Hive | How To Fix The Tokenomics !
Unpopular Opinion: Content on Hive is Worthless!
I know that many don't see it this way or like to hear it, but essentially nearly all content here on Hive is totally worthless from an absolute monetary point of view. If Tomorrow, somehow advertisements on blogposts were introduced with real earnings that are distributed, everything pretty much would fall to near zero.
So where does all the value come from ?
Basically people who are willing to buy Hive either a little bit to have the needed resource credits to do all the transactions they need here or bigger buys to have more influence on the network (increase their upvote value) or are building something that needs Hive and the resource credits to run their application on the blockchain.
In the past, I would argue that there were people willing to buy Hive as a speculative investment. However, years of systematic inflation and selling pressure has pretty much all of those people out. Also the crypto narrative now is "Buyback & Burn" so infinite inflation and selling pressure is simply not attractive. It feels like only those who have been here for many years (like myself) have recently used the opportunity to increase the stake they built over the last decade at a really low cost relative to the effort put in.
Too Much Free Lunch on Hive!
I would say that one of the problems here on Hive is that it's way too easy to bring somewhat decent content here on Hive without any kind of investment while acting as a value extractor seeing the content creation as work that brings in a paycheck to systematically cash out that out fully.
^^^This I would say is one of the accounts as an example of content where there is nothing wrong with but overall a big net negative on the Hive Ecosystem just cashing everything out while curation groups continue to give big daily upvotes purely on the 'good content'.
I could make a list of probably hundreds of accounts that in a similar way systematically drain value out of Hive and are able to keep doing it as curation groups continue to provide the big upvotes completely neglecting the overall behavior of these accounts. To check for yourself, just go to the @curangel account, click one of the daily posts and one of the articles that got curated also checking the KE Ratio. It's insane how often you stumble on people who should have their earning potential here cut to zero based on their value extraction behavior. Just the first one I clicked now doing the test again.
The Curation Struggle!
As someone who thinks that content itself generally is overrated here on Hive (esepcially if it's not from a user who is also actually good to the tokenomics), I actually rather upvote users with more mediocre posts of users that actually invest in Hive and where I know that the upvote doesn't land as selling pressure. It makes curation also a struggle because each upvote I would give especially manually needs to proceed with an investigation if the user is actually a net positive for Hive or a net negative. The frustrating thing also is that more than often when wanting to give content an is upvote that most of the time if feels like it will result in just more sell pressure. So most of the time I just stick to Auto-upvotes which also isn't optimal for the platform.
Needed Tokenomisc Update!
Imo, Hive is due for a Tokenomics update giving way more incentive for users to actually buy and stake some Hive. At the same time, I don't make any illusions that anything will happen as the development of the chain mainly seems to happen on invisible things as the only real (positive) change I recall is that upvotes values are now linear instead variable based on the voting %. (In other words, a upvote at 100% is worth as much as an upvote at 10%)
Basically, Hive needs a system where it becomes way harder for 'value extracting accounts' to succeed while making it easier for curators to curate while not making it impossible to come here with nothing and build your account over time.
The Fix
What I would propose is to change the default post payout structure to (Step 1) for accounts who don't really hold any Hive Power and who's upvote is more or less worthless (~500HP or lower). Since curatos by default have invested in the ecosystem and help to keep the price up that way, their payout should never be affected and they should just be able to upvote what is the best content so that gets on top.
| Beneficiary (Author Under 500HP) | Post Payout % |
|---|---|
| Autor Post Payout | 10% |
| Hive Burned | 40% |
| Curator Payout | 50% |
Authors are able to get their Post Payout Percentage up by holding more Hive Power (which isn't delegated out but represents their own upvote). I have no clue what the numbers are fair and what they should look like exactly but it's more the idea that I'm trying to communicate. I would say in order to get the Autor Post Payout Up to 25%, only a very small amount of HP is needed as a way to make it so that it's a no brainer for anyone creating content to get there. 500HP (~25$ now) I would say (which I guess is the amount needed on hive.blog to get the upvote slider) bumps up the Author payouts from 10% to 25%. This is easy to get by everyone just by leasing some HP on the rental market.
| Beneficiary (Author 500HP) | Post Payout % |
|---|---|
| Autor Post Payout | 25% |
| Hive Burned | 25% |
| Curator Payout | 50% |
In order to increase author payouts to 50% and the burn to 0%, either a specific number of Hive can be required which is realistic for everyone (using the rental market) or it can go exponential at the end which gives everyone incentive to keep powering up to reach close to the full amount.
| Beneficiary (Author 10000HP) | Post Payout % |
|---|---|
| Autor Post Payout | 50% |
| Hive Burned | 0% |
| Curator Payout | 50% |
KE Ratio Factor
The way I see it, users who have been on the chain longer and managed to earn during their time have more responsibility compared to new users. I do think KE Ratio is kind of a broken metric as curation rewards should not really count toward it. I would make that easier in just calculating (Earned Author rewards/ total Hive Power) where it's no problem that the Hive Power is delegated out.
I'm all for making it possible for people to actually earn something here on Hive but not for just maximum value extraction. So a earnings vs HP ratio of 2 seems to be healthy realistic where users are able to cash out half of what they earned without any negative effect. Someone with a rati
| Author Eanings/HP Ratio | Author Reward Penalty |
|---|---|
| 2 | (2-2 = 0) 100% Author Payout |
| 3 | (3-2 = 1) 90% Author Payout |
| 4 | (4-2 = 2) 80% Author Payout |
| 5 | (5-2 = 3) 70% Author Payout |
| 6 | (6-2 = 4) 60% Author Payout |
| 7 | (7-2 = 5) 50% Author Payout |
| 8 | (8-2 = 6) 40% Author Payout |
| 9 | (9-2 = 7) 30% Author Payout |
| 10 | (10-2 = 8) 20% Author Payout |
| 11 | (11-2 = 9) 10% Author Payout |
| 12 | (12-2 = 9) 0% Author Payout |
Basically, the more users extract value, the more their author payouts get burned instead of paid out. Again, Hive only wil work if everyone works along and shows some responsibility instead of only acting as a value extractor. All in a way, it is accessible to everyone so small accounts are not in a disadvantage to build their blog and get earnings.
Double Value Extraction Protection
So by both having the Upvote value of an individual user as a requirement and their past earning, it should be possible to quite easily cut out all value extractors here on the chain in a fair way.
So first a system should look at the Hive Power for example giving a user 40% author payout (10% gets burned) and if the Earnings/HP ratio is for example at 4, they get a 20% reward penalty of that and only get 32% Autor Rewards / 18% Burn / 50% Curation rewards.
The Benefits of This System!
HIVE Demand Increase:
Since pretty much every author with a system like this has a clear incentive to get some Hive Power as without it cuts into their earnings, there should be a spike in demand (there are a ton of accounts who either would leave which would benefit the chain as the value extraction stops, or increase their HP to a level where it's optimal to still get earnings)
HIVE Initial Small Buy Hook:
One of the hardest and most things (for example in mobile gaming) is the first small buy of new users. This small HP requirement to bump up earnings by a lot will cause exactly this and since there is a rental market it is also fairly easy to achieve by users who are not willing to spend or buy anything. All they have to do is to use the earnings they get at the start to lease some HP and they are set for bigger payouts.
Rental Market Boost:
Since most of these users who currently mainly extract value won't all of a sudden be willing to buy Hive, they will be directed to the rental market which currently us pretty low on demand and offers. It will boost the demand which will increaste the APR which might bring back investors in the chain who can rent out their Hive Power for a good yield.
Easier For Curators:
While now you need to be somewhat of a detective to curate posts if you don't want to feed Value Extractors, with a system like this you are able to just focus on upvoting good content as you know that Hive Will be burned in case the post comes from someone who is here just to extract value.
Extra Hive Burning Mechanism:
Inflation is an issue, and this way, a lot of the Hive that otherwise is sure to end up as sell pressure will get burned!
Users Become More Invested!
The thing with Hive is that if you actually put some money in it that you become more emotionally invested in the platform and get a longer-term vision. Everyone is still allowed to cash out everything they earned, but that comes at a cost of a really high Earnings/HP ration which cuts down their ability to just keep earning after. It's always possible to come back but they will be forced to either buy or rent a large part of the Hive they earned and fully cashed out.
Everyone Curates & makes Friends
One of the nice things about Hive is that you are able to give others upvotes. Many accounts with low Hive Power (or leased out Hive Power) never really get to experience this as they are locked in value extraction mode. Having them all experience the act of giving out upvotes might give the social aspect of Hive a nice boost as it's inevitable that people start finding like-minded users to give their upvote to which makes communities stronger.
Hive Price Up = More New Users
The best advertisement for Hive is the green chart where the price goes up. If all of a sudden a lot of users actually need Hive and are no longer able to dump it systematically, the value of Hive should go up which should make it a lot easier to attract new users who start off having to invest a tiny bet which might create a positive feedback loop which gets us going again.
Curation Outflows ?
Right now, there is quite a lot of Hive Power delegated to curation groups, which in a way is nice. Forcing everyone to hold Hive Power (not delegate it out) especially done in a whay where the percentage of post earnings they get go exponential the more HP they hold might see an outflow of HP Delegated to curation groups.
Conclusion
Currently on Hive, the amount of accounts that are here just to extract value making content thinking that they are working and rightfully earning Hive that can be cashed out, is very high. An update in the tokenomics of Hive where it simply becomes beneficial to hold Hive Power if you are an author could be a gamechanger especially if it's done in a way where Hive is accessible to everyone also to those who have no means available to actually invest money in the chain. As long as things remain the way they are now and curation groups continue to systematically upvote 'good content' of 10+ KE Ratio value extractors, it's hard to see Hive grow over time because there is no reason to invest while the systematic selling pressure keeps existing...
Honestly I think this is an interesting an idea: not sure about the exact numbers that should be enforced, but linking your ability to earn as an author to the HP you own and to the HIVE you sold, seems more than reasonable and something that might help getting rid of quite a few extractors (or at least making their lifes harder).
Right now too many users use Hive just as a faucet, while we should build a system where users are encouraged to build up their HP.
Yeah, I also don't know the exact optimal numbers, but it's more about the idea behind it, which feels fair and also allows everyone to still come in with nothing and make a blog that turns out doing well.
There is just way too much free lunch now, and it is way too easy to get, even though it does take some effort to make the content. In the end, as many things need to be a net positive for Hive and making good content but max extracting value out of it systematically is a clean net negative. We need a way to make all those people either leave or adjust so they help to actually support the price and the ecosystem.
With how good AI already is, I'm not even sure most extractors are putting any real effort in the content they make...
Having an account (or a curation trail) curating good content, helping new and old underrated users, but with a strong eye on how much one extracts from Hive could be somewhat of a start.
Indeed, that is also what I have been thinking. A curation group that sets some ground rules when it comes to value extraction, and even leaves comments on good content form users who are a net negative on Hive that they would have gotten an upvote if it wasn't for their value extracting behavior.
I'm also sure a lot of the HP delegations would flow out to this and I would not mind delegating some myself. I have thought about starting something like that myself but I don't have the time and tecnical skills. It would be nice to have a curation mechanism where users can summon a vote (like the old 'minnowsupport' system) like once or twice a week with clear rules in terms of the content and the overall contributution. Or something like the old busy.org upvotes wich took in consideration the amount of followers you have an their total stake on the platform.
Yeah, it would be cool and maybe it could make more people aware of the importance of curating authors that not only post good content, but also are invested into Hive - or at least aren't extracting everything they earn.
In the past I wrote some scripts that, with some little work, might get the job done... but I feel that a project like that needs someone well known by the community to get some traction and have an impact on the chain.
Agreed: this would also make the project easier to manage, because the whitelisted users would act as curators and find themselves the posts that deserve an upvote. The project would only need to check if the post fit the requirements for an upvote and, if yes, calculate the percentage of the upvote according to its own criteria.
I find your thoughts interesting. I'm a little disappointed by the decline in interaction in HIVE, and lately I've been trying to interact as much as I can, but it seems like a difficult task to liven things up right now. However, I'm holding on and I'm still here. !BEER
Con questi valori bassi Hive è diventata ancora meno attraente per l'utilizzatore medio... purtroppo il prezzo è un fattore importante per i nuovi utenti ed al momento non sembrano esserci molte chance di vederlo tornare anche solo ai 30 centesimi (che ci sembravano pochi un tempo... oggi sembrano un'epoca d'oro 🤣)
that point about curation becoming an investigation really hit home for me. it is exhausting trying to figure out who is actually invested versus who is just cashing out daily.
Exactly, there are also so many layers to it. Lately there are many AI Generated comments that at times look really convincing. There is also so much 'pretend content' on Hive which is just fishing for upvotes. A good example of that lately are the Movie-tv reviews since there is potential good curation attached to it with scrobble.life. You see so many people who have been here for years with daily posts and never made a single movie-related post turning into full-time movie reviewers.
It's so exhausting to browse Hive and find genuine users (especially new ones) who are good for the ecosystem and where you know the chance is high that they will still be here years from now not dumping all their earnings.
It would be nice if it's possible to curate and know that the system pretty much handles all these needed investigations.
What a relevant post!
The metrics it presents certainly deserve to be analyzed and discussed by the witnesses, and to change the extremely dangerous status quo that has taken hold.
Let’s just say we’re on the same wavelength, @costanza. Lately, I’ve been diving deep into the KE topic. I’ve been channeling my impatience into my marketing project called KE Fest. Many users complain—and rightly so—that HIVE doesn’t have a good marketing plan. So, let’s embrace irreverence and good humor.
KE Fest is a virtual marketing campaign in which, in every city where there are HIVERS, a billboard will be installed promoting users with two- and three-digit KE scores who are constantly voted on by curation groups and stakeholders.
If you notice, many of the members of the curation groups also have high KE scores. In other words, they’re reaping the benefits. It’s legitimate. It’s theirs, and so I understand that they’re paid to perform this curation service. So, if they’re paid to curate, they need to be even more careful about where they cast their votes. Ignoring users with a KE below zero who buy HIVE and constantly voting for users with high KE doesn’t seem like the best strategy to me.
Yes, I actually addressed the curation group KE Ratio issue over a year ago (Link) but it's still going on. We need a way where the system to take care of this automatically.
I also think KE isn't the best metric. Users should be able to lease their way out of a bad KE and curation should not really count as value extraction. It make little sense to put a ton of money in Hive, curate to get some rewards while seeing the value of your investment going down. Compared to coming here with no investment, making posts based on what curation groups tend to upvote and cash all that out.
The fact remains that there is just way too much value extraction going on and it's hurting the ecosystem while no real solution is in sight.
Without a doubt, you are absolutely right.
Automation can be a solution, addressing the lack of awareness. This publication is already a path that needs to be reflected upon.
Look, the voting power of these Curatorship groups depends on the HP of those who delegate to them. The delegators thus indirectly become responsible for the extraction. They must be aware that, in this way, they are not contributing to the financial health of the ecosystem and are harming themselves. At least those who buy HIVE.
I like your idea, but if we were to try to fix Hive inflation problem, we need to look at all sources of inflation the same metrics and measures should be applied to Hive witnesses:
Source: https://seattlea.z5.web.core.windows.net/witness-dashboard.html
That makes sense.
I like those ideas a lot! Just won´t happen. The top guys (@blocktrades, @gtg, etc.) will never ever be open to such a rather radical change.
It would be interesting to see if a hard fork incorporating these successful ideas emerges in the future.
Honestly, it feels like Hive has zero leadership or anyone with power to actually make change happen. I see a lot of people (like myself) shouting things or taking some initiatives but as far as real fundamental changes go, I only can sum up one which is the flat votes change instead of each vote being variable.
You are spitting into the wind, why would those with the most stake change anything?
The curation gangs serve the top.
Extractors also serve those buying cheap hive for tomorrow.
Presuming that at some point in the next 50 years we actually succeed at gathering another crowd, this is a hedge as 'their' hive sells first and for the lowest price.
So, if you want change, explain to people how the curation gangs are working against the restivus.
They centralize power, they benefit their organizers the most, most people will see little if any benefit from having brown nosed their power structure.
Unless they have boobs, imo.
Even then time is limited, they will eventually time out of any support.
You can use lumensocial.net to quickly see the k/e ratio.
You have to be in 'inquisitor' mode, but it shows more than just the k/e on the accounts blog.
I think they are working on something that tracks the ones sending hive to other hive assets, ie splinterlands etc. but it's not active yet.
As far as the multi-pronged action plan, anything that requires cooperation from large stakeholders is unlikely to get passed.
Many of them don't like each other and the feelings are mutual.
Money does strange things to some people.
https://ok.ru/video/2834911136297
Nobody dumps anything that isn't first voted to them, that places responsibility squarely on the curator.
Curators are the problem.
The large ones like the way things are, and the small ones aren't aware enough to understand the chains that enslave them.
Most just chase the shiny object and avoid any conflicts.
Doesn't it make more sense that the big guys want the price of Hive to do well. I mainly just see everything as a lack of leadership and most people just trying to get most out of it for themselves one way or another which is why nothing ever really changes here.
That would make sense if the 'big guys' were poor, but they have no worries about where supper is coming from even if hive goes to zero.
IF they cared so much about the price we wouldn't be at .05usd.
Nothing changes because changes are not wanted by anybody that counts.
Let's start with the concept that tokenomics concerns the economic rules of a cryptocurrency: how tokens are created and distributed, what incentives users receive, and what mechanisms influence supply and demand. HIVE's challenge now is to create a blockchain ecosystem that balances rewarding those who contribute to the platform with maintaining its own economic model. Unfortunately, in my opinion, the whole thing hasn't worked very well over time. HIVE has been around for six years now, and the platform is wonderful, but the blockchain has lost some of its value when compared to other blockchain projects. !BEER
I would say the fact that it's still around (despite values having dropped) whith many that are here for nearly a decade still running their blog, kind of speaks for the fact that Hive is doing something right. I feel that it's just a matter of actually improving some of the things that don't make much sense to really get things to go in the right direction again.
I like the your idea that owning Hive should get rewarded more than creating content.
I think the rewards for posts are mostly based on luck. I think a lot of the content that gets upvoted doesn't get read at all. My blogs get a few dollars by automated upvotes within minutes after posting, regardless of the content. But there are others that receive 10/15 dollar this way.
I like all initiatives to discuss this, but there is not a lot of enthusiasm for it. The big stakeholders earn their Hive anyway and are fine with the autovotes they are getting.
A while ago made a suggestion in the Hive Discord if we could introduce Hive Savings, like there also is a Savings for HBD.
We could lower the percentage for curation and author rewards and use that for a nice APR on Hive.
The advantages:
It's quite a simple idea, so it might just not be feasible, but I do agree with you that this could be improved. The system is broken now.
I wonder if this topic is on the agenda already. Maybe @crimsonclad knows. She has been active in the Hive Discord lately.
Hey! I'm always active everywhere I'm mentioned, though admittedly discord pings and dms pile up so damn fast that sometimes I'm not on par with them. I'm trying to make sure I spend an hour in chat and voice whenever I get off a call or a space though recently as you noted, to be more full sync accessible to go alongside all our chain/off-chain async comms.
So, of course we do have the savings "security" feature, which is the short lockup that provides an extra layer of defense in between you and an immediate drain. What you're suggesting here would be adding an APR to it in a similar fashion to the way HBD functions?
I can see pros and cons to this for sure; right now we struggle with HBD savings being the number one cause of inflation. If you allow for inflation on the short lockup (3.5 days), it removes pretty much all incentive for anyone other than the biggest curation fanatics or people really into governance voting to keep more than a little bit of fully staked HP. Maybe that's not a bad thing; it could solve some problems and compound others.
It's an interesting thought exercise. What behaviours would we see if most people had very little allocation power, the bulk of our inflation came from passive APR, and the price did more swinging since people would be able to buy in and sell out more quickly? Would we be happier with the lower curation/reward percentages if even fewer people were deciding on where it all went? I think it would be potentially good for creating more natural volume, but I also think at that point we would really, really REALLY need EVM and SVM compatible options to allow us to take advantage of DEXes to actually do something with it and lure in the same 67 big money degens that every ecosystem shares right now.
To return to the question, I don't know if this is on the radar; the upcoming hardfork is really centered around huge tech gains that make it so anyone can run a node on a potato, that we make it so that anyone can create/compose/combine/disseminate HAF data as part of instantly building and also accessing chain data super easily, and that sort of thing, because it's a pretty big part of attracting builders and cross chain projects in a world where everyone has accelerated timeframes and smaller budgets with agentic coding. (I have some pieces coming on these topics that will be used for brand content/teaching and some seo/aeo work soon.)
Past that, I'm not a great voice on this. When I started, I made content, and it was really good! I got on the radar of most curators, because it fit what they liked... long form, original photos, stories, and a unique perspective tied to a writer with a doxxed face and deep roots in the community. These days I post very, very infrequently mostly because I'm in the weeds on so much on Hive work that is not related to posting, but also because in the back of my mind I know the second I make one, it will go to minimum $20. I could sit every day and farm that, and maybe some people would be happier I was "more visible," but it makes more sense to me right now to be respectful and careful with that ...er... power? To make sure there's always room for others and when I do post, that it's always worth it. I don't think everyone should be held to this standard and should do whatever they want with their stake and this chain! But my version of that for myself is weirdly principled around how my privileges (perhaps not the right word) shape people's perception of and reaction to what I do.
I'm not going to lie, it's so stressful and mostly killed my entertainment posting career lol 😂
Thanks for your reply. Since Hive has no owner it's sometimes hard to find out who to contact if you have an idea for improvement.
Disclaimer: I'm not an expert in Hive tokenomics or tokenomics in general.
Similar or maybe even replacing it if HBD Savings if that already causes inflation.
You don't need to make it 3.5 days. You could also make it a term deposit. Lock it in for a couple of months or even a year and have people pay a fine when they want to withdraw before the deadline.
It doesn't necessarily need to be little vs bulk, but if there is a passive option, it might attract new people. People that don't want to be that active on the blockchain itself at all. Those who do can keep their stake HP. I think those also will actually use it better than those who only want to profit from the author and curation rewards.
True. I do wonder if, when the trading volume of Hive goes up on the few DEXes that trade Hive (for instance because there is a good savings option), if more options will open up caused by the demand.
Thanks! I think it is good to share your thoughts on improvement.
Again, thanks for commenting.
reach out any time. I've definitely seen many versions of changing power up or making an alternative with the 'pay to break set lock terms'.
Most DEXes right now focus on free EVM/SVM token inclusion because it's essentially copy/paste for every new token, and liquidity can be shifted quickly and easily across chains and protocols alongside the current 'hourly runner' meta... this is even before even addressing that almost all of the pumpfun/hyperliquid coins now are released and traded out by the same set of addresses over and over every day to extract. More fast volume equals more fast trading fees for the DEX or CEX, which means always higher priority than us. (When we started, you were hoping to maybe catch the runner of the CYCLE, let alone the quarter.)
Working with us is proprietary and without an official bridge or some other form of equivalent integration path convincing a DEX to do an inclusion with liquidity provision for free on our natural volumes, it's a slog. Bitshares (xbts) is an awesome example. Natively integrated DEX with real volume because similar graphene underlying tech... not used super regularly by most of our own users even because it's outside the current VM dominance where they want to be.
It's definitely frustrating from a growth and devrel perspective too as it makes it a super hard bargaining position to be in, but opening a lot of relationships and staying on top of them is what I can do while we try to fit all the pieces together on our end.
Anyways, I do agree that passively available options that aren't just baseline APR on HP (just under 3% right now) would be good. Arguably, better than ultra high HBD. People hold that and convert when price is very low for way more HIVE than they initially earned the HBD at, which means that while the debt represented in dollars is the same it can lead to a lot more hive than expected being converted and added into supply over time. That's what we're seeing. A separated hive APR with term lockup would be a more known entity in terms of issuance that moves more in lockstep with expectations and less with the fluctuation of US dollar value debt instrumentation.
caveat: I'm not a tokenomics/market economist guy either, so this is pretty out of my personal purview other than considering how it shapes the wider ecosystem ethos and brand story, and the resulting behaviour modification and incentivisation.
(edited because my phone's autocorrect added a word that doesn't exist without me catching it 😂)
I would say that to get rewards here and do well (especially for new users with no stake), it's not luck, but mostly a matter of looking at what kind of content gets upvotes from curation groups and bending your way around them. The problem is that it makes a lot of what it on Hive feel like fake pretend content just there to get upvotes. It's funny how many people who have been here for years with daily content and never made movie reviews all of a sudden became full time reviewers because you are near guaranteed to get curated since scrobble.life came to life.
I still think the right way to go about it, is that people have some kind of passion and want to make a blog around it which, as a side effect, potentially earns something, and not like in most cases where people just want to earn something and then start blogging about what achieves that goal most efficiently.
I kind of like the auto-upvotes, but it comes with a certain level of trust, as you don't want to have people on your auto-vote list spamming content just because they know guaranteed votes are coming.
Your blog really feels genuine and your wallet also shows that you are a net positive for the Hive ecosystem. That is why it's easy for many to put you on their auto-votes and rightfully so. Sure there are always others who get more and for some it might not be fully feel fair but I guess that's life (it's not always fair).
For as far as Hive Savings go, I generally don't like the concept of 'staking coins just to get more coins' as it's kind of a circular. I rather give Hive more use case by requiring everyone who blogs and gets author rewards also to be a holder of HP to get the most out of it. This will push more toward leasing HP which should increase the Yield for investors who lease out their HP.
Thanks for your response. I think we on agree a lot parts.
What I meant with luck is, that if you have the luck to have a following that autovotes you, you can post whatever you like and still get upvotes.
Publishing what gets upvoted most also kills the diversity. The short media platforms get overloaded with 'game achievements' at the moment that it's not even fun to scroll through them anymore for me (yes, I can use the one front end that filters them out, but that is not a solution to the problem).
The problem with autovotes and votes without reading content is that the rewards get too centralized. Do I deserve more for my posts than someone that is new? I find it unfair that a newbie, that posts the same content as me (or even better) doesn't get the rewards because they are not autovoted. Then they need the luck to have a real manual curator to check their post.
For them it's not very encouraging to see their posts with no upvotes, comments or rewards and others earn a few bucks on an automated post of a 2 kilometer walk they made.
If the inactive autovoted could earn more with their stake by putting it into savings, the people that really curate would have more weight. And I think in the end it would benefit both the content as user retention on Hive.
I kind of get where you are coming from and agree that those who get Auto-votes can quite easily abuse them, and it also centralizes the voting power quite a bit.
At the same time, it's not realistic for anyone to browse Hive daily, plowing through all the garbage to find something great which on top also comes from an account which is good to Hive. Nobody has time for that. I kind of like the idea behind Auto-votes in that it's some kind of patreon equivalent. You find people here you like, trust, and want to support in what they bring and to do so you put them on auto-vote. In reality though it mostly is more an 'upvote4upvote' dynamic.
However, the idea about creating a genuine blog and gathering a real following that eventually over time results in friendships and some auto-upvotes is one that I kind of like as long as it's not too much and it doesn't get abused. What curation groups should do, is scout for newer users with good content. Somehow they tend to end up upvoting the same people over and over again completely neglecting the KE Ratio, I think because they also often are lazy and here to earn a quick buck in the most efficient way.
Hive just remains a platform with a lot of flaws in it that need some fixes in one way or another but not much really gets done ever. or at least it doesn't feel that way.
Starting my day here with reading your post word for word, @costanza, I appreciate the effort you have clearly put into it. For your sake and others still laboring away (in hopes Hive has a future), I hope ... "the big boys" ... at least read it. Challenge #1 ...
Abuse. You have made a good case for the prosecution of one aspect of what happens on the Hive blockchain. Overly simplified, but still with some merit perhaps, you have addressed one "end of the spectrum" - those at the "bottom of the food chain." Abuse at the other end of the spectrum? Challenge #2 ...
Tokenomics. "The money has to come from somewhere" ... "Money flows to where it is treated best" ... We all have our biases (it is just human nature), but I consider myself to be an objective, critical thinking, independent soul (compared to most). In my bias, I have no idea what case would be made to a new investor in Hive. Particularly to one willing to invest enough capital to make any difference whatsoever. Under current conditions, what % of their investment would serve as "exit liquidity?" Challenge #3 ...
Interaction. As you rightly say, as a % of the total content produced to "earn," I think the % that is "good content" to be quite low. Not helped in the slightest, by the steady decline in interaction on most posts, i.e. beyond the $$s, what incentive does one have to generate better content? We both know what that represents ... So ... There is the commitment of $$s. How about the commitment of time? Of the two, which has the greatest long-term value to supporting a thriving Hive blockchain?
I will keep reading the content on Hive I deem to be of at least some value, as I have spent years "in here." Along with you and others, I hope the day arrives when a major overhaul is apparent where even a beginning to addressing these shortcomings results in a reversal of Hive's downward trend.
More information - Support - Reports - Discord
Support engagement with a delegation to topcomment:
50HP - 100HP - 250HP - 500HP - 750HP - 1000HP - 1500HP
Thank you kindly for your affirmation I put a little effort into my support of this post, @friendlymoose! 🤝 Costanza is a stand-up guy and so are you. 👍
All the best to each of you, for a better tomorrow.
Hive for sure has a lot of shortcomings and challenges, but even with all of them it still kind of feels like a home on the internet for me which is worth something. Thanks for stopping by!
Absolutely ...
It definitely is worth something. I understand that very well. Otherwise, you and I would not be communicating ... 😉
Key to me is that people are able to clearly distinguish between however one would go about defining "worth something," from a money-making investment. The latter must be based on cold, hard, facts.
The original "experiment" of creating
Steem/ Hive, based on linking $$s with the universal human desire for affirmation blurs this distinction.My $0.02. Worth every penny ... 😉
Lo de “Buy & Burn” vs inflación infinita es el punto clave, pero cuando mostrás esa cuenta que cashoutea todo mientras los curadores le siguen dando upvotes diarios, literal el problema no es la tokenomics, es la curación. ¿Tenés el nombre o el HP de esa cuenta? xq sin eso el ejemplo queda medio en el aire.