Dear Hivers
In answer to my first post I had some interesting discussions about Hive, burning tokens, and fighting for better Hive price. It was fascinating and it is worth describing positions that are different from mine.
3 paths to Make Hive Valuable Again
To remind my opinion is that our negative trend in Hive price to BTC is partly made by inflation policy. So to reverse this trend we should fight inflation by sending with our posts and votes some of the newly produced tokens to oblivion (@null account). See more in my first post. Some ppl agreed with this, but also there were 2 other approaches to this topic:
The first opinion was given to me, on a different scale, by @deepresearch @hallmann, and on openhive chat @introvert-dime. This point of view states that the most important for hive price are good quality posts, and cast on them votes of high value. As an additional argument for voting for certain posts, @deepresearch is giving that the author should hold all, or most of his/her income. I can agree with the main statement that it is one of the most important things. Unfortunately, it is very hard to decide what is really good content, and as a second problem what it means good content. I mean this "good" means good from SEO point of view? Good because there is a lot of knowledge in it?, or maybe good because it provokes discussion and interaction. There can be a lot of kind of good posts, so which should we promote to boost Hive value? For me it is uncertain and I believe, that because this is a decentralized platform hm ppl should decide that (even if I don't agree with the amount of votes that some posts, in my opinion, poor posts, get). Also, I can't fully agree that we should vote only for these authors who nothing or nearly nothing are spending from their income. We are here to earn some money, and it should be even promoted that it is easy not only to earn but also spend what we earn. Although we should also avoid supporting accounts that are taking everything that they earn, and give nothing to the community. So to summarize, yes it is important to give more votes to good posts, from decent authors but there are already a lot of "institutions" on hive that are taking care of it (@tipu, @curangel @ocdb @arcange and for sure there are more, this are that I know) and ppl are doing this all the time, so hm nothing to do here! Maybe we can just make an appeal to all of us to pay more attention to what we vote, to avoid accounts that want to take from hive as much as they can with as little effort as it is possible.
Second opinion is more important for me because it gives me a new perspective on what we can do. This one is from @gtg and it has, let's say, two steps. The first one is a realistic approach to the crypto market and investors on it. It states, that burning tokens won't work, because investors don't care about it. It is worrying to read this, but it can be and I am afraid it is true... The second step is about alternatives. @gtg thinks, that it would be more valuable to instead of burning tokens, send them (in the same way that we will do here so with the beneficiary option) to HBD Stabilizer. The reason is that if there will be more tokens on this account then it can do more good things on the market. And it is in fact logical that instead of hopping that our actions will show investors that our blockchain is a good option to invest in, it is better to have our own "investor" that can intervene on the market when there is a need (include burning HIVE tokens but not only). The problem I see here is who governs this account (I mean Smooth is doing great here, but everyone can be corrupt, or get sick, or other bad things could happen), and what supervision does the community have over the activity of this account. I afraid there is no real supervision, and as community, we do not have much influence on the activity that HBD Stabilizer takes. What guarantee do we have that the funds we provide will be used as they should? Well, @smooth the author of this stabilizer project is giving a good and rather an easy solution: making different stabilizer proposals from other people to diversity budget and power, see more about it here Regardless all of my doubts I think it is something that we should discuss about more and also give it a try.
Conclusions
To conclude I can say that for sure I will do nothing more than I did till now for the First alternative to my opinion about making hive tokens more valuable. Simple because there is nothing more I can do as i see it, but if someone would propose something I will happily support it with my(@sarmaticus) little power. I still believe that burning tokens is the best solution, but not only just burning, but also making about it a story, and showing outside the blockchain that the community of hive cares a lot about the blockchain condition. However, for this to be successful it requires real community involvement.
I see also great potential in GTG proposition, and because of that if it will be possible for me I will expand post creation on this account adding similar to the burning posts, just with a different beneficiary: instead of null it will be @hbdstabilizer. For now, almost only @hbd.funder sets it as the beneficiary (sending a lot of money, much more than Null gets) but maybe we will promote this kind of helping HIVE, and maybe if there will be more ppl that will want to set beneficiary on @hbdstabilizer, we will see in near future more diversity here, we will see new proposal similar to that govern by @smooth.
Thanks for your support for my first post, and for the discussions we had. **Reward from this post is set to 95% beneficiary going to the @hbdstabilizer **account.
PS. It would be nice if this kind of beneficiary would result in a different icon near to earnings counter as it is with @null.
