the almighty "reward-pool" is comprised of new tokens, created out of thin air
in monetary terms, this is called "inflation"
and "inflation" steals money from SAVERS by diluting AVAILABLE SUPPLY (aka "increasing liquidity")
this drives the value of the token down
in other words, the almighty "reward-pool" is STEALING MONEY FROM SAVERS
also, the almighty "reward-pool" is split evenly by stakeholders AND by number of upvotes
for example,
if only one person voted during a single week
then 100% of the almighty "reward-pool" would pour into that one vote
no matter how little stake that person controlled
so, when big curation trails vote
it is proportionally STEALING rewards from everyone else
in other words,
if FEWER PEOPLE VOTE,
each vote is WORTH MORE
Thanks.
So should I only vote once a day ? Once a week ? Once a month ? Never ?
What is the best strategy to reduce the “inflation” and improve the Reward Pool ?
everyone can vote as much or as little as they please of course
but "not-voting" also contributes
since we don't have a massive built-in demand for tokens (like splinterlands)
we really need to focus on encouraging the newbz
i like the idea of giving them delegations
and then perhaps having a "non-voting" holiday periodically, where accounts larger than say, 100,000 blurt power, don't vote for one week
so all the smaller accounts get bigger votes
just for a week, maybe twice a year or something
i'm switching to 1% upvotes from now on
I set mine to .01 % on Dtube and still earn 1 DTC on every comment. Dtube is the best ! Are you over there ?
My 1% upvote is worth .42 Blurt ..
The Answer to the Ultimate Question of Life, the Universe, and Everything is 42
i am holding some DTC, but i'm not active there
i like odysee better
https://odysee.com/@LOGICZOMBIE:0/1969:6
I’m a little bit confused about the vote thing please could you explain it in five-year-old terms? So you’re saying we should only vote once a week or that we should have a lower vote power?
vote as you please
but if you vote less, or in smaller amounts
this increases the share for smaller accounts
of course, it also increases the share for larger accounts
So it’s better to post a lot for the working class? 🤣
i'm not sure that would help small accounts here, considering the per-transaction fees
https://hive.blog/ethics/@logiczombie/please-stop-posting-and-upvoting-you-re-eating-into-my-rewards
https://peakd.com/ethics/@logiczombie/please-stop-posting-and-upvoting-you-re-eating-into-my-rewards
Should we stop voting, to increase the reward pool? Of course, if nobody votes, the reward pool is wasted, so at least 1 person has to vote. Who should that be?
Should we burn our BLURT to fight inflation? How much should we burn? Who should burn the most? Who decides?
It seems you are missing the point of free markets. And calling things "theft" and other emotionally-loaded terms that don't actually apply.
everyone can vote as much or as little as they please of course
but "not-voting" also contributes
since we don't have a massive built-in demand for tokens (like splinterlands)
we really need to focus on encouraging the newbz
i like the idea of giving them delegations
and then perhaps having a "non-voting" holiday periodically, where accounts larger than say, 100,000 blurt power, don't vote for one week
so all the smaller accounts get bigger votes
just for a week, maybe twice a year or something
I see that as the opposite of good curation.
the "opposite" of "good curation" is upvoting criminal content
You're about as dumb as that logical thought guy around here... nothing but illogical nonsense, time after time.... muted.
perhaps you can explain your counter-point
If we call theft for products whose value is somehow reduced, would we be telling the truth if we say that someone is stealing every day based on all markets?
please be slightly more specific
I'm sorry, but I can't be specific for bch and crypto, which fell from $1600 to $120, because I think the fall of each of them is for similar reasons.
It's a different look, though.
if the drop is due to a drop in demand
that's not necessarily "theft" unless that drop in demand was engineered
or the demand that was propping up the value was artificial hype (also engineered)
but if the drop in value is due to inflation (also engineered)
it is theft
for example,
@foryoubtc
I don't need to buy BCH in order to pay for other things with it. Not everyone uses credit cards or paper markets/or bank accounts for savings. That is where market share comes from for Bitcoin. The fiat system failing to be a good kind of money for various reasons. BTC has the network effects and that also means higher market cap and more uses apart from speculation. BTC is also bought for that reason as well. It looks like $20k is the value when the speculators give up and we are left with those who are holding long term.
How does Blurt offer a better money solution than Bitcoin? We know it's faster, and blocks are empty. With the blocks empty, we have really low fees and we can trust the transactions will go into a block. However, nearly wherever we can spend Blurt we can spend Bitcoin.
Blurt is an App-coin for influence on Blurt.blog and blurtlatam.com. That's about it.
exactly
clickbait title - nowhere do you actually explain how it works
dozens and dozens of posts on this across steem/hive/blurt.
also, same tired lame lack of understanding that was promoted on steem and hive - that voting robs others - by which logic nobody should ever vote.
the argument isn't that "nobody should vote"
the argument is more like "self-voting is not a crime"
🌹
implicit argument
here
https://blurt.blog/blurt/@rycharde/why-are-my-reward-payouts-about-half
here
https://blurt.blog/blurtopian/@rycharde/making-the-reward-fund-distribution-sensitive-to-the-vested-blurt-economy
and here
https://blurt.blog/blurtopian/@rycharde/how-blurt-s-hf3-will-affect-vote-values-and-the-economy
plus plenty of stuff on steem and hive that I really can't be bothered to search for - you do that, if you wish!
i'll take a look
Its stealing, but in quotation marks, because you can't honestly call it stealing so you disingenuously try to sway the readers by invoking notions of fraud, or larceny, which means that you don't have a point, less an argument, you're as well funded and correct as a one legged chair.
it is stealing, but not in the traditional sense
it steals VALUE and not actual tokens of value
for example
if you had collected some valuable commodity, like, you know, wheat or cotton or steel or gold
and then someone dumped a huge supply of that commodity on the open market
the VALUE of your holdings would be reduced
proportional to the NEW SUPPLY
Not necessarily proportional. And it still isn't theft or stealing.
if you own (HOLD SAVE) government issued fiat
and they print and spend MORE fiat
they are stealing value from you
because your dollar loses VALUE
The white paper I'm certain covered how the notion that increasing the circulating currency doesn't corelate to inflation.
Let's examine the basis for
What gives the dollar value?
What makes the dollar lose value? How and why?
This is saying in the first seconds that they (bankers) are stealing from us, by directly devaluing their own currency.
Bonds aren't backed by taxes. They are backed by "taxing power" a meaningless notion, exactly like the other thing that "secures" them, "the full faith and credit of the issuer", which are all bankrupt and will default again and again.
Creating money is the function of the FED, not some villainous design.
How the currency enters the market? The FED creates currency the banks ask for which is used to create more currency through the fed ad infinitum..
Intrinsic value is another word for "it's relatively rare".
So at 10 minute or so... We give money it's value. How does that factor into the supply of money gives money it's value?
consider how money functioned BEFORE the "federal reserve"
It is difficult for me to understand this part a bit, since reading what the same platform provides about the reward fund declares that: Such votes depend on the BP held and the vote weight used by each voter. It is thus not a question of who votes, but rather about how much each user votes.
https://blurtwallet.com/faq.html#What_is_the_reward_pool
So, it looks like my vote is only affected by the amount of BP I have and the weight I give to my vote. So... How can my vote be worth more than what I have invested in my account, regardless of whether one person votes or several? 🤔
On the other hand, the word STEAL seems to be a bit out of context, if I really understand what you wanted to explain in the answer to @baah here: https://blurtlatam.com/@logiczombie/rj8qyl.
It would be nice to have the opinion of @saboin and @practicalthought on this topic, which is very interesting to learn.
the almighty "reward-pool" is comprised of 100% inflation
this "reward-pool" is distributed evenly by the number of votes made in a one week period
if only one person voted one time during a single week
100% of the reward pool would be funneled into that one vote
regardless of the blurt-power controlled by that single user
of course, more blurt-power means you have a larger vote payout
proportional to your blurt-power DIVIDED BY the number of total votes during that one week period
Total bollox! Where do you get this from? obviously NOT from reading.
Try to understand first and then maybe make some valid points.
if fewer people vote
each vote is worth a larger percentage of the "reward-pool"
is this statement TRUE or FALSE ?
TRUE
not an insight - I've been explaining this every week for over a year.
BUT
FALSE if those non-voters power-down and stop voting entirely.
people with no blurt-power can't vote anyway
how is this any different ?
What is "this"?
"this" is your example
Your question proves to me that you didn't read those 3 articles! lmfao
If you had, you wouldn't have asked it.
you've done a phenomenal job of communicating your point of view
The way I understand it works is that the reward pool is determined by the amount of vests, and the rewards are then divided by the vests that votes, so you don't have a set limit as to how many rewards you can distribute since it's based on how much vests voted during that period. This is how years ago, the whales on steem stopped voting and downvoted other whales, in turn canceling their vote, and this made everyone's vote about 10x more.
Good read with lots to think about.
You mentioned (in the comments) that if someone isn’t using the voting power of their entire stake that they are the ones loosing value. It’s true. This inflationary system entitles all stake holders to vote value (inflation) into the system. (I believe it’s at a set rate?) This incentivizes use of the system. Holding Blurt and not utilizing it means that you are going backwards in the value of what you are holding. If everyone didn’t vote… then yes. The value of Blurt would go UP but this is not what it’s been engineered to do… so whoever votes with their voting power controls the value of Blurt. Also… investment (demand) flowing in (or out) controls value as well. Additionally… fees (being burned) act as a deflationary counterbalance. This last part I find to be interesting… because it’s one of the aspects about Blurt that is different than Hive.
As well…
I found it interesting that you mentioned HBD in the comments. It’s absolutely true. Non-Participation is being rewarded on the Hive Blockchain. This is a way to direct the flow of value to passive accounts that are NOT making the engine turn. Holders of HBD are the actual owners of the Hive Blockchain… but to its determent as they are not utilizing (turning) the system and making it work. I believe this further centralizes the blockchain and puts more and more wealth in the hands of people who are not interested in producing value on the blockchain. Another reason why I think that Hive is on its way out.
Still… we could capitalize on HBD and use it to control and diverge the price of Blurt (on Hive Engine) from Hive. That being said… I’m leaning towards getting out altogether so that I can entirely focus on Blurts well-being.
huh? would you really like to try that!?
ridiculous notion.
very similar to those (far too many) who think burning tokens increases their value.
I guess burning them to zero would make them of infinite value.
banksters own the media that blame govscum who are also owned by banksters.
watch the hands, not the puppets.
why does lamestream media never blame the banksters for being rapacious POS?
never bite the hand that feeds you
💋
i say whatever i wish and people vote however they like
also, declining rewards does nothing except shovel more money directly into the mouths of the top earners
Nope .. it is evenly shared compared on many calculations
Number of followers , number of posts , number of images etc..
top earners ( 20% ) or low earners ( 1% ) will have a piece of the cake .
it's a way to funnel demand for splinterlands cards (50,000 users) into the pockets of the savvy oligarchs
👆
Your indeed correct. It is interesting to see how they have made HBD a priority... and it's all so that people with large amounts can extract even more value without doing anything.
Things don't last forever... I'm wondering what is going to happen when Spinterlands dies down. I think the price of Hive is likely to follow.
So last Christmas Hive pumped (like an artificial Christmas tree) and I'm thinking something like that might happen again... I thought about waiting for that possible event... but then reconsidered. It's more important for me to vote and follow my values.
Speaking of which...
I'll be cashing out my HBD. You have convinced me.
it's like when google (and many other big corporations) bought up a bunch of saudi-aramco shares
sure, saudi-aramco is the world's most profitable company
and it looks like "a solid investment"
but do you really agree with and support the actions of saudi arabia ?
On 2 October 2018, Jamal Khashoggi, a Saudi dissident journalist was assassinated by agents of the Saudi government at the Saudi consulate in Istanbul, Turkey.[4][5] Khashoggi was ambushed and strangled by a 15-member squad of Saudi assassins.[6][7] His body was dismembered and disposed of.[8] Khashoggi's final moments were captured in audio recordings, transcripts of which were subsequently made public.[6][9]
The Saudi government engaged in an extensive effort to cover up the killing, including destroying evidence.[7] By 16 October, separate investigations by Turkish officials and The New York Times had concluded that the murder was premeditated and that some members of the Saudi hit team were closely connected to Mohammed bin Salman, the crown prince of Saudi Arabia.[10] **
I’m just glad I sold most of my hive around that time. Not that I have loads but at least I got out of one token near the top 😂
anyone holding HBD is contributing to the oligarchy
Yes. This is fact.
Thank you for putting it this way...
I'm officially selling off my HBD.
We don't need to play their game (and their rules) anymore... the sooner I'm done with Hive... the better.
exactly
Did a reluctant upvote ,.. after taking in the info .
;-)
Interesting. So what is the remedy?
I vote like a demon lol
I just got an under 2% vote off someone asking me to vote his witness in return. Isn't that frowned upon (buying or begging for votes) and as if I'm gonna be swayed by a less than 2% vote? Very strange.
if the big accounts really wanted to encourage "engagement" from smaller accounts
they could simply stop voting
and this would automatically increase the value of everyone else's votes
also,
the main point i was trying to make here
is that "self-voting" is not "stealing"
it's more like "treading water" - since the almighty "reward-pool" is inflationary and therefore "steals" value from SAVERS
I've been told that I should shut up about money because I know nothing about it but this month I've read 2 books on the money system. Both claim the fiat system is based primarily on debt. People borrowing money (like mortgages) create money from thin air. How is this system similar or is it completely different?
I hear the debt system is on it's last legs.
Think of it this way... Banks make up money out of thin air (FIAT= By Decree).
Now the nerds have learned they can do the same but have to document the "AIR" that their made up money is coming from... So BLURT inflates by like 8% ATM and is on a downward curve. Compare that to FIAT US Dollars, which were inflated by money printing (out of thin air) by about 40%... last year alone...
🥓 Keep in mind that inTEResting involves RISK 🆔 The value of your inTERest... will fluctuate over time, and you may gain or lose ... 🤬
So BLURT, like a most cryptos, are made up out of thin air, with a better documentation of the air which was used, and now WE THE USERS are inDEBTed to IT.
Don't lose your key and YOU TOO can make up your own BLURT and move it to other Users with little to no restrictions.
🥓BLURT!ON🤬
FIAT LUX
FIAT CRYPTO
Some people call it an RV (Revaluation) 🤬
I call it the great Wealth Transfer 🥓
The Fed was created as the result of a huge bankster scam.
The scam involved the "controlled collapse" of some banks, and the resulting contagion, to give the illusion there was a genuine banking disaster - when it was in reality synthetic. The same people then created the Fed.
Now, if the Fed decides on another "controlled collapse", coz the debt-laden-fiat-game is over, what is the WIN? ;-)
I shall also keep saying this, despite being increasingly bored, that people are being given a shitty life with the excuse of "gov debt" when the biggest black hole in the money supply is - derivatives!!
So, the "solution" has nothing to do with the lives of pathetic little believer-babies, but a way to re-calibrate that huge bubble of "impermanent losses".
Well there's no going back to secret money and hidden debts.
I'm not a citizen, so KYC doesn't matter to me.
The FEDs been Dead for years... Not my problem what happens next. I've already capitalized back into the land of the living...
Let the dead bury the dead.
Banks are done son 🥓
yep
Now you're getting complicated. I did read that 'economists' are a bit like virologists in that what they are taught is mostly fictional nonsense. I'm in agreement on that at least.
iAMADM!- BEENJAMMIN@frankbacon | @spamnhater >> 🤍 💔 🖤 << YET @ihavewatchers -RE:HowdoImakeMONEY$$$onHIVE?
I've just been at THIS awhile Ms Tracy 🥓👍
yeh I know Mr Bacon ;-) and it's miss not ms LOL I'm not into that feminist stuff any more
well stated
Member 🤬
https://www.tiktok.com/@blackjackpaulie/video/7149628170990341381
Rewards 🥓
Came on for my daily blurt sauce to reward the peers, but the peers are saying i am inflating the pool. Being a lockstep conservative, i will move for a 1% vote on 30 day curve back to 100%
This theory is back my 60,000 imaginary university studies, so i assure you the chain will be in better condition if you conform to my interests lol.
Im just kidding by the way, but that is why i gave you 1% up vote to stand in solidarity with the concern of inflation via the rewards pool.
switching to 1% upvote mode for all upvotes
someone should count how much megadrive is STEALING from reward pool with his alt accounts like socialgraph, initblurt and the rest of his "officilal" Blurt accounts
I think it would be about 25%
technically they're only "stealing" from accounts that don't use their full voting power every week
A reasonable solution at the blockchain level would be that people who don't vote because they don't have time or not enough BP (transaction fees) would receive a "staking reward", 50% of their each vote value (they would earn as much as curators)
nice
Hey @mariuszkarowski and @logiczombie. That's an interesting idea... however isn't the idea of inflation to create economic (in the case of Blurt content) participation? I think we should continue to incentivize active use of the blockchain don't you? If we can use the heck out of this blockchain... (use it meaning creating content that has value and is valued by the blockchain and it's users) then with this active use case we will continue to stay relevant in drawing more users who want to do the same... generate and have their content valued by the other users. That's my thoughts on this idea of "staking reward".
"buy-and-hold" participation is still valuable participation
The problem arises when you have groups of vested people... who are vested for reasons that diverge. Values differ when you incentivize passive investment as apposed to active investment. I'm all for holding... but handing out 20% (as in the case of HBD) seems to split the users into conflicting wills. Consensus gets easier when you work from straight forward angles. At least that's my thoughts on this. I guess it's a way to get people to go long... but there is always a cost. It could be helpful to decide what the main innovation is... and then utilize accordingly. Mixed messaging can split consensus over the long run. (Thinking aloud.)
i agree 100% on the HBD thing
it's a way for the hive oligarchy to motivate large stakeholders into basically "non-voting-shares"
It could be helpful to decide what the main innovation is
we need a set of explicit core-values
sort of a "constitution of blurt"
in order to clearly define the scope of "governance"
it's not the job of the federal reserve to stop all crime
Here comes the wooo woo train and its FUD engine.
You can post Open Source graphs and charts displaying that data for others to see and comment on. I used to love how PeakD could be used to filter information on votes and engagement. You can look at the Blockchain alone, or focus in on one specific user... All open... All transparent... If you know how to look 🥓
if you hold HBD, you are not "contributing to the community"
you are not voting for witnesses
you are not voting on "high-quality-original-content"
and yet, you are getting a 20% bonus for your "non-efforts"
curators, good curators, like even marky make about 11% bonus on their curation investments
why do HBD holders deserve 20% ?
and why do big curators, like @themarkymary and @buildawhale and @blocktrades give 100% upvotes to this spam ?
which get funneled into the pockets of HBD holders ?
who are NOT "contributing to the community" like the "intelligent curators" ?
wrong chain here, but, yes, HBD has been redesigned and is now very different to the original SBD.
This comment is endorsed with a 1% upvote to stand in solidarity with the concern of inflation via the rewards pool.
good point
✊I STAND IN SOLIDARITY🥓