That's right, the takers need givers, or it all stops.
When the takers are stronger than the givers, the blockchain, community, and token price are degraded. Imagine all the whales suddenly selling, much like what happened 2 years ago when the price fell by 90% (and has never recovered). When the givers are stronger than the takers, the blockchain, community, and token price are bolstered. A market needs both sides, but their relative strength is what determines price action and corresponding interest in the blockchain/community.
What do you consider a giver though ? Only an investor? In the real world if an artist produces art and someone invests in the art hoping it goes up in value in the future no one’s a taker or a giver it’s just people giving in different ways and hoping to take in different ways . Everyone is going to cash out eventually creators and investors. I find ppl have rly bizarre rules about getting paid on these sites.
Investors have more available cash and don’t rely on it to live on so they can afford to put the money in an investment and not have access to it for a good while. That’s how all investments work. But for their investment to go up in value it requires ppl who make the art and are willing to sell it below its potential top value. They sell their work at the value it is because they need the money to live, the investors can afford to sit on the money for a few years.
Everyone’s looking to take money and value from the system it’s just investors are not using the money for day to day expenses so they can keep it in longer in the hope it’s worth more in a few years. Everyone is imperative to the value system and both ultimately want to gain abundance.
By "giver" I mean someone who adds value to the community and/or token. An investor is one example, and I gave many others in my post.
I don't think there are any "rules about getting paid" on Blurt, and I'm not suggesting any be created. I'm in favour of free markets and individual liberty.
We have a lot of users here who don't upvote anyone but themselves, giving all their spam comments 100%, and selling the profits. This drains the reward pool. It also drives down the token price. We also have people like me who have brought more than $20000 to this platform, and put in 2.5 years of full-time content creation, and have never pulled anything out. In fact, if I was to need my money back right now, it would only amount to $3000. Meanwhile, many users here have cashed out thousands or tens of thousands of dollars. Hundreds, in the case of the insiders at the top. Where did all that come from? It came from the givers.
You can talk about general macroeconomic theory all you want, but THAT is how Blurt works. Money pours in, "BLURT tokens" are handed out by the millions, then insiders (and a few farmers etc) withdraw the money.
That doesn’t bother me that much as their upvotes are rly tiny unless they actually invest real money and we need those investors I guess it’s like their dividend to change it we would need to change the platform and make it less worthwhile to self upvote but investors rarely have time to vote and comment so maybe they could just get a dividend