mind always drifts and focuses directly on that one missing element I included in the story for another day.
Tactics removing potential selling pressure combined with actions generating consistent buying pressure yields noticeable results. No one cares... lol
Assuming you are referring to the burn posts, it makes no difference. The HBD is created during the payout process by destroying the HIVE that would otherwise power up, and if it goes to null it still gets destroyed. The outcome is exactly the same.
That answers my question quite smoothly.
Good that he just does it through comments below, in order to not occupy the trending.
I also agree that if these rewards would have been used in incentivizing low paid authors, that also may have mattered.
I agree his approach makes sense and doesn't cause interference in any way.
As for paying people more for simply showing up and creating content. In most cases I tend to disagree with that being beneficial. I'd rather see capable and interesting content creators attracting paying supporters organically, on their own, much like you'd see in the Twitch example I provided. Majority earn very little and often nothing, yet Twitch doesn't fail. Content creators know and accept the fact they won't get paid just for showing up. They work to build an audience consisting of some paying supporters.
To me the thing that matters the most is the amount of traffic. Facebook, Twitter etc may not have a good number of content creators compared to average or low content creators but they still are popular because of the amount of traffic.
Just my thoughts. I might be wrong.
Traffic is important. Typically an audience generates the most traffic. You have one video or one content creator, and that video has 1 million views. A content creator only creates an opportunity to generate traffic. They don't generate traffic by default, just for showing up. More often than not on this platform the content creator wants rewards more than traffic. That's backwards. And without paying supporters (also traffic) entering the ecosystem to support them, their efforts amount to a net loss. Very little traffic and money only exiting.
Look at every other method of supporting a content creator directly then compare it to staking HP and voting.
These days more and more people are supporting content creators with their own money. That market is expected to grow.
Everywhere else it costs money to support a content creator and becomes quite expensive trying to support several. Consumers end up spending less on each individual resulting in creators earning less once the well dries up. Consumer becomes annoyed with being exposed to ads every few minutes while watching video and instead pays the platform rather than the content creator. Live video online can't be interrupted with ads. That only works on networks prepared to take breaks. And not everything can qualify for ad revenue. That model is dying.
Here it's incredibly affordable and the paying supporter is rewarded for being a paying supporter. Their level of support grows over time and they can add to it at any moment without it ever becoming an expense.
This platforms undercuts the competition yet ignores that market, insisting consumers want to become "stakeholders" and "curate."
They can be paying supporters and support. The only change is the wording.
Amazon share value rises because they own something like Twitch and Twitch creates opportunities for consumers to arrive with their money.
See how it all ties together?
We have posts in trending that are making $100+ with 40 views. Where in the world can you do that? 40 views is nothing. That's probably 1-2 people actually reading it.
The posts ain't looking SEO friendly in order to grab some audience through search engines.