@drutter I agree on your subject . i am here to follow it. none will be burn from my end . inflation only can be control if we stop creating more blurt in the system.
RE: "Burning" (Deleting) BLURT is a stupid fad
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
"Burning" (Deleting) BLURT is a stupid fad
What we actually need is more users, more users to distribute rewards across who can then trade and create market daily volume, with existing users selling and new users buying.
Burning is fine, nothing wrong with it but it just reduces what the the author earns and make them leave Blurt sooner because rewards aren't enough to sustain producing content, it also feels like a sort of tax and anti-freedom.
It was used on Steem back in 2017 when we were all still new to crypto, but now we know you can burn as much as you like but if nobody wants to buy your coin the price won't go up, only users and market reach do that, so an initiative of say voting if you introduce a friend, that will make sense.
if we were to reduce or stop inflation, all rewards would stop or be less, authors wont produce content, witness will down their nodes cause they wont be compensated for running them and the chain will die.
People come to me saying we need exchange listings or we need a new logo (we did that actually) or to burn tokens etc, my reply now is going to be No! we need more users first! did you know that a new user came from hive called @holovision and only people from the Blurt Core team welcomed him? we should start with the basics, increase user welcome, support and engagement, and that doesnt fall on Blurt Core, the community needs to step up and actually be a community.
Edit: Our team just informed me that only author rewards are subject to burn, so the author gets less while the curator earns the same as voting a non-burn post, so the curator grows in power faster than the authors.
you are very right in what you say regarding support and token burning, especially since blurt already has a built-in token burning system for use which, as I have always emphasized, is a groundbreaking approach to the matter compared to the predecessors of our blockchain.
I disagree about the logo and branding because I believe that whether we have users depends on the appearance of our platform. People today judge 70% with their eyes. and only secondly do they try to learn about the functionality and advantages of the product. Good branding is needed here to create a good, catchy advertisement, and a good, catchy advertisement draws attention and encourages people to get to know the product better. And finally, at this stage, a lot depends on whether the product is really good or not. We are still improving the product, but unfortunately, in my opinion, the branding is not quite going in the direction it should be and, above all, the appearance itself is lagging behind.
New users also do not solve the problem of inflation. Inflation imposes the need for continuous development, but individuals in the inflation system constantly feel unsatisfied and finally get tired of this system, seeing that it is a horse race against a modern car, and they change their approach.
This is the moment when the platform loses users. Because they are trying to look for other ways to stand out.
For centuries, people have naturally been looking for a situation in which something can minimize their efforts and the amount of work they put in, and they are willing to put in incredible efforts and risk their lives for a situation that will set them up for the future in such a way that they will not have to make any more efforts to survive.
So they are trying to create something that will pay off for the rest of their lives. Hence the entire development of civilization.
The inflation system is the opposite of this state of affairs. Therefore, inflation can only stimulate the state of excessive stagnation and not establish it as the norm.
A strong inflationary trend leads to a lot of fakery, cheapness and mediocrity because people, knowing that the money they work for is not worth much and loses its value over time, do not try to do what they do. They want to hit posts as quickly as possible and grab a few tokens and then escape to more stable and reliable currencies such as BTC or ETH
In our case, this leads to shitposts and spam, and then the token value drops.
Basically, in the case of our platform, the situation should be as follows:
the more users, the greater the money supply, but the supply itself should always be slightly higher than the increase so as to always keep the blurt price on the verge of deflation and inflation, with moments of strong deflation during the best economic times.
This approach would make the token price more stable and upward, and the token itself would have the features of digital gold and be attractive to investors and creators.
It would also motivate creators to create better content. Because, on the one hand, a small supply would mean a greater difficulty in obtaining the token and, on the other hand, the value for good original content would increase over time. For me, the only thing missing would be a reward system and good content after monetization. But I already have an idea on how to solve it, but it requires a bit of refinement on my part before I present it.
Thanks for your reply, quick reminder that inflation reduces by 0.5% each year, I think we started at 10% and we are at 8.62% now, so inflation is reducing and users transacting burn Blurt with fees, the daily rewards pool is the same so the more users we have commenting and posting and voting the more Blurt is burned.
Regarding the logo, we didn’t feel a corporate look was suitable, we also wanted to keep similarity ro the current logo to please users that did not want to change it, the logo is legacy much like bitcoin’s logo is its legacy, so freshening it up was a compromise, but still millionaire Alex Hermozi said in one of his videos the least effective thing you can do is apend effort changing your logo when you need to desperately grow your business, any number of things would be more effective.
Luckily it only took a few days and was quite a fun experience, and everyone involved is quite pleased with the result, a post will be out sometime with the brand kit and methodology around the design.
WEFgtptshit.png
Never trust a WEF NWO controlled hacker . ;-)
Lol I’m certainly not powerful or connected enough to even be on WEF radar, just an ordinary builder ser.
Yeah , what ever ,. have a song from me .
I know what know ,.. ;-)
How comes you didn't welcome him with a blurtbooster vote? White list only votes is a stupid policy. Give votes to everyone and then look after them. If you find spam or plagiarism, then add users to blacklist
Do you remember the time when I voted on every post? It brought tons of new users, many spammers and many good folks who are here till today.
Vote on everything. This is the only way to get and keep new users here.
Well said - the 'whitelist' is really a blacklist...
Let's change 'whitelist' to 'inclusive list' and everything will be clear
or....'whitelist' to 'go along to get along, corner' !.....the option are endless! lol
Hi, thank you for your reply and suggestion. I don’t oversee the Blurtbooster votes myself, the code was designed by @saboin and has oversight by a team he put together. I have tagged him here incase he wishes to clarify its mechanics or make any adjustments he deems to be a good idea.
I’m starting to understand you more, I believe you do have an interest in seeing Blurt succeed but maybe have different ideas on how to achieve that. I think however, our goals are aligned for growing Blurt.
I agree that votes and engagement are necessary, but I also don’t think a bot vote makes up for organic human votes, the real value comes in when many users comment and vote on posts of new and existing authors, attention is addictive, you don’t get the same dopamine from a bot votes or replies in an automated fashion, as when real people validate you and your content personally.
I have asked @outofthematrix to look into some general research on a user acquisition and experience funnel.
I think what must happen is that a sales funnel type software should be operated by a dedicated user experience team, the user is welcomed and guided to join a Newbie community, then we as a whole support and nurture the Newbie community with real human touch interest and engagement and accompanying votes according to merit.
Once this funnel is perfected we can do targetted ads on other socials like facebook, and even hold events on Eventbrite to teach people about the world of crypto with Blurt as the gateway. We basically need a gradual user experience journey from Web2 to Web3 with training, positive reinforcement and support along the way.
I also want to present some HF ideas for you to read over, please afford us some time on that, @khrom may have mentioned to you about some of it.
Anyway, thanks for the constructive comment, hopefully this marks the start of cordial conversations between us for the betterment of Blurt.
I don't even have a discord account (or any other social media) to contact him. It would be nice if hf ideas were published on Blurt
No problem you can tag @saboin anytime on Blurt or comment on one of his posts or comments like you did me.
Yes the final draft will be on Blurt for your consideration, here you can decide which items you are happy to support, but while fleshing it out will need input from team and witnesses, so may have to be a group effort in Discord first before goes to chain.
I just wanted to add something, I think it is great you were voting every user, you have, however more freedom to vote any content because you aren’t a core team representing Blurt. Imagine for example the Blurt Core bot votes every post and lands up voting hate speech, murder or child porn, we can unvote but our votes would have forever touched that content and author, so because of the position we are in we will get a lot of kickback and hate if we vote on low value or bad content, in many respects you have more freedoms to blanket vote all content.
Perhaps however there is a sweet spot in the middle we are yet to discover.
Yes, add a comment under each upvoted post:
this post has received automatic upvote from Blurt Core, if you see plagiarism, spam, blah, blah, blah please report it on discord or mentionl this account @blah under this post, we will remove upvote and blacklist author
Thanks for the suggestion, the idea of a comment under each post gave an idea to comment under each new author’s post and welcome them and let them know they will be eligible for blurtbooster votes in a X days if their content is suitable. This also creates something to aspire and build up to and a reason to keep developing ones blog for higher rewards to come.
As an active promoter of this platform and having onboarded hundred of new users, i agree with your statement we should increase user welcome and engagement but what i mostly observed even with a good welcoming support from the community, they won't continue to use the platform if they dont get high upvote value. A good vote value perhaps from the Blurt Core to all new users would some how make a difference and inspire them to remain.
Lovely to see you back onchain! 🙏🍀
@megadrive Sir we are user and As user of blurt ecosystem , wish always best . Hope we chase Hive blockchain and atleast make Blurt more transparent and well managed .
Thanks for your thoughts, and some background info on the topic.
You're very right that our token price is more about demand than supply. Anyone can invent a token and burn a trillion of them... doesn't mean it has any value. You need demand, which generally means some kind of functionality/use. Blurt has the functionality, and will continue to add more real-world uses, so demand should continue to increase.
True, there's nothing wrong with burning... having the option to do so is great. Options are power (as long as they don't come with any drawbacks, costs, etc).
But I think a lot of people are currently being duped into believing it's some sort of fix for the low token price, and this is causing many people to make decisions like burning a good portion of their funds. And as I said, there are better options if we really want to reduce the number of BLURT in circulation. Reducing inflation too low is just as bad as having it run too high, but it's still a very valuable tool in managing the amount of tokens floating around (and ending up on exchanges).
It's not fair to say "only people from the Blurt Core team welcomed him". Perhaps some of those people were the first to welcome him, and they should get credit for their discovery, but you're trying to say the community isn't a real community because of that, and that's just not the case.