Sportstalk Social to burn 50% of the author rewards of non-native posts

avatar

I feel that it's important for Sportstalk Social platform users to be aware of the proposed economic change that will affect the author rewards of non-native posts. What will happen is that authors who post content using platforms like blurt.blog, PeakD, Leofinance, and other tribe platforms other Sportstalk social will have their author rewards taxed approximately by 50%. This economic change will not affect the curation rewards so the ROI for Sports power investment will not be affected by this change.

It's a remarkable change in the Sports tribe and it could potentially impact many of the users of this platform.

To clarify, the 50% tax from author rewards will be burned. It will definitely improve the token in circulation as soon as the proposal goes live.

Implications

The Actifit users will be the first group of authors that will be affected by this change.

image.png

If you browse through the New posts section that 3 out of 5 posts are Actifit reports, that's a rough representation of the statistics but it's about there. I think you will get the feeling that Sportstalk is mostly dominated by Actifit posts in terms of numbers.

Based on my observation, there are Actifit posts that are upvoted to around 20,000 to 30,000 Sports total payout. Well, I'm not saying that they are overpaid because I also feel that these posts are of good quality. Also, the authors are legitimate contributors and are well engaged with other users.

Beyond Tax

I have to step back a bit and look at the grand scheme of things.

image.png

The planned token quantity will be 101.262 Billion.

The current token quantity in circulation is only about 1.49 Billion which is only around 1.4% of the total supply. If that's not surprising enough then you should check on how many tokens have been burned so far...

It's only 14.20 Million tokens and that's only 1% of the 1% of the token supply.

image.png

The way I see it is that the inherent value of each Sports token is heavily diluted which makes it a good case for burning a portion of it.

However, the execution of burning the tokens has to be considered in every aspect and the potential consequences of it.

There are usual practices in burning tokens, these are:

  • burn post (allow the community to upvote a post with rewards set to @null as beneficiary)
  • token buy-back using ad revenues
  • Hive power delegation to a community account in exchange for Sports token payment (Hive earnings to be used to buy-back Sports to burn)

These are just a few options that could be considered in order to reduce the supply of tokens out from the market and be burned permanently.

Anyway, I'm hoping that more Sportstalk users would take part in sharing their opinion about the proposed change to the rewards distribution in this platform. Also, I'm hoping that the community will reach a consensus that will
prove to be the most beneficial for the platform and the community that is backing it.

Peace

Posted Using LeoFinance Beta



0
0
0.000
3 comments
avatar

I guess its a good move and thank you for posting , we need a lot of votes to move the proposal .

Right now we have only 19% for the proposal . We need 51%.

Posted Using LeoFinance Beta

0
0
0.000
avatar

Love to see a discussion about this. I think this a good first step to take in order to get some tokens out of the system. Other tribes are already using this, but maybe not so high as 50%, but they don't have the same issue with the token supply either.

The idea is to incentives people to come over to Sportstalksocial and when the numbers go up we can earn more from ads as well.

0
0
0.000
avatar

I think this proposal is a value add to additional proposals down the line. I don't believe that this proposal is a requirement but I do believe that this proposal will help build for value down the line. What I believe really drives value is the attention economy and the burn that comes from advertising to that attention. Right now that's SPORTS' real issue is that we have no value coming into the tribe.

I partnered with the Hive Engine team to display ads through our site but they haven't made any payments towards this since 2019. This led to a negative feedback loop where less value caused less attention and less attention inevitable led to less value. LEO on the other hand went with CoinZilla for advertising who has been continuing to help burn LEO from the marketplace and support value creation. This creates a positive feedback loop where more value brings more attention. More attention inevitably breeds more value.

This proposal has been labelled a tax but I would actually consider it more of a tariff if anything. The proposal is saying that if you are using other tribes sites then you are not contributing to the attention flow of this tribe in the same way and thus the potential for more eyeballs for advertisers we could bring on is replaced with an automated burn.

0
0
0.000