RE: Hive Rewards Distribution System: Good, Bad & Entitlement
You are viewing a single comment's thread:
Most of the downvotes I get are insignificant and from someone who I helped deal with a couple of years ago. That is just part of the system. There are those who are really nasty with their downvotes and aim to wipe out rewards of people they don't like. That can drive good people away and the community ought to help out there.
I keep saying that this is the wild west and anything goes.
Part of the reason I want to see Hive grow is to decrease the effect any individual can have by spreading the vote more.
0
0
0.000
If/when SMTs happen, we can experiment more with different models. They would give power for sub-communities to decide how rewards are distributed in are more meaningful way.
Core rewards pool still works fine. There is always room for improvement. Requires participation, engagement, and networking to collaborate on improvements. After all most investors/stakeholders would care more about increasing the value of their holdings.
I think the key is the Users. Improve user experience, bring in masses, everybody is happy.
I see people saying they want the rewards system to change because it does not suit their needs, but there has to be some compromise. I don't think it's too bad. We do need big accounts to help in getting rewards where they are deserved and not just to the 'usual suspects'.
Users are definitely key. It is supposed to be a social platform after all.
!ENGAGE 50
The starting point should be that nobody really deserves anything. Whatever people get as rewards is just a nice bonus.
But I do understand where you are coming from. We are building something amazing for people, it requires attention to users and creating a user friendly environment and great user experience. I do believe that is the key for success. If this is solved, stakeholders will be super rich. Win for users, win for stakeholders.
But what you are asking requires objective curation and a lot of work. In a protocol level, anybody can upvote/downvote as they wish. Nothing wrong with that. But we also have a social level that we can network and convince large stakeholders divert their influence certain way. It requires campaigning, networking, and convincing. Usually it is not difficult because end result of successful platform is a net gain for these stakeholders.
Curations projects like Curie, OCD, Curangel, tribes, etc has successfully done these things. But they come with a lot of effort.
I think we are in a good place and heading the right way. We can continue improving together. Great ideas will get support needed. Just need people to do the work.
I 100% agree with you that user focused vision is the right path for Hive.
I do not take my rewards for granted, but I am lucky that people consider me worthy of their votes. If Hive thrives then we all do well, but greed is an issue and we have to be open about that. People will try to game the system and we get to decide if we let them.
I have mixed feelings about some of the curation projects. Powerful accounts have a lot of influence on where rewards go, for good or bad.
It is all a big experiment that I am happy to be part of.
!ENGAGE 20
ENGAGEtokens.ENGAGEtokens.