RE: Hard Fork 21: A Case For the 50/50 Curation Reward Model by juanmolina

View this thread on: d.buzz | hive.blog | peakd.com | ecency.com

Viewing a response to: @juanmolina/pt5r3b

·@redpossum·
0.000 HBD
![inigo.jpg](https://cdn.steemitimages.com/DQmYjSPLA7abHi5pg3Ty8wQowwVHRByCLp6a3yaVLAhK8BG/inigo.jpg)
You said, "*Initially we should reflect and ask ourselves: why am I in Steemit?
We will find ambiguous points of view.*
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/ambiguous
Most of us are quite unequivocal about what we want from Steemit; many of us are downright opinionated. Personally, I want an audience which will pay some attention to my writing, and I want to get paid for my efforts. See? There's nothing ambiguous about that at all.

You said, "*A 50/50 reward distribution assumes a balance in profits.*"
Balance? You know what I get for an average blog entry? 
$0.02  
That's not what I call very damn balanced.

You said, "*If we are here, we must trust the administrators.*"
Let me just ask you to please share with us the chain of logical reasoning which led you to this conclusion, because it is by no means apparent to me. Why in the name of all that's holy would you think that we "must" trust them?

But worst of all is the way you keep talking about "investors" when what you mean are whales. This ignores the fact that I too have invested in Steemit, not just money but over a year of my time and much unrewarded effort, **as have hundreds of other minnows and redfish**!
👍 , , , , , , , ,