Now you can see the numbers.

in #hardfork2 years ago (edited)

Yesterday, I just wrote a post about the upcoming rewards change for Hard Fork 21.

Three comments on the post concerned me. They were essentially saying:

  1. It's too late to voice our opinions (it's never too late)
  2. They didn't know enough about the proposal (that's what were here for! to learn and grow! Go steem!)
  3. It's only going to really affect newbies that were on their way out anyway. (Think so? Well. That's what this post is for)

Here is the problem:

Most people think that this will be a change that will "spread rewards evenly in a new pattern that we will all just eventually adjust to."

@bluefinstudios and I chose cross-section of people for this chart. Minnows, dolphins, orcas, whales.... witnesses, concensus witnesses... you get the picture. And we specifically added some people that were interacting with the last post - so they could SEE with their own eyes.

Perhaps pictures and numbers will speak louder than words.

All this information is publicly available on, YOU TOO can find out this information about yourself - or ANYONE on the blockchain - to see how this proposed change will potentially affect each person. lists the last 30 days of curation rewards and author rewards. As much as people want to say this proposed change will help to increase curation - I'm going to show you why it won't. But I'll save that for the end of the post.

Let's get to numbers.

We can take mine for example. I currently have a project that is supported FAITHFULLY by @fundition, and my author rewards reflect that. I also spend a lot of time curating, manually - and on curation trails. I could increase my curation a bit... but I'm doing a LOT right now, and its unlikely that I'll be curating much more than I am right now. And be honest - CAN YOU?

REMEMBER: we ONLY get ten 100% upvotes a day - to distibute as evenly as we can. I currently go OVER that amount, in order to support as many people on the chain that I can. (I'm currently at 63% voting power - clearly over the suggested limit!) Could I just find the consistently "high paying posts" and just put them on my autovote? Uh. Sure. But isn't that the exact thing that we're supposed to NOT be doing? Aren't we supposed to be pushing more HONEST, manual curation? Intentional interaction? Boosting quality content WHILE supporting our friends?

See that? Everyone in the red... get prepared for that new monthly amount. Everyone in the green - CONGRATULATIONS! This proposed change REALLY boosts your wallets!

So if you're wondering where that extra 25% from your rewards is going... Now you know! The people in the green are not the enemy, mind you. I know some of them, and I think they're awesome and often fight for good change.... BUT I surely hope that the people in the green see that they are disproportionately BENEFITING from something that THEY ARE VOTING ON.

Well, hold on @dreemsteem. If I increase my curation, then won't I earn some of that back!? You sure will!!! Let's see how much you need to earn back to break even.

Well, let's see. Take me as an example if you like - but you can look at the chart for everyone! For me? I'm currently making about 9 SP a month in curation rewards. After the changes - if I do NOTHING ELSE, and just keep doing what I am doing (which is pretty heavy on curation), that will most likely double to about 18 SP. Why? because 25% curation to 50% rewards is doubling. So, my 0.05 SP curation rewards on any particular post will now be 0.10 SP.... Follow?

In order to make up for the deficit in my author rewards (which now gets cut by AT LEAST 33%) I need to WAY MORE THAN DOUBLE my curation rewards to break even....I need to take it from 18 to 121 Mine is specific to me. Go look at yours! Go look to see how much YOU need to increase - JUST to break even with the proposed changes. It's that last column. (and if you want to know how to calculate it, if you're not on this chart... leave a comment for me below and I'll show you)


How many posts are you manually reading and curating each day? And how much time do you have to increase that... SIGNIFICANTLY to make up for the loss in your author rewards?

By the way, those author rewards aren't going into some balanced and distributed pool. It's MOSTLY going directly into the wallets of people who post little, curate a lot - and ALREADY HAVE significant percentages of the curation rewards (because don't forget people... curation is stake-based).

I'm just not sure why we need to motivate the big accounts even more to curate? They are essentially going to be giving out awesome votes, and then getting HUGE amounts returned to them. Why continue to make it harder and harder on the biggest population of Steemians? WHY do we continue to destroy the foundation that we should be building??

So what I'm seeing here is... The proposed changes are showing what kind of behavior they would like to see implemented.

  • Write less.
  • Curate more (on less material, since everyone is writing less)
  • And purchase and powerup 50,000 steem so you can be an orca and get a high percentage of the curation rewards back.


P.S. remember also - that these are not the ONLY changes. Your payout is also going to be decreased for the other proposed changes in HF21. So even though it LOOKS like nothing changes... (your post payouts will still be shiny and high! ) What you KEEP is going to be significantly lower.

So..... as I said in the last post.

Might we REMOVE this portion the HF21 proposal and consider it for another hard fork? If you agree.... go drop your name as a comment on THIS POST Perhaps if we join together and speak as one, we might be heard.

Tagging all the people that were discussing the last post with us!

@fionasfavourites, @nickhavey, @blockurator, @cheese4ead, @bengy, @zekepickleman, @thekittygirl, @bluefinstudios, @shadowspub, @chekohler, @audreybits, @omra-sky, @greencross, @enginewitty, @eveningart, @saffisara, @penderis, @naltedtirt, @hazem91, @darrenfj, @brisby, @josediccus, @thehive - and feel free to share with anyone you know will be impacted (aka. everyone)


I like the data driven analysis that you have done on the hardfork. One area that I will disagree though, is I don't think it is possible to make accurate predictions on the effects of the hardfork. Sure, you can extrapolate data out and show how it is different under the new math, but that does not take into account all of the other factors.

For example, the price of STEEM could drop significantly if we don't move forward with the changes. The price of STEEM could also rise significantly if we implement them. It is not possible to know, but both are very real possibilities.

Another thing that is near impossible to take into account is user behavior. If more large stakeholders spend time curating quality content after the hardfork (because there is now an incentive to do so), then content creators could actually end up earning more in terms of dollar amounts - even though their percentage of the overall inflation pool is technically lower.

There are some real legitimate concerns about how the hardfork could play out, and I'm not going to sit here and try to tell anyone they are wrong. HF21 could end up being really good for content creators, but it could end up being really bad too. The reality is we are not going to know until after the fork.

I assure you the few extra hundred dollars that I stand to gain based on increased author/curation rewards have zero influence on my decision making process. I am a somewhat large stakeholder (close to 78k SP), so I am much more concerned about whether the hardfork causes the price of STEEM to go up or down, as that has a much more significant impact on my "bottom line".

I want the STEEM price to go up, which is the lense I use to evaluate the hardfork. If the STEEM price goes up, and more stakeholders start spending time curating - then it is a win for everyone. I have no idea whether that will be the end result, but it is at least the one I am going for.

I'd love a list of witnesses who would vote against these changes. I'd like to vote for them.

Posted using Partiko Android

I do not know for certain, but something tells me, Pumpkin is against it.
Not from any firsthand knowledge.

I love the way you think LOL!

@enginewitty any idea who is thinking what?

The only top 20 I know that has publicly come out against it is @yabapmatt, who retains the freedom vote and ironically is #1. The other top witness that is against it is @drakos (who is now not in the top 20 - weird how that works). @thecryptodrive is hesitantly on board but wants the SPS to come from witnesses - which I totally agree with. What better way to give back to the community that supports you than by giving a meager 1% of your rewards? I think @themarkymark is also somewhat hesitant based on what I've seen in various comments the past few weeks, but then again, I could be misinterpreting what he is saying.

well ..... ask and you shall receive!

@shadowspub just posted this!

I am anxiously awaiting the answers! :)

The poll is great, but won't reflect truth if all the consensus voters don't show up. That's the trick.

That is EXACTLY the conversation that @bluefinstudios and I had this morning. I'd like to know who can see the harm in this proposd change. Any witnesses that will stand up against it - has my vote!!!!

Me too

will be interested in seeing the answers! I'm sure @shadowspub will keep us informed!

 2 years ago 

I would also like to know who it was that proposed this change in the first place. Any idea on that, @dreemsteem ?

wasnt it blocktrades? i cant remember

I surely don't. but I'm sure we can ask witnesses that we go to shows with and Witness chats with!

any idea @enginewitty? @guiltyparties? @jackmiller? @crimsonclad? let's see if they know - or even if they know who is currently voting against this? I'd love to support those who are supporting us!

If i don't have open votes for them - i'll make room.

 2 years ago (edited)

I'm going to start this statement with a universal Steem truth that we've all been very poor at remembering: There is no one size fits all set of numbers. We all have begun painting with the same brush we rail against being painted with.

This is an opportunity to write some stuff, so I thank you for asking my opinion. You've pinged me and I think I'm feeling really kicked today, as a human and as a steemian. It's my job to respond. Don't take it as a direct response or accusations leveled at you, but rather the best explanation of the situation we're in that I can currently muster as an individual. There are some responses in this thread bordering on vitriolic, and though my knee jerk reaction is to yell "NO, not everyone is that way, witness or user" and I find a lot of the responses in both directions egregious, I'm coming to at least answer you in a timely fashion because that's the respectful thing do to. I fully understand why people feel all of the range of emotions that they do. I understand that as someone who started as a minnow and earned and bought all her steem, who's never powered down, who's never sold steem, who delegates to non-returning things even though growing myself might give me a chance to do more down the road. I learned how to build steemd and run a server and build scripts and tools and how to explain those things to others so they don't have to because they're not interested in the same things as me.

I am caught quite directly in the middle of the two "sides" that a lot of communication, top down and bottom up, is stratifying into a class war. I am the steem everyman, fighting to find time to post and pouring my best work and soul onto the chain and hoping to grow organically, and a special circle-jerk snowflake evil cabal secret society greedy centralized shill. So let's put down the classes we're bludgeoning each other with here and have a real discussion.

I will candidly say that witnessing here has gone from a fun and exciting learning opportunity to a job I take seriously with all my heart that has opened me up, voluntarily, to things approaching outright hatred from people who don't give me the same chance they demand. I see behaviour that as a small account makes me angry and has me feeling unheard, because honestly, a lot of our whales totally suck. I'm not virtue signalling with my experience above, but it is a truth and a lovely testament that a transparent chain bears. I hear where people are coming from.

I have spent actual hours probably now bordering on real days worth of time looking at this, talking to people directly, discussing it in communities, making my personal wants and needs known and navigating a populace that is hell bent on creating a bi-partisan us/them conflict over something that is contentious. My comments are on chain. They're been in the ramble, on shows, broadcast out to anyone who will listen. So a part of me bristles when I get painted with that brush again... not listening, not talking, not caring, not available... just like everyone in this thread bristles at getting painted with one by people who don't listen to them or care to consider them and their feelings of earnings. I understand you.

Here is the best summary I can give you of why this is a thing that has come up, how I currently feel, what I need to do. I imagine NEITHER side will be happy with it, but it won't change until I find more compelling reason to, and part of that is testing and part of that is hearing other people's plans on how they're going to pitch in because this is going to take A L L of us. I message people when they unvote us with much the same caveat: I can't promise to change what we're doing, but I can try to explain it on your way out the door. But right now, right here, I personally am putting my foot down on one thing; we live and die by the sword. Pumpkin doesn't whisper in our ear. We don't have magical bags of money being dropped on us by anyone. Steem pays our witness server costs, our tool costs, and our script costs. Other than that, this month is the first time in a while that I earned my own cut. 2k steem! I'm stoked. That's so much compared to almost every other user on the platform! That's $800. Holy shit. And yet.... none of it has left the platform, ever. And when I look at the hours of time I put in every day, even being generous and trimming out a ton of stuff as "normal user activity"....I'm not even making minimum wage. If you average that out over the months where there wasn't enough left over to split between the two of us, it's a dollar or less... and that's still more than some users! And yet- this is not rich. This is not a consolidation of power. I want to be very clear that the one brush I refuse to be painted with is the hateful "gilded handshake" that I see brandished in other comments here and all over the platform. I have no doubt there are activities where it happens. But, no one size fits all.

With all of that out of the way, here's the closest I can be to concise and it differs not at all from any of the other places I've said it. I'm not anti EIP; I'm Anti-EIP right now. I want a funded SPS and a downvote pool, and I'm not happy that a HF that I fully supported got a tacked on addition that doesn't allow us to properly separate implementation of these things. Jeff and I don't have a perfect consensus between us, and that is tough, because Jeff is crushed that people who should be getting paid aren't and that there should be a reason to get voting again because that's the ONLY thing that fixes distribution, and when looking at those inequities is tentatively pro-EIP. He's not wrong. It's going to be difficult for us to formulate a fair stance on the HF even between us. No matter what we do, we have supporters in both camps. People on both sides will accuse us of "caving" to the other. And no matter which way we choose, we likely will lose a voter big enough to drop us out of consensus. That's DPoS, baby. In some ways, it's the most fair thing in the world. I can't sit here crying because people are mean to me and also because we could basically lose one vote from any number of people who aren't pumpkin and drop out of consensus. If that happens, we reduce what we offer until we aren't $500+ each out pocket each month and keep on keeping on. I don't have a "salary" to lose.

The more people I talk to, big and small, the more I realize that the EIP change is likely needed in some form, but also that it's the last thing we need right now. Retention, onboarding, engagement- we try to blame the rewards for these things, but there is nothing we're doing currently that is improving these things. The EIP will do nothing about them, either way. And even if it did do anything, good or bad, price action of Steem basically nullifies that; here we are, looking at the pointing fingers, pointing more and more, and missing out on that heavenly (enlightening) glow of the moon in the sky. The problems that we have that we are solely ascribing to "FUCK YOU GOT MINE (author/witness) REWARDS" are partially caused by the fact that we think the rewards are what is causing them. The lack of self awareness for what makes for a strong blockchain and a strong coin is insane. These debates are literally the WORLD within Steem, and yet, the world is literally forgetting Steem exists. Feeling that the EIP is a fuck you to little guys misses out on some of behaviors the EIP could potentially encourage that we simply cannot achieve any other way, and pretending like the EIP can magically account for human behavior in every way perfectly is completely fucking naive. The math in this post is too simple: one size fits all. Imagining the EIP as a magic bullet is too simple: one size fits all. Imagining the EIP will destroy the platform is too simple: one size fits all. Either stance places every emphasis on the money, and if we can't fix that part, then Steem will never rise. Some people would change with the EIP, and find different routes to success, even small. Some people would change with the EIP and get crushed and give up. BOTH OF THESE THINGS ARE HAPPENING RIGHT NOW ALREADY, WITHOUT THE EIP. IT'S GOING TO HAPPEN EITHER WAY UNTIL WE ALL WORK TOGETHER.

I can't tell you what you want to hear to try to play all sides and sway the voice of the people as a Robin Hood figure- which is that without a doubt I will vote no. I can't tell you that I will without a doubt vote yes, even to try to "keep some big votes"... because the entity that many believe is slipping dollar bills in my pocket quite frankly knows nothing about my existence other than that I and my partner are great witnesses and heavily contribute to the security of the Steem blockchain (and maybe not even that ¯(ツ)/¯ )

This is a monumental wall of text that may not be called for. I can tell you that right now, it's all moot until my testnet node syncs up and I start playing with testnet condenser and we get a chance to have the testnet HF a few times. I can tell you thank you for allowing me to have a moment here to have a rant, at small accounts, at big whales, at witnesses of all sizes, and at myself, because some days I just want to sing or paint or take pictures and share them with the world and I traded that for this whole witness thing. And thank you for caring what I think (or maybe forcing me to answer you and grill me, I don't know the intent but both are fine- that's the job). I am hoping that I can keep thanking you for trying to bring people together in debate and discussion and disagreement while recognizing them as individuals who need much much more than one size, regardless of the size they might be.


Did I just read something that caught my attention in this very emotional comment:


"The lack of self awareness for what makes for a strong blockchain and a strong coin is insane. "

So glad you said it and not me, for when I say it so bluntly I get a guaranteed chewing for it.

As with any business venture, the people running the show are the ones who call the shots.

Here those people are chosen by "the people" and hence no matter what anyone wants to yell about, the person responsible for ones actions is the person one sees in the mirror every morning!

Voted in "Governance" is the responsibility of ALL voters when it comes to a business venture, let alone an entire economy such as Steem.

With all the talk about "anti establishment" one would have hoped to see a difference between human behaviour in "real life" i.e. voting in national elections, for those who shall govern and manage the economy etc etc etc. and that of what we can see in our governance and management of our economy etc etc etc.

Won't go into a ramble, just had to react to this as it literally caught my eye and all I can say, no matter what you may have been thinking when you wrote it is:


"The lack of self awareness for what makes for a strong blockchain and a strong coin is insane. "


no wait, i think it was an acc by name trac? gees am forgetful

it was mentioned on steemit blog, i believe, like who came up with the idea as to try to curb the self voting etc.


I can't curate any more than I am right now. I'm doing almost double the curation that I'm supposed to be allowed daily.

i do that to SUPPORT people on the chain and it drains my voting power. I dont do it for curation rewards.

but now? I'm losing 33% of my author rewards and there is mathematically NO WAY for me to make that up in curation rewards (aside from my purchasing a LARGE amount of steem, and powering up, increasing my stake)

but you know what I know? Every time I work hard on my Fundition project posts - they come support me!

You think I won't self-vote those posts to try to gain back even a LITTLE bit more of curation rewards???

self-voting curbed??? LOL um. try not at all.

someone made the point in a DM that if we want to increase our curation rewards - we need to go to the posts that consistently make a lot of money.

so are we all gonna go put haejin on our autovotes now? this makes no sense at all.

It takes me 4 hours to write a good post. Longer if I have to create and edit video - find suitable pictures - make QUALITY CONTENT that they keep pushing for.

Now.... we are making LESS for working harder. but the large accounts are making more for doing NOTHING more.


I am failing to see how this is seen as a good thing.

you should check steemitblog account and state your concern there as the dev and steemit inc do read those comments and occasionally reply :P

btw!!! i will be in LA and SD next week!! will be meeting up with @mariannewest and @derekrichardson . would love to see you as well, let me know! i dont bite, seriously, ask @enginewitty lol

I will be there July 8!!!! will you still be there then? I am too far to drive down twice hahaha

Yes I will be there July 8.

Marianne invited my family and I for dinner at her place. I think thats when Derek can come as well. But most likely not July 8 tho as Derek works that date.

Let me know where you will be on July 8 and we can figure things out 😊

Will message on discord!

Sounds good!!!!!

Posted using Partiko Android

She doesn't, TK is one of the sweetest lil cupcakes on the chain so if time permits, do have a bite with her!

Posted using Partiko Android

Well.SD is 8 hours from So if she is there for July 8... I am all in!!!

Posted using Partiko Android

Wow that far hey.

I'm in la, too!

Posted using Partiko Android

Well get down to San Diego!!! Lol cuz I guess thats where they will be!!!

Posted using Partiko Android

I will be in LA as well.

Will land in SD, drive to LA for sight seeing, stay for 2 nights at least, then drive back to SD

Like @dreemsteem said 😁 the more the merrier altho am a shy person! Have our paths crossed before???? I am meeting my #thealliance and #powerhousecreatives family, so am less shy 😁

And also, hahahah where should we all meet tho???? Marianne invited my family and for dinner, but I actually dunno where exactly Marianne lives 🤣

She's in San Diego. When are you in Los Angeles?

Posted using Partiko Android

Honestly I see nothing wrong with self voting. If you are writing something you of all people should like it....


Every smart person pays themselves first. Like with any paycheck you should be “paying” your savings or retirement plan or whatever first. No one came to Steemit to make money for other people. If your self vote is worth $0.01 or $5.00 of course self vote.


aah true hahaha

thanks boss

 2 years ago (edited)

Thanks! Looks like he isn't a witness, so we can't un-vote him. And with the large earnings on his posts because of the big-name upvoters that support him, no wonder he isn't worried about slashing author rewards. Heck, he earns more off one of his posts that I would earn in 4-months-to-a-year of researching and writing. 😕

but Shadows just posted a poll - we can see who is voting which way!

will be interested in seeing the answers! I'm sure @shadowspub will keep us informed!

@kevinwong has been advocating the 50/50 split for a while.

Posted using Partiko Android

I think it was theycallmedan , there were couple of articles from him asking people thought because they are going to implement it. Blocktrades was in huge support too.


I would suggest every Steemian DM their individual witnesses and just ask their position on this portion of the proposed HF21 and concerns we may have.

Very few witnesses have made their position publicly known through their blogs. I realize they are very busy ensuring the blockchain remains functional and stable.

Rich getting richer. That's decentralized, right? That's helping people progress, right? That's the giving spirit! I am so in love with this! Why didn't I think of it before? I would totally be voting for this if I was top 20 and it fattened my wallet and it's what I was told to do so I could stay in the top 20. I totally get it now.

I certainly hope that the top 20 witnesses will take a look at how blatant this is - and pull this off the HF21 proposal. Isn't @shadowspub having a witness forum on Sunday? Would be interested to see who is still voting for this after seeing the blatant disparity on that chart

Definitely going to show who cares about what.😏

Posted using Partiko Android

 2 years ago 

The witness forum on Sun-30-Jun is hosted by Aggroed in PALnet discord.
The witness chat hosted by ShadowsPub in TheRamble is on Wed-17-Jul.

ahhhh thank you! Shadows told me about it today and I assumed she was doing it on a different day! hahaha thanks @thekittygirl


If everybody writes less and curates more, wouldn't that mean that the people still writing earn a lot more than before? Slicing the same pie fewer ways, as it were...

Kind of sounds like it might result in low-quality poor-performance posts being reduced and higher quality high-performance posts continuing. Tell me again how quality improvements are a bad result?

I'm against the overall package of changes, but 50/50 is the best piece of the package, and the one getting all the negative attention.



Take a look at Haejin's Posts.
Literally 3 words at best, why would I not simply CURATE his posts from here on out, instead of real content creation? this teaches me it's worth more to simply CURATE large reward low value posts

why would I not simply CURATE his posts from here on out, instead of real content creation?

and why shouldn't you? If you curate, it's with your stake to do with as you please.

The ratio of curators (content consumers) to content creators on Steem is very abnormal because content creators are disproportionately rewarded. But that results in a low-price equilibrium where nobody earns as much as they should. Giving curators back more of their own stake ('Come earn money curating quality content') for being effective curators will improve the amount of organic curation taking place.

I oppose the EIP because there are serious issues with downvote pools and the new rewards curve, but 50/50 is the best part of the proposal. If we could have just 50/50 and SPS I would be a strong advocate for the HF21.... because it would almost certainly result in a rising STEEM price (even relative to bitcoin).

So, rather than make posts, I stop being a content creator and only curate?
What happens if we multiply that by thousands of creators and authors?

what's left to curate?

Each user will make their own judgment call about whether to continue as a content creator. It won't be everyone, and if enough organic curation remains then the remaining content creators may do better than they were before.

My concerns are more about the impact of CLRC (convergent linear rewards curve) and downvote pools. Those I think will be devastating impact and make change to 50/50 totally irrelevant in the broad scheme of things.

the 2 or so free downvotes will have ZERO effect.
What user with a rep of 45 or 50 is going to downvote a user with 100,000 SP and a rep of 70?

Exactly right. Economic costs are gone, social costs remain... But social costs are zero for accounts with no social standing to lose.

The upcoming downvote was will likely be devastating and their impact will have a massive impact.

I'm told by dependable sources that at least 10 million SP will be brought into downvote action. It's not about the tiny accounts, but the mighty and rich.

Although I don't say that this won't happen... I think the analysis is a little bit too simple. From what I see, you have just doubled the curation rewards and taken a third from the author rewards. Yes, definitely in the short term this is what will happen... but there will be a new equilibrium point for the system to settle into. I'm not saying that end point will be like this or not, but I don't think it is quite correct to assume the start and end conditions and assumptions to be exactly the same... I think two states will be different. ...

... but that isn't to say that it will be better... just different!


I have a question. Curating means Resteeming? Sorry for the stupid question. I am still lost.

Posted using Partiko iOS

It's ok - its not a stupid question. You were gone for a long time and now you're back ! (welcome back heheeh)

Curating is when you upvote someone's post or comment. When someone creates a post, let's say they have a $20 post! (maybe they earned a Curie for an awesome post!)

Right now - you only get to keep 75% of those rewards. 75% goes to the author (which is $15) and 25% gets split amongst all the people who upvoted your post (the curators)

but see.... it gets SPLIT amongst them.

so $5 is being divided. If 400 people upvote. then - that $5 is being divided among the 400 voters.

is it being divided equally??? NO.

If you have a 100% upvote with only a little SP in your account - maybe you will only receive 0.005 SP for that curation.

But if you give a 10% upvotes with 1,000,000 SP in your account - maybe you will receive $3 of the curation rewards!

See? it is based on your stake.

So - if they are dropping your author rewards to 50% now (instead of 75%) then you lose money there... that you can NEVER regain in your curation rewards.

Even though they are increasing the curation rewards from 25% to 50%..... the small accounts make SO LITTLE in curation - that doubling 0.005 to 0.01 - means almost nothing!

but - for the large accounts??? doubling $4 to $8 - means A LOT. (or doubling $3000 to $6000 in one month.... that is ALL being taken FROM author rewards - and going TO curation rewards - and they are doing NOTHING more to earn that.)

do you understand now? if not - ask questions :)

This means upvoting also is curating.

Posted using Partiko iOS

yes - that was my third sentence hehehe

Curating is when you upvote someone's post or comment.

I read it for the second time and finally understand what is going on. Reading this and seeing red and green got me really confused. I see a lot of red in the chart.

There will always be more people reading than creating.

More readers will be good for us creators.

So if they take away how much we creators I making, I guess we will have to churn out more.

Like the music industry with Apple Music and all.

Maybe it is a good thing.

Or we can curate more than we create.

We only have so much time in a day.

I now have 5 businesses to run. Time isn’t getting any more.

If I can just do one thing in the world, it would be writing.

But life sucks.

And we do other things.

Posted using Partiko iOS


This is exactly the problem it creates.

Work harder for less. You are proving the point beautifully!!!!

Time isn't getting any more... So if they are trying to make it harder for authors to survive here... They should just come right out and say it.

Hey. If we can’t beat the system. Join it.

If evil ever takes over. I ain’t going to join it. I hope I will never live to see that day.

Posted using Partiko iOS

Perfect explanation, @dreemsteem. Excellent on all counts.

Posted using Partiko Android

Thanks for visiting my friend!! I would so be wrong on this..but I don't think I am.. ☹️

Nope, I don't think you are either. Drat. ;-)

Posted using Partiko Android

reading, voting, commenting, resteeming

no qs is stupid ;-)

resteeming is NOT curating


This post has received a 20.00% complementary upvote from @swiftcash 🤑

This post is supported by $2.77 @tipU upvote funded by @penderis :)
@tipU voting service: instant, profitable upvotes + profit sharing tokens | For investors.

How much of those author rewards are from voting bots. If they are bought votes as a means to grow SP over time vs just a straight power up, won't the impact be less as the ROI calculations will adjust to the new curations %?

Side note, I wonder if we will see a shortage of vote availble on vote buying markets after the HF...

Posted using Partiko Android

I can speak for mine. (cuz i'm not tracking bid bot use across the platform LOL)

I have @fundition votes for my project that come in maybe 8-10 times a month? Every time I do an update (that takes me hours to write....) they faithfully support my project!! and I'm GRATEFUL! LOL There are also projects like @helpiecake @helpie @curie @c-squared @c-cubed and COUNTLESS other curation projects that help the little guy!

All those votes that help the newbies to grow will be CUT IN HALF. PERIOD. and the overwhelming majority of the money is going BACK to large accounts.

yes - there are bid bots across the platform, but bid bots are used for SO MANY things. I often will buy a bid bot purchase for people who win a contest of mine! And if this proposal is meant to cut out bid-bods.... it is so RIDICULOUSLY skewed in favor of large accounts - HOW is this actually seen as a correction?

If they want to outlaw vote buying... its very simple. eliminate them.

Don't try to make it "more difficult" to make money on them, while allowing other people to benefit GREATLY off the solution.

it's smoke and mirrors. if there is a problem - go after the problem. Don't "sneak the potential solution" into a win/win situation for whales that JUST HAPPENS to double their wallets too.

honestly - this is so bad - that i can't believe that the people in GREEN aren't speaking out about how shameful this proposal is!!!! It's kind of embarrassing. A case could potentially be made if they were working twice as hard for making double the money.

but they're not. its literally just a windfall for doing not one thing more. (and worse - its taking the money from authors - most of whom are LITTLE accounts!)

I think it may actually create a higher demand for bot votes as people will be accustomed to higher payouts and as such, seek what they are about to be missing.

Posted using Partiko Android

Not sure if you are playing next colony.. but there is possibility if you are lucky. Some are selling Explorers for 10 STEEM, and transporters for like 5. I think those are crazy prices but its happening. Others are selling planets for 25-150 I think.. but its all about the type and the location. I have not made anything and only spent 10 STEEM so far.

I've got it bookmarked, have yet to dig in but if things are that low atm...

Posted using Partiko Android

I was thinking of SmartSteem. They give you a guaranteed 5% return on your bid. But after the HF if you spend $10 STEEM bid, they need to give you a $21 STEEM bid. It will require a lot more SP to give a profitable upvote. The reduced rewards may really drop the number of content producers and create more people who just sell their votes for growth.

I think you're right that people will be looking for any way to make more money again...

The premise behind the 50/50 rewards is that with the 100% increase in rewards curators will now look for the best articles to curate. This has always struck me as basically dumb, just think, why would a big old whale whose vote is worth $20.00 right now and is giving out 10 100% votes a day (it doesn't matter if he curates manually but randomly, actually reads posts or has a voting bot or delegates to bid bots) and is earning $50.00 in curation rewards , change his voting habits because now he is going to make $100.00 a day?



not only that - how can WE (the little guys - are already going BEYOND our 10 100% upvotes) how can WE curate more? we can't. the system isn't set up to give more. we only get 10.

if we go beyond that - we can - but our curation rewards decrease.

Curators curate what they want. and always will (that goes for all of us) Taking money from the little guy and putting more into the whale's pockets will change one thing

further division of classes.

Thanks for the tag! I appreciate you putting your argument in numbers and I can understand your point on why you are worried but we also cannot account for all the widespread behavioural changes that will go along with it it won't be a simple case of A and now its B.

  • Yes people will get less for posting
  • Yes people won't earn that much from curation

But STEEM is starting to outgrow the one use case, which is blogging, there are plenty of ways to earn steem now as well as tokens that can now supplement your efforts.

  • What if your rewards go down but the value of steem goes up? Does that offset the change?
  • What if those who aren't bloggers and want to be passive consumers of content can now have more of a place and say in the system? Is that such a bad thing?

We all know the system isn't perfect and no matter how you slice it the haves will always benefit over the have nots. I just see it as the harder it is to earn the more you value it the less likely to sell, the more pressure to HODL and the better the scarcity which is good for the community.

As a tech entrepreneur myself, I side on to take a chance, fail fast and learn from it, making a decision has never been a bad move, not making one has always been a bad move. Take a step back, take step to the side or take a step forward all creates momentum, but taking no steps will see you quickly see you fade into obscurity.

As someone who makes their living on the internet, I know exactly how hard it is to generate an income and I've diversified into various streams both in business and personal income streams to mitigate any risk. Which is why I strongly feel people shouldn't make this one platform there be an end-all for rewards.

If this HF is truly the end of steem, I will have lost some money but have fond memories of my time here. I know hardly anyone feels this way but yeah I still believe we're in a position to become something better. Call me an eternal optimist


But STEEM is starting to outgrow the one use case, which is blogging, there are plenty of ways to earn steem now as well as tokens that can now supplement your efforts.

So what ways of making Steem other than creating content is there? Note, I said creating a content... not all content on the platform is blogging.

When I can get this for two months and less time creating posts because the UI is significantly better, and don't have to push my content out to several Discord channels every time I post in order for people to see it, why should I stick around?

NRVE earnings as of June 26 2019.JPG

Seriously, two months. And my Steem account right now, after a year-and-a-half, is worth less than $500. I spend more time on Narrative now. Several other Steemians have jumped ship for Narrative, as well.

I am on Narrative but not doing anything on it. People complain about Steem being involved to learn, Narrative sucks big time on that point.

Yeah, it's not like any other website. That's for sure. My problem with Steemit is the primitive UI and lack of development. Plus, I have to go off-site to promote posts to get anyone to read them. It's very time-intensive. I picked up on Narrative pretty quickly.

I don't really have an issue with the UI and there is development starting to take place. It's not all that much different than the UI used on other sites including where btw, promotion is done more off the site than on even with them having curators (real curators not just upvoters) on staff to find content.

There are several FB groups where content is shared from Medium and of course on Twitter. Having to share on other sites to get notice on one is not that big of a deal.

I'm not talking about promoting on other websites. I've been doing online marketing since the 1990s. I'm talking about having to use Discord to promote to other Steemians because the trending pages are eaten up by low-quality posts propped up by bidbots and there is no simple way to promote to an audience without tagging individuals, which is tedious. Curation trails are only a small help, and it's all for a pittance.

So, apparently you didn't get the clear message of what I told you. On Medium one needs to go to groups on Facebook that have been setup to promote their posts... just like Steemians go to discord.

Even though Medium has tried to put a system into place for content discovery.. it is not enough so people have to go off site to promote their to other Medium users.

I understand what you're saying. I don't think you're understanding me. Sharing Medium posts on Facebook is just like sharing any other post on Facebook. With Medium, if you're a member of their get-paid-to-publish club, they may or may not put you on the front page. But they have other avenues baked into the system. I submitted a story to Hacker Noon and it was widely read. Got a few claps. Okay, yippee yi yay.

On Steemit, today, I can make $2.00 for a post. It's almost guaranteed--if I am willing to spend an hour promoting that post on a dozen different Discord channels. If I don't do that, I'll likely only make $1.00. On Narrative, I'll make a dollar if I fart.

So as I understand it at a glance, as the SF niche owner you should be looking to recruit people with expertise and subject-based writing skill to participate in that niche, right? So tell me why I ought to come and start generating content for you.

(Also, is that posted fiction or articles about SF or some of each?)

So as I understand it at a glance, as the SF niche owner you should be looking to recruit people with expertise and subject-based writing skill to participate in that niche, right?

Yes, that is correct. I prefer to cast a wider net and just invite people to Narrative because it's a platform with a ton of potential for many niches.

So tell me why I ought to come and start generating content for you.

That's a great question, but you wouldn't be generating content for me. You'd be generating it for your audience. But there are a ton of reasons why you might be interested.

  • For starters, 85% of the generated rewards go to content creators, niche owners, moderators, and other community members. 60% go to content creators.
  • Beyond that, there is a growing community of great spec-fic writers forming there. Just take a look and see if you might fit in.
  • Not long ago, the Spec-Fic niche hit the top 10 in terms of number of posts. That's fairly significant considering the specialized nature of the niche. Among the fiction writing niches, we've got some of the best engagement.
  • I'm considered by a good number of content creators to be one of the best and most active niche owners (just ask around). I am not a passive niche owner. I am involved in the niche and take my responsibility to support the authors who pour blood, sweat, and tears into their craft as much as I can.
  • I am about to launch routine contests, writing prompts, and other exercises, with rewards.
  • Read my post on brand-building. It applies to fiction writers.

(Also, is that posted fiction or articles about SF or some of each?)

Yes. We have fiction writers, reviewers, other types of non-fiction writing about spec-fic, a podcaster, and poets publishing within our niche. If it's about speculative fiction, it's welcome.

I'd love to see you aboard. I go by @gardengnomepubs on Narrative.

Great points! When you show how the people who are mainly posting and getting small amounts of curation, it's easy to see who will benefit the most. Sadly, it won't be most of the content creators. I believe JustineH did a post where she calculated that with all the changes, authors will see a 42% drop in rewards. That's a big decrease!

Yes, by all means, go see all the extra curation that @steembasicincome will be passing through to its member base in the form of substantially larger upvotes.

It's substantial, and enough to almost entirely offset the decrease in author rewards that members will get from our votes, in spite of the decreased author rewards that will be earned. It won't be able to offset the convergent linear curve, unfortunately.

I am opposed to the EIP, but in my opinion, 50/50 is the best part of it.

I think SBI is in a good position to adjust and be just fine even with 50/50 rewards. One option would be to reduce the cost to sign up for each share. Another is to decrease the amount of leases that need to be bought, thereby increasing the value long-term by powering up more Steem.

You should go see how much steembasicincome is about to make.

With ALL their different accounts

By the way... When you check steemworld, you'll have to refresh their page because their curation rewards are disabled at first.

Geeeeee. I wonder whyyyyyyy.

Posted using Partiko Android

I'm actually not too worried about the affect that 50/50 would (or will) have on SBI. They've been really good about returning value to members, so I imagine they'll just give bigger votes or lower the signup cost. That's one silver lining in the gray cloud of all these changes.

Bigger votes and less dependence on leased delegations...

yep! thats' what @josephsavage said! so I'm glad that will benefit everyone!

i need to find out how to transfer all my SBI to some lucky person LOL

I wont be posting anymore - so I need to know where to go to transfer those SBI shares.

If you have at least 25 units, you can request transfer by 0.001 transaction. (Transfers are done manually, thus the minimum)


yep - I have 785... well actually no, I think I have more since we got some airdropped to us at the Alliance meetup.

I will most likely transfer them all to one special newbie.

!sbi status

Hi @dreemsteem!

  • you have 803 units and 8 bonus units
  • your rshares balance is 2476678967057 or 1.455 $
  • your next SBI upvote is predicted to be 0.291 $

Structure of your total SBI vote value:

  • 85.05 % has come from your subscription level
  • 0.11 % has come from your bonus units
  • 8.63 % has come from upvoting rewards
  • 6.21 % has come from new account bonus or extra value from pre-automation rewards

    To reduce blockchain clutter, you can also check your status in our Discord server!

The airdrop units will show in your bonus units.

But again I'd like to apologize for being rude before. Steem is losing a valuable asset if you really do go silent as a content creator.


I appreciate that. Apology accepted - thank you for turning your curation rewards back to the community.

and thank you for saying that the steem is losing a valuable asset. I honestly don't think they feel that way - but that's just opinion.

Ill have more time to focus on Spunkee Monkee now.

I will transfer all my units to @dutybound. He's an amazing artist and a generous friend. I hope that the SBI will help him to grow here. Is there a post that tells me how to transfer? Or I can literally just write a simple memo with 0.001 steem transfer saying how I'd like all my shares to be donated to him?

Sorry you won't be posting anymore. It's too bad to see so many people leaving. I don't know if SBI is transferable because I don't help run it, but if you can, you could always transfer them to ssg-community. I'm sure the shares would be appreciated and would help a community. ;)

yes - but i think one newbie will benefit from this. I love my SSG community - but i think they're doing ok.

This newbie is going to feel the hurt from HF21 a lot. and my 785+ shares will help him a lot!!! ( well. i hope they do)

No worries. I'm just messing around. I'm glad that someone is going to get to benefit. It's hard enough to make a progress here without having rewards cut by 42%.
Best of luck to you!

Hehhehee. Believe me.. i thought about it. But I think the newbie deserves it.

And it makes me so happy to give it to someone who ... As you said... 42% cut! Lol

It's another silver lining

Posted using Partiko Android

Yet another example of scraping cream off the top for themselves and the whales.

So the content providers, with whom the platform would have died at the outset, have to give up even more of our rewards, again, because those at the top have zero imagination regarding how to actually craft a realistic win/win/win scenario.

Decentralized my ass. Pathetic. Still.

I'm still committed here long term, but it's in spite of the udiocy and greed at the top, not because if it. I have faith in the people who use the platform. I have zero faith in those who control and abuse it.

And we've yet to see whether they break the flipping platform, like they did last time. Bunch of useless dweebs.

Posted using Partiko Android

well - discord still allows me to interact with all my steemit family - for free!! hehehe and i will STILL be going to the meetup! ohhhhh yes i will. I won't be able to upvote - but I'll be able to comment !

just to be clear @crescendoofpeace this HF is not being driven by ... or steemit inc.. it is the witnesses who vote on it and steemit inc who codes it when they decide.

Thanks for the clarification.

It still takes away rewards from creators, giving them to those who have not created, so I'mstill not in favor of that change.

If they rely want to help creators and the platform, they should go back to 30-day payouts, as it was in the beginning.

That would help creators and curators, without taking rewards from anyone, and would help the whole platform.

If they rely want to help creators and the platform, they should go back to 30-day payouts, as it was in the beginning.

that 30 day payout was not all that it was cracked up to be. The reality was if you didn't get upvoted well in the first 24 hour window, you would be lucky to see even a few cents in the next 29 days. Then, like now, content was buried pretty quickly.

No doubt.

But by taking rewards from content creators, and awarding them to curators, they are in effect directly awarding them to abusive whales, since we already know they will be the first to game the system.

Not exactly upholding the promise of holding abusive whales in check, is it?