"Quality" and "value" are subjective terms unfortunately...
...and then see lots of truly garbage content getting upvotes just because the author kisses up to certain whales or collaborates with a group of other crap posters...
Oh man, I feel you!
Like I said in my other comment I just left you, Hive's reward system incentivises the creation of junk.
When it comes to the value of the HIVE token itself, this doesn't matter.
For HIVE, upvoting on content is purely a mechanism to distribute the network's governance token (inflation that goes into the rewards pool) as far and wide as possible.
So it doesn't matter if the content is good, bad or indifferent - Just that the token is always spreading.
But content on Hive should (and does!) have value!
Communities like LeoFinance need to monetise their front-ends, incentivise evergreen content and use that revenue to make their token sustainable.
The thing is, not one single community has actually tried to monetise their content and taken this path.
They just remain unsustainable, using their layer-2 token to reward junk content until it goes to zero.
Why??!!
We just need to see one community publish stats on how much ad revenue their front-end generates for x number of monthly page views.
From there, a path to sustainability (by burning more than inflation is rewarding authors) can be mapped.
LeoFinance says they're on top of it and the ad revenue they're collecting will eventually be used in this manner.
For now we just have to trust them...
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
