RE: Proof of Brain - All ideas start somewhere (DCC Tribe Token Talk)

You are viewing a single comment's thread:

I don't remember speaking to you about the topic, but I DO remember reading about the possibility of re-publishing older content.

Sociel Media

We see republished content all the time outside of Hive. Old YouTube videos, for example, can collect earnings for years. Hive only allows content to receive rewards for up to 7 days after publishing. A limitation like this appears to draw ire from the community as there is time pressure on that article to gain funding. So, a seemingly great article might receive the value of a low reward with only 7 days being active. It's for this reason why I see engagement as being so critical towards getting your article noticed. You have time on other platforms.

Unfortunately, I only know what is the rule. I don't know the why of it apart from that it may be regulatory-based. I'm not sure, to be honest.

Potential Solution

I've been speaking to Hive Downvote Rewards about the possibility of republishing content I previously published. What Hive doesn't want is double-rewards for an old post. What I understand of things is that I can republish content if:

  • I accept no rewards for the post, AND
  • I assign all rewards to @null, OR
  • I can assign all rewards to @hbdstabilizer

I'll have to get back to you on their responses, but I walked away feeling pretty confident about republishing. My original intent was to re-publish articles as a refresher to the community. There's no reason why I couldn't, for example, promote someone's past work to get them some advertising.

Responses to erh.germany's points

For newbies to drop some hive dollars from my personal wallet and pay them that way, as I can afford it (since my upvote can only show measly pennies).

That's definitely one way to go. I do know that for introductory posts use of the #introduceyourself tag, at the very least, will give the new person additional Hive or other tokens they may not get on regular posts. Hive seems to give a pass to newbies which is understandable.

For old-timers to support each other by upvoting and commenting again on their original posts made with love (enriching the newly created post with a few explanations of the old post). I mean, come on, what speaks against it to gain in terms of currency and awareness from something you put into a lot?

The "potential solution" I wrote of could apply here. Also, curation posts provide a function that seems to meet your point. When I've written curation posts, I delegated article rewards to them. I don't see curation articles as a good payout for myself. It's always an act of appreciation for me.

To enliven the marketplace by trading goods and services horizontally with each other, who in turn use the Wallet as their a relevant source of remuneration.

I've not thought about using the wallet as a source of remuneration. I don't actually know that this is done as my knowledge about Hive isn't as wide as I'd like. It's a good idea though.


Posted via proofofbrain.io



0
0
0.000
2 comments
avatar

Hey scholaris,

thank you for your reply. I see some overlapping points in my answer to Sam and I ask you to read also, what I responded to her, so I won't repeat myself.

I've been speaking to Hive Downvote Rewards about the possibility of republishing content I previously published. What Hive doesn't want is double-rewards for an old post. What I understand of things is that I can republish content if: ...

For me, it cannot be something "Hive does not want", as I see it. In the policies of Hive I nowhere can see anything against it, it's rather a form of etiquette, not a restriction. Hive is, from my point of view, also a self regulating system with aspects both, hierarchical as well as anarchical and everything in between.

Let's say you received in payouts 99 cents for a post of high effort and quality, would that be a double reward? I don't think so.

It can only be seen as a double reward when one rides on this principle and does not see the single case. In any case, if you would re-post an old article of yours, I'd be able to see the former payout (you would not just post it without revealing that it was already published on your blog, wouldn't you? At least, I would not do it that way - but even then, it really depends). If it received a payout in the higher ranges, I may not vote for it, but maybe inclined to read and appreciate the content itself. But most likely I would give an upvote, why wouldn't I, if the content is new to me, got my attention and makes me wanting to comment.

If a dumb thinks to re-post trash again, nobody will show interest or give upvotes anyway (excuse the curse). It may even be downvoted. ... The more I think about it, the more I think I could just do it and would have to take the risk that it might be frowned upon or even downvoted. Which would be a shame from my point of view.

The "potential solution" I wrote of could apply here. Also, curation posts provide a function that seems to meet your point. When I've written curation posts, I delegated article rewards to them. I don't see curation articles as a good payout for myself. It's always an act of appreciation for me.

That sounds like a really good idea. Though I have not fully understood. LOL.
Do you mean that when you write curation posts and you get payouts for them, that you give those payouts to others? That's a very good point that I haven't thought about enough. See also what I wrote about promos and ads in my reply to @samsmith1971 .
Let me ponder ...
.... Indirectly I did already as you said! I made an announcement, a starting point for a contest and then a winners announcement for "finish the story", the rewards were then given by me to the winners (I have not made the maths, if I lost, were even or won financially wise. Though that is not the most important aspect for me).

Duh, sometimes things are simple but I cannot fathom them. I am happy to have talked to both of you in this length.

I may have forgotten to consider other points of yours, but right now my brain says "no".

0
0
0.000